Introduction and the Burden of Guarding the Gospel

Now I think back of the movie dumb and dumber or Jim Carrey asked the the lady Just give it to me. What chance do I have? So you're telling me there's no, you know, so you're telling me there's a chance and I remember that I'm like, man, I'm dumb.

Am I the dumb or the dumber one? Because that's what. What hyper predators do. So you're saying there's a chance. Oh.

Everybody thank you so much for joining the Apologetic dog where it's our hearts desire to guard the gospel deposit that's been entrusted to us and so we do that by warring against pagan philosophy and we contend for true knowledge and we expose other worldviews that has professed knowledge that Contradicts itself and so I would just like to encourage you to like and subscribe to this ministry.

This actually helps our videos. Receive more viewership on YouTube and so that would really help and you can also find us on Instagram. And I do things on Facebook and we're looking to go to these other Media outlets and so if you would please join the ministry Of the apologetic dog understanding that this applies to all of us to guard the truthfulness of God's Word.

And I also want to encourage you if you're interested in following some of our preaching series. I serve as a pastor at 12 five church. And so today I'm really excited because we're gonna be talking about Eschatology the study of end times and I've been a part of so many wonderful conversations about whether you're premillennial dispensational Believing in a pre-trib rapture.

Whether you got the votive Occam's out there that are all millennial this more of inaugurated Kingdom that Jesus is in fact ruling and reigning now at the right hand of the Father and then you have the Jeff Durbin's that See the the kingdom now in this post millennial framework, and I love these conversations.

Because we can grapple over these issues, right? We understand that there are fundamental things about Eschatology the end times that you can't touch Jesus is coming bodily in the future, right? He's gonna set up his Kingdom in a new way where it's gonna be a new heavens and new earth.

And so you can have these full discussions about maybe the nature of that coming right and so Eschatology is awesome until it compromises the gospel. And so I had to call in an expert because I'm starting to interact with this almost resurgence.

Coming up called full preterism and this is the idea that the second coming of Jesus has already happened at 70 AD. So I had to call in the big guns. Dr. Sam Frost. Thank you so much for joining us. Thank you for having me.

I appreciate it. Yes. Well, hey, tell us a little bit about yourself who you are and why you're here today.

Sam Frost’s Background in Full Preterism and His Turn Away from It

Well at your invitation and to talk about matters that I Think that I know a good deal about.

I.

Was in the full preterist world for about Eight or nine years speaking actively 20 or so conferences across the United States and Was one of the main leaders teachers in that in that movement one of the few having a national church for four years.

Oh, wow.

Yeah, we were one of them one of them you can count them on your hands. How many full full preterist hyper preterist churches there are. And this was you know, 2000 to roughly 2010 when I saw that the.

There were a new in innumerable problems with the overall paradigm and then trying to have that at the idea of Whatever one wants to make of what applies today with it, which is really one of the biggest problems that I'm seeing that they That they encounter today.

That's really where they start fragmenting. There's several fragmentations within.

Full preterist world.

But that's that's one of the major ones that we can talk about.

Yeah, dr. Dr. Frost. Do you have a website? Do you have anywhere in particular that people can look more into your work?

Yeah, it's a vigil dot blog VIG IL Dot VL OG vigil dot blog and that's where there's.

Probably.

70 or so papers on that miscellaneous papers on topics, whatever I feel like writing on at the time and a lot of them I have to do with eschatology my former way of life and.

The way I'm.

Seeing it now and. So it's a lot of good stuff a lot of Good readership on that on that page. So I I like the articles on there haven't taken any of them down.

Well good. Do you. We'll get into this more later. But do you have your paper on the problem of infinity on there?

Yeah, and I wanted to say Today I found out that my mentor one of my mentors. Dr. Kenneth Calvin passed away today and he's with the Lord In heaven as he awaits resurrection together with all of the Saints.

I'm in. And so I'm a little saddened Today my mind has been on been on that. And seeing what the arrangements will be made by the family there and everybody certainly pray for the Talbot's. Hmm. You know, dr. Talbot.

Hey, dr. Talbot. While I was a hyper preterist minister, he was there During my ordination. He just mentored me throughout the years and stayed with me, even though he was catching some blackboard because I was a hyper preterist and He just stayed with me he just believed that I was all through you know.

Kept confronting me with the issues and and problems him and dr. Gary Crampton would do that and his brother Randall.

So.

At Whitfield seminary where I earned two master's degrees in my in my THM. Hmm there as well.

So.

He.

He worked with me on the issue on a paper. We both researched together and then he wrote one and I wrote one On the nature of infinity because that was really where the problem. Yeah was.

Defining Preterism, Hyper-Preterism, and the Gospel Problem

Not a cross. Before we delve into that because I cannot wait. I reread that paper again today. Do you mind to kind of define what what? Preterism is and what hyper preterism is with partial preterism.

And why is this an important definition? Why do we make those proper distinctions? And then why does that hyper full preterism compromise the gospel? Well.

Preterism. Just classically you go back to the second century. So everybody knew that the temple fell. That was a rather large war. Rome and Judea.

From.

66 got stalled a little bit and then finally in 70 and Then on it didn't stop and said everyone thinks it stopped in 70. It didn't went on to 135 136 137 under the barcode bug revolt. And that's that's when it was actually the land was actually bulldozed and it was kind of illegal for Jews to have any kind of setup, but they were almost successful in rebuilding they certainly had the foundation of the temple in the city and Under that revolt in 135.

So they're almost they were massing them out a pretty good Sizable group and Rome finally just put the kibos on the whole thing. That was the end of that. Hmm, so You know, everyone thinks it ended in 70 just it didn't.

But that's when it was named renamed Palestine. Just they call it Palestine set up a temple God of the God Jupiter and just made it into a you know, kind of illegal for Jews to Not not to be there. I mean there was always there's always Jews around them in and around that area.

But but legally to be there in terms of any kind of religious kind of way.

So.

And everyone knows that that that's that's pretty staple. You know history. Josephus has always been a source that's quoted from the second third centuries onward.

And.

Just be clear. We're talking about the destruction of the temple in 70 AD is common knowledge across the boards.

Really than Rome. There's a big arch. Titus arch Titus put up in 81 CE so it was. You know, if you lived in Rome you would have seen this massive arch. It's still there today. You'll see it. Of the temple complex and then the coinage that was issued so it was just common knowledge that Jerusalem was was the was burned and destroyed and.

So and and how you relate that to clearly what Jesus was talking about to some degree. Yeah, that's the issue to some degree. He mentions Jerusalem being surrounded by the armies. Obama he uses a Danielic language language of Daniel.

You know abomination of desolation kind of cryptic. When he talks about it he doesn't go into a whole lot of detail. And neither do the gospel writers so that's that's what that is but what some have done is to take that skirmish and Turn it into a grid By which you interpret the entire Bible.

And so you run every verse that's in the Bible you run it through 70 ad. So rather than Jesus Christ being the paradigm of how to interpret the Bible 70 ad becomes the paradigm. Mm-hmm, and that to me is idolatry.

Because you're more interested in figuring out at least I was but when I'm saying that.

You got to understand that the time is near the time is at hand.

These things are gonna happen. The whole thing is based on the whole thing is based on every that that is 100 the major plank the first plank of Any forms of of preterism is the so-called time tax the time the time indicators.

That's that's kind of their foundation. Would you say what hooked me? That's what got me. Yeah, yeah, which at first it provides very powerful Explanatory scope saying okay, what would be soon and the hearers of the Apostles and Jesus?

Well, you know the destruction of the temple. Definitely so and so. That quickly becomes okay. The coming of the Son of Man also has to happen during this time frame, right?

Well There's one passage in particular That's used and Matthew picks this up all throughout his his gospel In the coming of the Son of Man and on the clouds of heaven description of Daniel 7 13 and 14 and That passage is referring to as a sense Was coming down.

That's just that's the coming up he's coming to the ancient days to or before the throne of the ancient of days and We can get into that that passage, but that's where my work Primarily has been in the last few years in my book The parishioner of the Son of Man, okay.

That'd be a good resource.

With that out and some scholars are starting to understand that now for the longest time Daniel 7 13 has been seen as an Ascension passage. There's very many scholars that see it as such but that's. That to me is it's it's quite plain and what what what you do in any type, you know theology or interpretation is operates very much like a Like a science.

Yeah, so you have hypothesis and then you float them through and see how far. You know before you run into any major difficulties and then decide to chuck it because it's just not not working out. I've had many many ideas where I thought I was heading down the right road and then I hit a roadblock.

Okay. Well, let's go back to the drawing board.

And so.

Interpretation hermeneutics all that kind of stuff operates on that same kind of Thing because you're using the data of Scripture. Yeah, and then we're reasoning and piecing together. Trying to get some sort of narrative going but for the longest time Daniel 7 13 Is seen as a as an as a passage very plainly that the text isn't is a ascension of us one like a son of man Who ascends to this ancient of days whose God?

Yeah.

And.

He's given all power authority a nation and a kingdom and the obedience of the nations are given to him and. What's interesting about that Passage. Well, we can get into that later. But that that's my work and my commentary on Daniel.

Which I'm quite pleased with that's gotten some good reviews. Very happy with with that commentary. And there that allowed me to dive in to all of the massive Ink that's been spilled over Daniel 7 as well as my own background.

So, you know, this is. I got my bachelor's in the 1989 so I've been doing this over 30 30 some years now particularly eschatology, right?

The Olivet Discourse, Daniel 7, and the Time-Text Hook

So now you mentioned when we're talking about the Olivet discourse Jesus does bring up things that were said in Daniel. So that's very important to this conversation. So the full preterist this and like we were defining preterism is things happening in the past, right?

And so they go further they say well Not only was the destruction of the second temple in 70 AD but also Jesus's second coming also happened at that time period and Essentially this what we're seeing now is the new heavens and then the new earth.

Yeah, right. So at what point do you say that the full preterist compromises the gospel. Well.

If this is the new heavens and new earth you can have it and I'm gonna throw my Bible away and Become like Bart Ehrman or something. That's what the point if this is the new heavens and new earth.

You're deluded.

Yes, and when you have to understand this when you're talking to a deluded mind that that believes that Joseph Smith looked into a hat and. And out of that we got the Book of Mormon. You're that's who you're talking to that and so there's no debate.

It's very difficult. It's like talking to a Scientologist at that point. It's just that it's.

Right because You and I hold to soul scripture we understand that God's Word is a more sure foundation even more than our personal experience. However, there has to be some correspondence. Right. I remember listening to you interview with Eli Yala, which I encourage any viewers to go check out revealed apologetics.

You were talking about how you're going through a season life where there was death. Right. And it breaks our spirits and Jesus somehow conquered sin and death and yet we see all this still going on in our world.

That should that should speak to us. Okay, we can't just Gnosticize everything that we read in Scripture and say oh, well, that was a spiritual happening. Oh, yeah, Jesus dealt with sin spiritually. Oh, yeah, there's gonna be no more death, but that's really just talking about spiritual death.

That's what they end up doing. And it is a form of Gnosticism. I've been calling it Neo-Gnosticism For many years now because that's just what it is the new Gnosticism and. They hate that like, you know me saying that that term but in my book misplaced hope.

That's sold a little over, you know, four four thousand units in the first couple of years that came out in.

2002.

I'll list some of your books and the show notes after we get done recording just to give good resources to people real quick. What do you think about the book? Have we missed the second coming by Ken Gentry?

That little book. I Cruised through that a couple of years ago. I think it came out a couple years ago.

Small little.

Small introductory. Yeah, but Ken. Who publishes my book? Why. I left plethoras as well as Gary DeMar. But both of both of them more so Gary than as Ken.

Or what I would call.

Partial predators right like 90 filled already and I I think that that's see that's the pathway through which. That can if one is not careful, right. Dr. Gentry tends to be You know careful making the distinctions.

For example, he doesn't surrender second Peter 3 to 70 AD, which I think is impossible to To read in 70 AD, but that's what they do. They reduce all the language of the apocalyptic right symbol. They they reduce language through spiritualizing everything everything's an allegory everything in Revelation has got to mean the.

The.

Legions of the Roman armies and how many just this is that you're connecting the scorpions tail. And so what does that sound like? Well, it's it's what they accused Dispensationalist of doing newspaper exegesis, but all that they're doing is first century newspaper.

Right. Wow. Same thing they're doing the exact same thing as the dispensationalist. Do they just do do it in the past? Yeah, and they limit great tribulation to a specific very small number of years period of time like the dispensationalist and.

All nothing approach to the all of this course the same hermeneutic going on.

Past and everything is everything is very narrowly defined. And once you define it in that narrow definition, you can't escape it. You can't get out of it. So they build this this artifice, you know here and then they read everything through that.

And.

It's they stranglehold every text. So nothing means what you What what billions and billions and billions and billions of Christians throughout the Last nineteen hundred years have understood it. It's just this small pocket of people that all of a sudden and and they conflate texts.

They bring things in don't quote scholars again. Everybody understands from The day that Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD everyone in the world knew that. It's it's in the early church, it's it was it's like knowing about 9-eleven, right?

Well, everyone knows that the Twin Towers fell but that's not the end of the world, but they treated as the end of the world. That's that's like taking 9-eleven and saying that's the end of the that was the end of the world.

Right, and it and it wasn't wasn't the end. It was the end of two buildings. The Trade Towers on the end.

Full Preterism, the Gospel, and the Charge of Gnosticism

Dr. Frost so this actually makes me think about the hard question that I sent you a couple days ago. Would you so since we see that there's a compromising of the gospel that that Jesus is a defeated King He actually didn't conquer sin and death and we we feel that every single day in this broken world.

They say oh, well, you know when Paul was talking about in Romans 8 the the groaning of creation is at hand. However, the tenses are being talked about they shoehorn all that leading up to 70 AD and we're like no it's impossible.

We serve a different Jesus who is King of Kings and Lord of Lords and he is going to renew his creation. That is cursed by sin. Do we consider full preterists a part of a cult? I?

Think they. I think they are. I think there's probably like myself. Well-meaning people that were in it at the time that gradually and look hundreds have come out of this. I personally have have seen well over a hundred personally.

That have emailed me or texted me or on the phone. That have come out of this. So and I thank God for that. Because it takes it takes a real eye-opening work. I think of the renewing spirit of God to to and I that was in my case.

So, I think that there's well-meaning people that stumble as I did stumble into this and then you're in this the next thing.

I know.

Misplaced hope came out and I'm on the lecture circuit with Max King who I consider the father of hyper-preterism. Today, no one has no one tops his writing. The book the cross and the parousia of Christ this mammoth 800 page book.

Well, no one has. Don Preston has wrote the most books. But nowhere near what that one book by Max King. That was the book that got me in into the whole thing. And then I talked to Max for a good year in 91 92.

That's when I was born.

Just yeah, I was calling him They're off and then we met in the conference at 99. The RSC scroll conference last day's according to Jesus which got me back into it now prior 91 to 99.

I.

Was in my own. I had my own six-figure business janitorial business going on. A lot of so.

We were talking about. One of the draws to full preterism is the time indicators, right. The the the near the the last day. That's the hook and so. Do you know anything about the origins of full preterism?

Did it emerge? I've heard some people talked about how it's come out of the restoration movement. The Campbell lights. Is that is there any validity with that?

The History of Full Preterism and Its Rationalist Hermeneutic

Yeah.

You argue those kind of calls it a historical things, you know, I think it's say It's it's a it's it the biggest real full Treatment of it seems to come out of a 19th century where it gets part where a partial product.

But like J Stuart Russell his book the Pharisee and That was With together with Milton Terry biblical hermeneutics. So and all that Terry's doing is drawing off Russell's work. Okay, and all that Russell is doing is drawing off Three John's John Gil John Owen and John like who are reformed.

And.

What Owen and Gil are doing is drawing off of John Lightfoot. Hmm. So there's not a. And most, you know Moses Stewart, there's a few others that were Really reading probably 80 to 90 percent of the New Testament was 70 AD but all of these guys still kept a Robust creedalism as it came to resurrection of the dead and new heavens new earth.

So you would call them, you know partial predators. I've been. I've used the word hyper partial.

Wow, that's funny.

You may have that's where that's where it really comes into. Yeah, it's fruition. So it's kind of this rationalist hermeneutic. That's that's going on. It's no grammatical historical so. Read audience relevance and how the original audience first century all of this is kind of stirring around from the late 19th century or late 18th century and really comes in to 19th century and that way and with that you have the rise of higher criticism and all the rest.

Yeah, so it's super new.

It's fresh on the scene and you made a comment earlier. It this goes against billions and billions of Christians over the past 2 ,000 years. And so this is what's very confusing to me. Dr. Frost the full predators that I've talked to.

As.

They would claim to be reformed. They would claim to be Sola Scriptura. Okay. Now I've actually pushed back to them because What they would say is well, we shouldn't look to any creeds that that's not they honest us.

That's not God breathed. So just just make an argument from Scripture. Just make an argument from Scripture Sola Scriptura, and I've said Sola Scriptura is pointing out that Scripture is the ultimate rule of faith in the practice of our life as a Christian.

But that assumes that there are other rules like the grammatical historical method of interpretation human reasoning and logic of historical documentation and the creeds and the confessions. They're not infallible and we do measure all those things to the scripture, but in my experience Full preterists would not practically be holding the Sola Scriptura is because they are disparaging all other standards.

And I'm saying okay. Well in my mind They are reasoning identically as Church of Christ would which I'm not sure if you're familiar with that movement the restoration movement.

Oh, yeah.

They are simp they are essentially so low. Scripture. It's my Bible and me under a tree no creed, but Christ don't tell me about Alexander Campbell. Don't tell me about these other people. Let's just stick with what the scripture says.

Let's be a speaker. The Bible speaks and be silent with the Bible silent and at the end of the day. We need exegetical arguments to make our case. Absolutely but Christ has been building his church for the past 2 ,000 years and we can even see that God's people exist ever since the time of Adam, right?

So It it helps to see okay. If something is new on the scene just within a hundred years or so That is a good indicator that heresy is creeping into the church. So what do you think? Why would they appeal to Sola Scriptura in order to say?

Well, yeah. The the creeds and the confessions have been wrong or they even say that they don't even speak to this issue. Is that true? Do the creeds and confessions nowhere speak to Jesus already coming in the past?

Sola Scriptura, the Creeds, and the Church’s Consensus

Yeah, they do.

They do.

Well, they look forward the Apostles Creed and we look forward to life in the age to come. That's a forward-looking. And we believe in the resurrection of the body. Mm-hmm. Who shall descend a second time?

So, you know, he ascended it into heaven and he shall come again to judge the living in the dead. So yeah, they address it. And the reason why they argue against the creeds is because that's what the creeds say.

Mm-hmm. So you have You they've immediately set themselves up against that and not just one or two creeds all every single confession creed. All of them. There's not one that does not look forward to These these things resurrection of the dead that we're talking about so they know what they're up against.

That's why that's why they oppose the Creed and then they turn to.

The.

Sola Scriptura and they try to use that. And it is what you said, it's solo scripture, it's Luther and Calvin never meant that and by what you're saying in the Westminster Confession of Faith Which says that it's the supreme judge.

Hmm. There's the well if it's the supreme judge, then it's not the only judge where the word supreme is superfluous. You don't need it. Just say it's the only judge, but they're careful not to say that Because there are other judges.

Right. It's just this is the supreme. Well, what are the other judges? Well Calvin's Institutes is outlined. His whole book is outlined according to the Apostles Creed. Luther's smaller Catechism is outlined according to the Apostles Creed.

That's the stuff. That's what makes the subjects of the book of his catechism. So they didn't reject the creed. They didn't do that at all. They operated under the idea of The spirit of the Lord is moving in and within the church and surely he left us with some sort of witness and Certainly, he would have left us with what would have become an ongoing or a non growing Consensus.

Yeah that in spite of the fact that we're still tossed to and fro of every wind of doctrine. And we have not come into the mature perfect man Which is obvious.

That.

At least.

There is an idea that we are growing and to say that we missed it on this major Fundamental thing that is united in spite of our serious disagreements. Yeah, and I speak of the Orthodox and Catholic and Protestant faith.

That is these have united us that that's brought us. So that should be somewhere rather than start where we're divided start where we are united and where we are United is that he shall come again to judge the living in the dead.

So they opposed that that right there I tried to deal with that in this place tote. And going back over it now. I saw that I just completely fell short, but when you're in it. You think that you're really championing this doctrine solo scripture because there's been many points Martin Luther's brought up and I keep pointing out to them that you're not Martin Luther.

Martin Luther was a doctor spoke several languages translated languages. He was an Augustinian monk. He was thorough in his theology. New Aquinas and the church fathers backwards and forwards quote him in Greek.

Could quote him in Latin. Extremely well-educated which is another thing that they kind of just that they show. You know, they don't really want anything to do with it. But I always ask to them about soul scriptura to turn to the very very front of the book.

Of the Bible that they're holding and they'll see this publishing company there and here's a committee Bible scholars that translated that in IV or ESV into English. And so you have a bunch of educated guys with a bunch of degrees that gave them that Bible.

And that you know that just usually. Silences them or they walk away or they say I'm splitting hairs. Well, yeah, I am but your argument doesn't work now and again, they won't buy this. That's why I said you're like talking to a Scientologist.

Right. Don't like what I tell a lot of people's don't get frustrated.

With.

That you're not persuading these people because they're some of them are on a they're on a bin. It's like a it's like an alcoholic on a Bender, you know, they're just gonna drink you can tell you know, you're gonna cause for and they're gonna drink anything.

But they don't care because they think they're on to something and I've been there. I had the excitement. I Remember this is going back to dr. Talbot again with Dr. Gary Crampton, we would we'd love to go out to eat.

Dr. Talbot was a big big fan of buffets buffets and Gary Crampton was was there and he said Sam. I understand your argument that.

The.

Sola scriptura grants. That's that scripture overrides even creeds and councils as it's as the Westminster confessional faith says. That they do air that. Logically is a possibility. He said I'll never forget this conversation.

He said that's logically a possibility, but you have to account for the experience also in consensus of the church. That if your logical possibility is point zero one one one percent. That you might possibly be right.

Those are very slim odds. Yeah, he goes I'll give you the fact that you have some odds, but they're very slim and.

I.

Remember in my mind because I was a Time and dr. Talbot and Crampton and others were always trying to talk me out of it or challenge. They were always challenging. But loving me, but they always challenge.

That's why I'll miss dr. Talbot. He loved me, but he always challenged me, but he didn't dismiss me or execute. You know, I worked on the Hebrew program and put together a Hebrew primer. He let me grade some papers in Hebrew and he let me work in school.

He caught a lot of criticism. He just stayed with me because he just knew you're gonna get through this but He him saying that I remember in my mind that I was so driven by hyper-rhetorism that I said.

So you're giving me a possibility and now. Now I think back of the movie dumb and dumb or Jim Carrey asked the the lady Just give it to me. What chance do I have? So you're telling me there's no you don't want so you're telling me.

There's a chance and I remember that.

I'm like.

Am I the dumb or the dumber one. Because that's what? What hyper predators do. So you're saying there's a chance. Oh my goodness. Well.

I'm glad you. They're they're grasping at straws and I speculate why I get the idea when you have a new concept. And you're like at the possibility of it being true. You're excited. It's excited, but at some point I think our hearts need to be checked because You know, we're we're not supposed to come up with anything innovative at this point, right?

I understand Semper Reformanda, but this isn't where we're, you know. Having groundbreaking new theology if anything Semper Reformanda is looking back at at the the good deposit the the once delivered faith to the Saints, right and so I Speculate that there's a lot of pride going on like look at this newfound teaching that I have and you you all Are wrong, but you need to come look to me to be able to understand the deeper truths of the gospel.

And that's the key you can't mess with the gospel. We can talk about secondary and tertiary issues. But we die on that hill about what the good news is who Jesus is you gotta believe in the right Jesus and you have to Receive that Jesus on his terms that he prescribed in faith.

And so for the sake of discussion. Dr. Frost let's meet them with scripture. Okay, let's start talking about some of these passages this is something that I was thinking about and I want to get your thoughts since everything is supposedly shoehorned at 70 AD and It's all faction.

So they're gonna get all different kinds of full preterist responses. But they all locked together on the second coming already happened. They lock arms with this is the new heavens and new earth and then this one the resurrection of the dead.

Okay.

Now I immediately start thinking about what the Apostle Paul said in 2nd Timothy chapter 2. But avoid irreverent babble for it will lead people into more and more Ungodliness and their talk will spread like gangrene.

Among them are hymenaeus and felidus who have swerved from the truth. Saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some now. There's a few key phrases that he's talking about not tertiary issues, but he's talking about gospel truth issues.