A Discussion on Full Preterism w/ Sam Frost & Andrew Rappaport @StrivingforEternity

Introduction to the Apologetic Dog and the Church of Christ

I know you're in that, uh, you know, that Georgia where you keep going, go dogs, for some reason. Yeah, so we should, we should bring on, yeah, because you may, you're a fan of dogs. Well, how about we bring on the apologetic dog himself?

Go dogs.

Jeremiah.

Thanks for having me on.

Yeah. So, so you and I got to meet down in, uh, in Tennessee there at the Open Air Theology Conference. You did a, uh, a pre-conference with Sam Frost on the issue of full Peterism. By the way, Drew told me I have to call it Peterism throughout the whole show, so.

But, uh, but yeah, so you, you guys have done a lot of study in this. I did enough study to just say, oh, you deny the second coming. Okay. Heresy.

Move on.

Like that was enough for me, but it was really, it was quite interesting to listen to you and Sam talk because being from a Jewish background, so much of what you are bringing up, they're arguing based on a wrong understanding of Judaism.

And I'm like, wow. Okay. It's like, I'm almost sad that this guy didn't come in and debate, uh, because it would have been really interesting, you know, if he made the arguments that you were saying that folks there make.

So let, uh, introduce yourself to the audience here and maybe, maybe just, maybe you want to explain what the apologetics dog is like. Like I even have this thing right here. It says apologetic dog is a little QR code.

Yeah. I saved that. You thought I was going to throw it out when you gave it. Yeah, I did. No, I'm going to throw it out now.

Well, um, so I firstly serve as a pastor and elder at 12, five church in Jonesboro, Arkansas, where the only reformed Baptist church in our town. And, um, it's been incredible to kind of, uh, explain to people the doctrines of grace and the beauty of the sovereignty of God and how we can have security and, um, our salvation, uh, work that God has begun.

And so out of 12, five, uh, my church family has supported me and encouraged me to pursue apologetics. It's kind of how I'm wired. I've been watching your, your content, Andrew, for a number of years with Matt Slick and really appreciative of Dr. James White's books and the content that he puts out there.

So for the past two years or so, um, I started up the, the apologetic dog. And if you see in that the logo, it's first Timothy six 20, where Paul says that Timothy, Oh, Timothy guard the deposit that's entrusted to you.

And so the mindset for the apologetic dog is that we are all Christians are guarding like a guard dog, the gospel of grace. And how do we do that? Well, we avoid irreverent babble, pagan philosophy and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge.

So I'm very presuppositional in my apologetics, because I believe that you can't leave the Christian worldview, a proper foundation for how we know who we are as people and how we ought to live towards one another and to give God glory.

So that's a little bit of the apologetic dog. I just had my 11th debate, um, live and in person at 12, five church with a church of Christ on the topic of baptism. Like for people to go over to my channel on YouTube and, uh, please like subscribe, uh, share the content.

And if you're a glutton for punishment and you like to watch the three hour debates, then I've done, I think around 11 or so now I've been on standing for truth at Donnie's channel and the gospel truth, Marlon love those guys.

Um, so I have just a lot of content there. So I have a website that's getting revamped. So you'll have.

To go check that out as well. Yeah. D says, um, Hey, Jeremiah, you're a busy man. I just watched.

You live. Well, thank you. It was a premier. So we have to have to batch content. You know,.

It's like Andrew. No, I'm not as busy as you. I'm a busy man. You do have a lot of debates or discussions about church of Christ. Yeah. And so, you know, folks are a regular here.

They'll remember pastor Norm. Pastor Norm was a fun one. I remember that episode. Oh, you do.

Okay. Okay. Yeah. Pastor Norm was fun. He never came back, unfortunately, but, uh, but yeah. So, so what got you interested in church or studying church of Christ and what.

From Church of Christ Apologetics to Full Preterism

Got you interested in studying full preterism? Well, great question, because there's actually a shared reason for why. So here in Jonesboro, Arkansas, it's typically Southern Baptist churches and church of Christ.

So I've grown up in this town my whole life. And as I started sharing the gospel and sharing my faith early in my twenties, I remember I interacted with a Jehovah's witness that just said, Jeremiah, show me anywhere in the Bible where it says the word Trinity.

And they had me running on a wild goose chase. And I just remember thinking, wow, I'm so unequipped. I was laying down at night. Like I profess to believe in the Trinity. I can't articulate it and I can't defend it from scripture.

And so that really started to challenge me to learn the word of God, hide it in my heart, to be able to share it with precision and well with other people. And so that was a good learning experience for me.

Not too much longer after that, I started interacting with, in my opinion at the time, was other brothers and sisters in the church of Christ talking about the gospel. And it didn't take long for me to think, wow, we are speaking two different languages.

We're using the same terminology, but we mean way different things. And for them, it's Acts 2 38, it's Mark 16 16, 1 Peter 3 21, all the eight proof texts. And I'm realizing, oh, they think your past sins are actually remitted and washed away in the actual water.

And we're like, no, that's adding works to the gospel of grace. And you've deviated from the only gospel that can save. And so throughout my twenties, it just was a lot of my friends, people, family members, everybody knows somebody that's a member of the church of Christ here in my town.

And so as I was beginning to learn their theology and learn the history that goes all the way back to Alexander and Thomas Campbell in the early 1800s, I'm like, wow, this is a restorationist cult. And that's the big C word that no one likes.

And I was actually able to be on Cultish, the podcast on apology with my good friend, Trey Fisher, and they interviewed us examining the church of Christ cult. And the reason why I did it, Andrew, was because as I was looking online, there was like no apologetics ministry to help people learn who the church of Christ truly is and how to evangelize them with the gospel of grace.

And so me and my friend Trey, we were like, you know, this feels like our Nineveh, like God is calling us here because every time I try to go the opposite direction, it just kind of pulls me right back in.

And so I have a heart for the church of Christ. I love these people enough to tell them the truth and me being reformed. You know, I spoke at the Why Calvinism conference. I believe that God has a people that are trapped in this group that need to hear the gospel of grace to be saved out of it.

And I do think people can be saved in these cults, in these places, in spite of what's being taught to them. Once again, even more reason to evangelize them apologetically. So, you know, crushing their worldview with the word of God and God's truth.

So that's how the church of Christ began. About two years ago, this birth, the apologetic dog ministry, I debated at the university in Jonesboro, ASU, Arkansas State University, with the church of Christ minister and about 200 people in the audience.

And it was the first time about, you know, 60 to 80. Oh, well, maybe over 100 church of Christ had to listen to this Baptist explain Acts 238 in context. Andrew, they're all the front row or church of Christ.

And they had just the meanest looks at me the whole time you've ever seen. And so that's a popular video on my channel. I encourage people to go check out. Enjoyed it. Brock said he would debate me again and he will never respond to me.

So that's not gonna happen. So has he blocked you yet? He's not blocked me. I think they're keeping tabs on me. So I don't know. They're welcome to check it out. When I do a live stream on Facebook, I can see everybody that's tuned in.

So people that aren't my fans, I'm like, hey, you're still watching out there. So church of Christ, though, then that's a big emphasis in my apologetics ministry. It's not the only thing like I want it to be not just a negative apologetics ministry.

I vindicate the Christian worldview with the doctrine of justification by faith alone. You know, I mean, so about a year ago and I explained this a little bit in my presentation at the dangers of hyper-preterism or preterism.

So I kind of gave a little backdrop what pulled me into this world because I was very comfortable on my hashtag pan millennialism. Just was like, I'm hashtag Johnny Mac dispensational pre meal was for eight years.

Not anymore. Sorry for people out there that maybe still are love Johnny Mac. So I was just comfortable with having that framework for a few years on earth. We understand. Yeah. You got to show me some grace there.

But I love I'm indebted to that man's ministry. So I always have to consult the Johnny Mac. But I'm just saying like I never was challenged to think about a lot of stuff. It's just comfortable. Then I had a friend in ministry say, hey, I'm planning on studying eschatology.

What do you think? And I was just like, well, just be sure to come out of the dark closet from time to time and interact with people and don't get lost in it. I said, I'm going to study apologetics. And so I'm I'm a pastor.

But the way that I teach and preach very apologetics, you know, bit. And he's like, OK. So he started studying eschatology. And it was just a matter of months. He went from pre meal. He was all meal for maybe a week.

Then he was the post mill for the longest time. And I remember he got and I would talk to him along the way. And one day he called me. He said, Jeremiah, I think I'm a heretic. And I was like, whoa, back up there.

And I was like, what are you talking about? He goes, I think I'm a full preterist. And I said, is that the heresy that denies the future coming of Jesus, the future resurrection of the dead and the restoration of all things?

And he said, yeah, I can't refute it. And I'm like, dude, it's OK to struggle with something, but don't preach it. You don't have to believe it. You can struggle with it. And I remember at the time he told me, well.

I I know if the problem is not with the word of God, the problem is with me, and he said, I think I may just resign because I don't want to ruin people's lives. And I was kind of like, oh, there's a glimmer of hope here if he's at least thinking along those lines.

But it was just a matter of months until he did the full swing. He was actually pastoring a Southern Baptist church. And I remember one of our last conversations, I said, if you start preaching this, you know what I have to do.

Right. And he said, I totally understand you have to warn people. You have to follow your convictions. And I just said it's not personal. I said, but don't do it, man. And if you do, I'm going to let everybody know.

So he did it. And the director of his association, their Southern Baptist, they I don't know how they called me, but they're just like, Jeremiah, what's full preterism? Why is it bad? Can we set up a lunch with you?

And I said, absolutely. I got a lot to share with you because I've been talking with this individual for a long time. And along the way, I called up Dr. Frost, which he may be joining us later. We'll see.

And I've had him just constantly explaining to me the ins and outs because he was a major speaker in the full preterist movement for a decade from about 2000 to 2010 around there. So anyway, started telling people about this church that's preaching it, and it was just, you know, a handful of weeks until he convinced his church to leave the SBC, the associate, the local association and the Arkansas Association.

And so he is totally converted this Baptist church into a full preterist church. They're going to host a conference in Arkansas, in Jonesboro, and they got Gary DeMar speaking at it and all the other full preterists.

Like, why? This is in my front yard, you know? But anyway, I've been kind of the one people calling me up saying, hey, my pastor is starting to say things like this. It sounds a little weird. And so I've been really trying to be a voice of reason to say, hey, this is a redefining of what our future blessed hope has always been.

All the disagreements that the church has had for 2000 years, you know, the one thing, Andrew, that they've agreed upon, our blessed hope being future. And I tell people that's not just good enough to say that only as saying that history has obviously affirmed this, but I tell people that full preterism fails historically, logically.

So you'll see a little bit of internal critique and presuppositionalism going on there, and it fails exegetically. And so you remember my presentation was kind of a walkthrough of 1 Corinthians 15, 20 through 26, obviously within the broader framework of Pauline's theology, but then also the canonical context.

Because I dealt with, you know, multiple objections that full preterists will make in 1 Corinthians 15, so we might can touch on a few of those. But yeah, and I learned this. Max King, church of Christ minister, he was kind of the first one to have a full-orbed understanding of full preterism, and he called it covenantal eschatology.

And I'm like, how about that? This has its roots in none other than the church of Christ.

What Full Preterism Teaches About the Second Coming and Resurrection

Yeah. So the thing is, yeah, I was going to eventually get to what's over your shoulder there. We'll get to them shortly. So let's see. John asks a question for you,. Apologize, dog. Premillennialism, postmillennialism, or amillennialism?

Brother John, I'm going to answer it like this. He's pro-millennial. He's pro-millennial. If there's a millennium, he's all for it. I have a playlist on my channel of five sermons, you know, presentations I did, and the first one was a flower review of the three orthodox perspectives, premillennialism, all-millennialism, and postmillennialism.

And then the next three was a positive presentation of each individual one, because I can speak the lingo, baby. And then number five was the death knell to hyper-preterism. So guess where I landed for now, Andrew?

I've landed all-millennialism for the time being.

Yeah, for the time being. So what you're saying is you're really postmillennialism, right? I say that because all-mill obviously, right? No, because all-mill believes there's no literal millennium, right?

But you do believe that the millennium is figurative, but Christ is returning at the end of that millennium, right? So post? No? Okay.

Could we, Jeremiah, can we just agree, you and I, can we just agree that post-mill is a confused on-millennial position?

I like to tell people this. Premill has everything downward trending, post-mill has everything upward trending, and all-mill says both wisdom and righteousness are going to both increase until the end of the age.

No, I like it better that all-mill just has.

Nothing. Hey, where's Dr. Frost? I have my back here.

All right, so let's get into some definitions of terms. For folks who don't, there's maybe people listening first time, they're saying, I have no idea what full-preterism is, how do people come to that conclusion?

Now, first off, I do want to point out for folks something that you did say, because this is how we try to encourage people to do here on this, is to educate people on apologetics. Folks, if you hear what Jeremiah said a bit ago, is that he was able to articulate different views, even the ones he does not hold to.

That is what we always have to do. We have to be able to articulate someone else's position. If you think back to the guy with the affirming Christianity, the problem he had was we wanted to define terms so that we could properly represent him, and he didn't like the fact that the definitions didn't match the Bible.

But you have to be able to properly articulate someone else's view, especially before you're going to debate them.

Can I chime in with something real quick? Sure. I remember you were debating somebody that was very hostile to Calvinism, and I believe you might have brought this up. Which one? Yeah. The time where you were leading him through each five points, and he was like, oh, I actually believed all that.

I just remember thinking, you got to know the opposition or the.

So-called opposition. This is why people should not debate. Don't debate against Calvinism when you're actually a Calvinist. You just don't understand the definition.

Andrew's going to ask you some questions, and then he's going to say, you are a Calvinist. God saves. Yes. There you go. So, Jeremiah, I do have a question as it relates to what Andrew was saying as how one arrives at the full preterist position.

Because what I've noticed, and I've noticed this with specifically two prominent men, is that you get there, arrive there from the post-mill position. I look at David Chilton, because he was a post-mill.

He's written some works that post-mills will use, his commentaries on Revelation. Then by the end of his life, he was a full preterist. Then Gary DeMar, who was actually not a full preterist, but when David Chilton became one, and he was asked to call David Chilton back from that, and now he ends up being one.

Which is good evidence not to be post-mill.

We should clarify something, because you mentioned DeMar earlier, too. In that podcast that you mentioned DeMar was on, I think it was a Canon Press podcast. My understanding is he was removed from that.

When you brought that up about that podcast, he had been removed from there. People had commented to me when I asked something about that. So, I guess it was, so that's probably a good thing that they removed him.

So, Jeremiah, how do people come to, we'll first give the definition, like what is full preterism? Then how do people come.

To this conclusion? So, full preterism is being distinguished from partial preterism. And full preterism says all biblical prophecy has been fulfilled up to 70 AD with the destruction of the temple. And like I said, partial preterists would see a lot of things in the past fulfillments.

Preterism means past fulfillment. And all Christians believe that some things have happened in the past. The virgin birth, Jesus being the suffering servant, died on the cross for our sins. That's preter in our past.

And so, the question is, what things are we going to put in the box that were past? And then what are we going to put in the box that is our future? Our future of blessed hope that God promises to deliver us from this sin-cursed world and so forth.

So, full preterism says that all of it, including the second coming of Jesus, oh, well that was 70 AD. And oh yeah, that was spiritual. And so, it's just wild because it has to reinterpret so many clear passages that speak to that.

But then the resurrection of the dead, something that we would, all the different eschatological positions would agree on are in our future a part of our blessed hope. Nope, the resurrection of the dead, there's a few different ways that full preterists will define that.

They don't agree on a lot of these things. Talking about the nature, some of them think that Christ bodily returned in 70 AD. So, they can't even agree. And then the last one is that this is the new, Andrew, this is the new heavens and new earth in its fully consummated form, as you see it right now.

And that's why full preterism only has about six followers because people are like, it don't mean that.

This is it. This is it, huh? This is it. Can I trade this one in? Folks that are listening on the podcast, you have a sign over your left shoulder and nicely lit up, which you never want to have a bright light behind you in your podcast.

You need a brighter light in front. But what does it say?

It said, it don't mean that. And let me tell you why I put that there, because you will hear that from the church of Christ and the full preterists. And they're like, hey, we're justified by faith and now we have peace with God.

And they're going to be like, it don't mean that. You've got to be baptized. And the full preterists, we're going to say, hey, Jesus is going to come at the end to restore all things. And they're going to be like, it don't mean that.

You know what it said before that? It said the flower patch kids and reference to Layton flowers in the crew, which by the way, I enjoyed getting to meet Layton at the white Calvinism conference. I was like, dude, I think you went to the wrong place.

Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no. He was gathering material for the rest of the year. I'm waiting, you know, he's still on his kick about, you know, James White. I'm waiting to see when he's going to start like dealing with the things that we said in the conference.

Although maybe he can't deal with that. So he's just ignoring it.

You know, he was a nice guy. I actually, I actually enjoyed getting to meet him. And I went to Texas to watch the showdown between him and Dr. White on John 644 and how it don't mean that. And so it's funny because I was in line to just take a selfie with Layton and I was in line.

He saw me, he goes, everybody, it's a Calvinist. And I was like, Layton, why are you trying to help me like that, man? So he recognized me. Well, that's good. So you asked the question earlier, though, what persuades people into full preterism?

There's a number of verses that to the undiscerning and the unknowing that you could see how they build a case like there is a case to be made. Now, if you know anything about biblical theology and systematic theology and oh, my goodness, context for proof texts, then you can see that it's all a house of cards and it's not hard to poke holes.

I mean, when they start denying that spiritual warfare is for today, if you do have the indwelling Holy Spirit, I mean, the heresy detector is going to be just doing this the whole time. That's why it's a slow growing movement.

You know, it does it. And I say growing. I think the Internet just allows them to be able to congregate. And that's why it does with every.

Group. But I mean, when has full preterism kind of when it is relatively new? When did it start?

So Max King, he wrote a two volume set on the return of Christ and the resurrection. And I think volume one was the early 70s. No, it was maybe the early 80s. And I know volume two came out in 87. And I think that's probably the magnus opus where he has written the most content on covenantal eschatology.

But that was the hyper preterist view. So it's relatively new. And what's the arguments that they make? Yeah. So I think what what hooks people in is the quote unquote timing indicators, the verses that say such and such will happen soon.

The time is at hand or Jesus is coming quickly. And so by reason of inference, they say, OK, first audience relevance, what's the thing that would answer that question the best? And, you know, they'll go to all of it discourse to talk about this generation.

And so they build a case of saying, well, 70 AD seems to check all the boxes. And so that's that's usually how they they they get they get you. They talk about the timing indicators. And if you're post-meal, pre-meal, you better have a good response for that or they'll just start wrecking shop.

And so it's the timing indicators. Now, I'm not picking on post-meal, but this is something that they leach off of post-meal. And I tell so I interviewed Doug Wilson. I've interviewed I've had a number of guests on my channel on talking about hyper preterism and especially how post-meal can distinguish themselves confidently, boldly and with clarity from hyper preterism.

You know what I mean? But there is something that is built in to post-meal, not all post-meal. So I'd be curious to to hear your thoughts in a second. This is something that is kind of new with post-meal, not with Ken Gentry and a lot of those other historic post-meal positions is how you define this age and the age to come.

Now, unfortunately, in my opinion, this is Doug Wilson's view. This is actually Jeff Durbin's view. And I think this was R .C. Sproul's view. And like I said, I'm fine with someone holding.

This. I just want to throw out the cautions. Just for the record, it's not R .C. Sproul's.

View today. Just saying. Oh, did he end up pre-meal? He ended pre-meal, didn't he? In heaven. Hey, he's a Reformed Baptist now, too. So that's true. He got baptism figured out. So I want to hear your thoughts on this, but we'll just go with Doug Wilson.

He's written on this when a man comes around or something like that, and he defines this age and the age to come like this. This age is the Jewish aeon. This is the Jewish age that terminated in 70 A .D.

And the age to come is kind of this golden age where the world's going to be Christianized. And trust me, I am the first person to say, hey, if Postmale's right, praise God. I'm excited if that's right.

If pre-meal dispensational view is right and we get raptured up, praise God. Those are things that don't make me mad. But in Doug Wilson's view, the age to come is a golden age that transitions into Christ-parousia.

So what's happened? And I say it like this just to let people know that there's a gravity here that I want to stress. There's a redefining of what historically this age and the age to come has always been, and it does all the heavy lifting that Doug Wilson and all them want anyway.

I would contend this age and the age to come is you have this temporal age that began with Adam in the fall, and this temporal, perishing age is going to continue until Christ's second return. Eighty percent, and I might even say 85 percent of the full predecessor argument need that to be in effect, that this age really terminated in 70 A .D.

The reason why it's so scary is because when you read the Olivet Discourse, what happens at the end of the age that Jesus said, end lo, I'll be with you even to the end of the age? The second coming. This is why a lot of post-mill have differing views on the Olivet Discourse and the Book of Revelation.

I would lean partial preterist. I'm over here saying I'm in y 'all's world a little bit with trying to parse these things out. But even Ken Gentry is like, man, we can't give that to the full preterist because when Sam Frost joins us, hopefully here in a little bit, he told me there's two things we can't give the full preterist.

We can't give them the farm, aka this age and the age to come, and we can't give them the livestock, meaning that Second Peter chapter three was fulfilled in 70 A .D. You've made their case for them if you can seed those points.

So what do you.

Think, Drew? Am I being too harsh? Yeah, so I don't think you're being too harsh. So when you mentioned Second Peter chapter three, you're talking about the elements of this world will burn away. Yeah, so because I've heard Gary DeMar talking about that.

And when every time that term element is used, it means the elementary teachings and philosophies, those things are passed away. Now, I would disagree with DeMar's teaching because there are indicators within the text that seem to indicate it's speaking about the actual world, not just a philosophy or a teaching.

But I think what you said about the age and age to come is something I hadn't thought of, right? The temporal age and then when Christ comes, I think I would have to look into that more. But where I line up right now would be somewhere like with a Ken Gentry, because I mean, his commentary that's coming out is called The Great Divorce or The Divorce of Israel.

But he's talking about where in 70 AD, it was basically the symbolic stoning of the adulterous wife that was Israel. And it was the end of that age. And then the age to come is the one of the.

Bride of Christ that goes forth. This is why, if you just say this temporal age and the eternal age, it does all the heavy lifting because this perishing age includes both the Jewish age and the Gentile age.

I'm just saying you already get that if you stay consistent with what Paul defines as this age and age to come and what Jesus in the Gospels talks about during this age. You're going to have things like marriage, celebrations, and things are going to continue as they are.

And Paul, in 1 Corinthians especially, makes a strong case that what's important in this evil perishing age is false teaching. And this is going to continue. And in 1 Corinthians 15, where God is all in all, everything gets summed up.

He is not the author of confusion. In fact, all of history is his story of redemption being worked out. And there's resolve. There's the evil, there's sin, there's death, and it gets crushed. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

And so I'm just saying to the post mill, I'm saying, do that hashtag post mill theonomy, go preach to the rooftops, but don't give the full preterist.

This age and the age to come. And maybe this would be a good question to ask for Sam when he comes on because he was full preterist for a while and wrote on it. But the one passage when it comes to discussing end times that I go to is Daniel chapter 9.

And the reason being is because he gives a very clear timeline. It's the only passage we have in scripture where we get this really clear timeline, but it's not as clear as some want to make it. So he says, this is Deuteronomy, sorry, Daniel 9 .24.

He says 70 weeks and weeks there is just, it means sevens. So we understand it as seven, seven year periods. That's not unusual within Judaism to judge everything or to measure things by sevens, by the Sabbath, okay, as a unit of time.

So it's the fact that it says weeks doesn't mean it's a literal week the way we understand it. Think of it as it could be a seven year period. So 70 sevens have been decreed and he lists here six things are going to happen.

It's going to be for your people in your holy city, one, to finish the transgression, two, to make an end of sin, three, to make atonement for iniquity, four, to bring an everlasting righteousness, five, to seal up the vision of prophecy, and six, to anoint the holy place.

So these are six things that we would see at the end of this 77 year period, right? And so I find a lot of people that will do this. We look at this and it says, so that you are now, so that you know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah, there will be seven weeks and 62 weeks, and it will be built again in the plaza, in the moat, even to the distress.

Now, when we look historically, right, seven weeks, the 48 years, and then there's a second period of 434 years. And you can look, there were three deportations from Israel, okay? So Babylon came in three separate times and you took Daniel and some of them in the first round, and eventually by round three took most of Israel, right, as captive.

So there were also three decrees. And so the question becomes which decree is the right one? And some make a point of saying there were three deportations and three decrees because each one was a 70 year period.

Yeah, I don't think, I mean, Daniel lived through that 70 year period, but I don't think most of them did. But it is clear that there is a 49 year period that many see as the decree from Cyrus to the building of the temple and of the wall around the city.

So that's something that can be measured in time. You can then take the next 434 year period. So you can basically look from the decree of Cyrus, whichever decree you look at, it either brings you to several years before Christ, some have it as the day that Christ was born, and some have it as the day that Christ rode in on the donkey, the ending of this period.

But we know, right, that that's, like most people take these first 69 weeks as literal years, right? And so for the preterist who's believing everything finished up, and you being a millennial, I'd be curious with your view with it as well, because I look at this, and so you have a connection of time wise, but then in verse 26, it says, then after 62 weeks, the Messiah will be cut off.

Okay, we know when that happened, right? And nothing, and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. Now we know that happened in 70 AD, right? Christ was crucified in the 30s.

So you're talking, you know, a 37 year period of difference, right? Now I could be wrong, but I don't think 37 equals seven. I could be wrong. My math is good, but maybe just not that good. And so I look at this and see that he allows for a period that here this happens, after the 62 weeks, Messiah is cut off.