Talk:Don K. Preston
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Biography because it uses a stub template.
|
Don Preston "The Cross Incomplete Without AD70"
Don Preston "The implication is evident: no second coming, no completed salvation. No completed salvation, no release from spiritual death. No release from spiritual death, no restoration to the "image" and "likeness of God." Each element of redemption depends on each other element for its effectiveness."
"The process (and ground) of taking away of sin undoubtedly began at the Cross, as Hebrews 9:26 affirms. It was not perfected and completed there, however."
eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=477&Itemid=61
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/2008/01/cross-incomplete-without-ad70.html
0 comments
Labels: 70ad Delusion, 70ad Endings and Beginnings, AntiChrist focus of Preterism, Pret-Don Preston, Spiritual BUT Temporal, Symbolic of Historical Events
Don Preston: Truth is really about having the right timing
Don Preston "When we put aside our preconceived ideas, and allow the Bible to tell us when things were to occur, we come closer to truth."
(AS IF TRUTH, IS REALLY ABOUT MAINTAINING THE RIGHT TIMING. Maybe Preston should let go of his preconceived ideas.)
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/
0 comments
Labels: Absurd Comments, Pret-Don Preston
Church is HISTORICALLY mature in 70AD?
Preterists maintains that the Church is somehow "mature" in is service to God since the OLD things of fleshly ordinances somehow disappeared in 70 AD. Typical Full Preterism tries to maintain that the church was an infant at pentecost yet in 70ad was fully mature. And it is funny that maturity is NEVER a state of which historical period you live but is a reflection of growing into the image of Christ.
Its amazing how similar FP is with dispensationalism. The only difference really is that they've taken the dispensational line and forwarded it 2000 years or so. All told, thats probably the grossest error that Full Preterism has made which is the cause of all error. Declaring ad70 to be a dispensational line in history, which cuts off the historical church from its roots and its foundation. To where ad70 is not only the end of Old Testament Judaism, but it is also the end of New Testament Christianity.
David Green "In stark contrast, the Church today is "mature" in regard to its service to God. Instead of being under the yoke of hundreds of fleshly ordinances that symbolize a future redeemer, the Body of Christ now worships the Father "in spirit and in truth" (Jn. 4:23). "
http://www.preteristcosmos.com/questionsandanswers2.html
Don Preston "A key point of controversy surrounding the Preterist view of eschatology is the contention that the church/kingdom was not fully established on Pentecost but was in a state of incompletion until the Old World was taken out of the way in A.D.70. "
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=280&Itemid=61
David Curtis "That which is perfect refers to the maturity of the body at the rapture of the church, which happened at the second coming of Christ, bringing in the New Heavens and New Earth which closed the cannon. This all took place in AD 70, when the Lord returned, bringing in the New Heaven and Earth where we see Him face to face. So the coming again of our Lord for his people brought them to full maturity. "
BUT YET CURTIS ALSO SAYS IN THIS SAME ARTICLE "Paul is contrasting what is temporal to what is eternal." BUT YET "This all took place in AD 70" LOL
http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/eschatology/13_8-13n.htm
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/
0 comments
Labels: Church Mature in 70 AD, Historic Fallacy, Historical Consequences, Pret-David Green, Pret-Don Preston, What Now Confusion
Don Preston: Natural Antitypes are Past Events?
Don Preston: "We believe we have well demonstrated from scripture that the fall of Jerusalem was indeed the antitype of the Flood."
Don Preston: "It is apparent that Jackson believes that the type must be physically inferior in scale; the antitype must be physically/outwardly superior in scale." "It should be obvious that the progression from the lesser to the greater in Biblical typology is a progression in significance, in meaning; not in outward manifestation." http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/
0 comments
Labels: Pret-Don Preston, Spiritual BUT Temporal, Symbolic of Historical Events, Typology (Natural Anti-Types)
Don Preston "This all happened in 70 AD"
This shows again how preterists confuse spiritual and eternal things and make them really just NATURAL SOMETHINGS by saying they (as a already proven FACT) "happened in 70 AD." So now they are simply are "mere past events". This is clearly a assumption Preston has imagined in order to fit his system. How can 70 AD do justice to the picture of Satan being cast into the lake of fire or the wedding feast. Making 70 AD as the focal point shows the limitations of Preston's system to show how Satan is truely cast in the lake of fire (placed underfoot) in Christ, and how Christ establishes his covenant within us to transform us into his glorious bride. Satan has full rein and power over those who are of this world who walk after the flesh. Likewise, Christ does not make the world at large, who walk after the flesh his bride. Thus, it is a huge assumption to say "This all happended in 70 AD" when it in fact did not.
Don Preston "But Jesus comes in judgment on that apostate city and destroys her. In chapter 20 judgment is set, Satan is cast into the lake of fire; and Jesus takes his glorious bride unto himself! This all happened in 70 AD with the full destruction of the Theocracy of Israel, the persecuting city of Jerusalem, the Old Heavens and Earth. The New Creation is complete--what Satan had succeeded in getting man to forfeit, communion with God and eternal life, is restored. Satan lost — God finished His work. "
http://www.newjerusalemcommunity.net/?c=54&a=1777
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/
0 comments
Labels: 70ad Delusion, All in the Age to Come, All in the New Heavens and Earth, Pret-Don Preston, Satan powerless after 70ad, Spiritual BUT Temporal, Symbolic of Historical Events
Don Preston
According to Preston, the final barriers have been removed completely for ALL MEN. The law and the power of sin was removed in 70ad. So what now stands to condemn man or separate one from God? NOTHING! Preston makes a huge assumption that that falling stones and physical nations some how removed your sin and mine? This is Universalism FOLKS! Pure and Simple!!!
Maybe Preston also applies his "mere past event" theology to "he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life." Since Preston ONLY APPLIES this to the "first century generation" how is it he is not twisting the very words of Jesus by applying this to 70ad. Preston maintains "he who hears my word" can only be those alive in that time, therefore the audience relevance might seem to demand that it only applies to them.
You receiving eternal life was NOT the result of 70AD, but the result of you hearing the word, and believing on it. See how Preston misses such simple truths by creating imaginary historical lines.
Don Preston I find it impossible to escape the conclusion that either the Great Trumpet of the Lord sounded in that first century generation or Jesus' promise failed and man still has no escape from sin, from separation from God. The Good News is, the Trumpet sounded and the final barriers between God and man were removed as God took away the last vestiges of "the law" which held the "power of sin." Man can now be fully justified and live in full assurance that "he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life" (John 5:24). Thank God for the sounding of the Great Trumpet!
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=584&Itemid=61
0 comments
Labels: Pret-Don Preston, Removal of the Old Covenant, Satan powerless after 70ad, Universalism
Don Preston
And Don Preston says he does not believe Universalism to be biblical? Let's see, "darkness and death" destroyed in 70AD. The "New Day of Salvation" or the new covenant "fully came in 70AD". This can only mean that ALL MEN are now in the "New Day of Salvation" or the "New Covenant" especially since Christ returned in finality of judgment, and the "Old World of darkness and death" ended and was destroyed in 70AD. This again shows the failure of Preterism to fully understand the problems with using a line in history to seperate the old things from the new things.
Don Preston Article: The Day Has Come The New Day was to come when Jesus as Messenger of the Covenant fulfilled the punitive measures of the Old Covenant in destroying his enemies in the day of fire, Malachi 3:1-3; 4:1-6; the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord. Since John, as Elijah, knew that Great Day of Wrath was imminent it therefore follows that the New Day that was to follow that Day of Judgment was imminent also. I believe the only scenario that satisfies the teaching of the Old and New Covenants concerning the Dawning of the New Day is when Christ returned in judgment, destroying the Old World of Darkness and Death, II Corinthians 3. This patently was not on Pentecost; the New Testament writers, writing after Pentecost saw the Day as still future, but imminent, I Peter 4:5,7; James 5:7-9.
The New Day fully came in 70 AD when Jesus returned in judgment of the Old World of Darkness and brought the New Day of Salvation. The Day has come.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=135&Itemid=61
0 comments
Labels: All in the Age to Come, All in the New Heavens and Earth, Historical Consequences, Pret-Don Preston, Satan powerless after 70ad, This Age / Age to Come, Universalism
Don Preston
Revelation is about the revealing of the removal of sin and death (not the removal itself), and the revealing of life in his kingdom (not that the event gave eternal life ). Sin and death is the issue, and can not be destroyed or removed by historical events. This removal or posession can not be a past or future event that is removed by historical events. The destruction of Jerusalem did not place you in the new covenant, nor did it remove your sin, death or seperation from God. If it did, there would be no reason to be born again. You were or have been in bondage to the flesh (covenant of death represented by the Mosiac Covenant) and if you are in Christ, you have been born again to the New Covenant of the Spirit. How is this process a past event, how did the old pass in 70ad, when you died to the old by being born again.
Don Preston Article More On No Death, No Sorrow, No Pain We believe the only view which does not pose such serious interpretative snafus is that which sees the New Creation as the consummated Kingdom of our Lord in which those who believe in him do not die, John 8:51; in which there is peace, Phil 4:4ff; there is eternal life 1 John 5:13; in which God's new people, Ephesians 2:12ff; wearing his new name, Is. 65/I Peter 4; offer up spiritual sacrifices in the New Temple, I Peter 2:5; Heb. 13:15f. This New World was consummated when God destroyed his old people, Isaiah 65:13ff, the Old Jerusalem; the Old Heavens and Earth of Judaism, Isaiah 51:15-16; bringing to a close the Old World (Age, Matthew 24:3) and bringing to glorious perfection, 1 Cor. 13:8, the New World. That time was when Jesus returned and destroyed the capital and hub of the Old World, Jerusalem, in A.D. 70.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=308&Itemid=61
0 comments
Labels: 70ad Endings and Beginnings, Pret-Don Preston, Removal of the Old Covenant, Universalism, What Now Confusion
Don Preston
Don Preston n Matthew 24 Jesus predicted the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple, the very center of the Jewish world. Referring to the passing of that system, and in direct contrast to his world that was to be established, Jesus said "heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away," Matthew 24:35. You see, one world was to pass, the Old World of Law; and a New World was to be created, the World of Messiah. It will never pass away.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=34&Itemid=61
0 comments
Labels: All in the New Heavens and Earth, ASSumptions, Historic Fallacy, Pret-Don Preston
Don Preston A Past Spiritual Resurrection
Preston believes that the resurrection occurred in 70ad which is EXACTLY the same problem Paul addresses of Hymenaeus and Philetus. This is a HUGE assumption on the part of Preston. First, if Hymenaeus and Philetus believed the resurrection was a past event, how could they not believe it was spiritual in nature. Preston is right to say,"They were not affirming the past occurrence of the end of the physical cosmos." And whose to say their view is not exactly the same concept maintained by Preterists. Their critical mistake was their claim that a spiritual resurrection was a mere past event which is a common declaration that Preterists make. It is very ironic that the justification for their system, which believes a spiritual resurrection is past is no different than that which Paul condemns. If the spiritual resurrection is past, how can we individually be resurrected. Was that not Paul's point?
Don Preston A Study of the Resurrection In 2 Timothy 2:18 Paul addressed the problem of Hymenaeus and Philetus; they maintained that the resurrection had already occurred. It should be clear to any thinking person that these two could not maintain with any degree of success — or a straight face — that the modern traditional concept of the resurrection had occurred. If the resurrection is an "end of time" event, then for these men to insist it had already occurred was to invite ridicule beyond measure. Why didn't Paul just say, "Look around! The graveyards are still full."? But if the resurrection is related to the death Paul addresses in vs. 11, it is understandable how these men could make such a claim and it be believed.
Since it is undeniable that the death of verse 11 could not be physical but must be spiritual, Hymenaeus and Philetus must have reasoned that since spiritual life was "already" then the resurrection must have already fully occurred. Had not Paul told the Ephesians they had been raised from the dead, Eph. 2:1? Remember, Paul was writing Timothy who was in Ephesus. The connection between Hymenaeus' teaching and what Paul had written to the church of which he was a member is very probable. Had Paul not told the Romans that Christ had delivered them from the "law of sin and death" Romans 8:1f? Had he not written to the Colossians that in baptism they had put off "the body of flesh," Col. 2:11-12? And had not Paul said in this very epistle that Christ had "abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel" 2 Tim. 1:10? Surely the resurrection was past already. It is in this context that Hymenaeus and Philetus can be properly understood. They were not affirming the past occurrence of the end of the physical cosmos. They were affirming — prematurely — the full revelation of salvation.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=124&Itemid=61
In David Green's own words "IF futurism is true and the Resurrection has not yet happened since the time that Paul wrote II Tim. 2:17,18, then preterism is indeed -- in the words of II Tim. 2:17,18 -- "ungodliness," "gangrene," a deviation from the Truth, and a Faith-overthrowing doctrine. If the Resurrection of II Tim. 2:17,18 has still not yet happened, then preterists are certainly heretics." http://www.preteristcosmos.com/if-futurism-is-true.html
0 comments
Labels: Hymenaeus / Philetus, Pret-Don Preston, Resurrection, Spiritual BUT Temporal
Don Preston
If Hymenaeus is teaching a spiritual resurrection is a past event, and Don Preston is teaching a spiritual resurrection is a past event, then how in the world is Preston different than Hymenaeus, both are being condemned by Paul which is a very serious charge. If the resurrection is indeed spiritual then how can it be a past event?
Don Preston Covenant Eschatology and the Hymanaean Heresy If the resurrection is a time ending, earth burning, history ending event, when the material body of every person who has ever lived is instantaneously reconstructed and raised out of the ground, not to mention the sea, just how in the name of reason could anyone convince anyone that this had already occurred? Paul dealt with the same issue in Thessalonica (2 Thessalonians 2:1-2).
If Hymenaeus was teaching the wrong concept of the resurrection, Paul could have easily negated him by showing that he was teaching the wrong kind of resurrection. Paul could have said, "Brethren, the resurrection is a physically observable event! Hymenaeus is teaching that it is a spiritual event.
(And HOW is this different than Preston?)
Jesus was approached by the Pharisees, who believed in a physical resurrection, and asked, "when the kingdom of God would come" (Luke 17:20). Jesus' response is critical, "The kingdom of God does not come with observation." If the kingdom and the resurrection are inseparably linked, and the kingdom is not with observation, why is the resurrection a visible event?
Hymenaeus simply had his timing off, and believed that Old Covenant things belonged to Christ's New Order.
(NOW WATCH THIS!!!!. Preston says the resurrection is not a visible observable event. But he continues to maintain this was simply a timing issue, rather than a error of teaching spiritual things were really temporal in nature. So by Preston's own comments, if something is in fact invisible, and not observable, how can he prove the resurrection occurred in 70ad. If he can prove it, when exactly did it occur and how does he know it occurred? If is is not a visible event, observable event, then how can it be observed by Preston in 70ad? How can he maintain it is a past event?)
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=224&Itemid=61
In David Green's own words "IF futurism is true and the Resurrection has not yet happened since the time that Paul wrote II Tim. 2:17,18, then preterism is indeed -- in the words of II Tim. 2:17,18 -- "ungodliness," "gangrene," a deviation from the Truth, and a Faith-overthrowing doctrine. If the Resurrection of II Tim. 2:17,18 has still not yet happened, then preterists are certainly heretics." http://www.preteristcosmos.com/if-futurism-is-true.html
Please see other comments under "Hymenaeus / Philetus" for how Preterist misinterpret and try to justify the issue of the resurrection being a past event.
0 comments
Labels: Bible is Silent, Historic Fallacy, Hymenaeus / Philetus, Pret-Don Preston, Resurrection, Spiritual BUT Temporal, Timing Issues, Typology (Natural Anti-Types)
Don Preston
The harvest and judgment is at the end of the age (that being represented of this temporal world, those in bondage to flesh (See Gal. 4), those found worthy enter the age to come (non-temporal, non historic, non external). Notice this passage speaks of the coming of the Son of man tied to a judgment of "every man" and judges based on their works. Thus Jesus is speaking of a judgment of a unbelieving generation (the tares) and also speaking of a faithful generation (the wheat) being judged at the time of harvest. The harvest, coming, and judgment is multigenerational and not temporal in nature. Preterists falsely point this to a single generation where as I point it to every generation, and a judgment of the heart of every man. Only those who are found faithful are allowed to enter in to the heavenly land which was promised as demonstrated by the exodus when they crossed the Jordan (New Heavens and Earth which is not a post 70ad period, but represents being born again from earthly to heavenly). Those who are not found faithful die in the wilderness (present heavens and earth, those who are dead, unregenerate).
I am not really not sure how Preterist can assume a judgment of "every man" finds its focal point in 70ad, since "every man" goes through judgment, "every man" is also part of the harvest, and men continue to be transferred in Christ from old things to new things (2 Corinthians 5:17). To assume this old to new occurs in history in 70ad is a huge assumption that is not biblical. This reveals the letter based focus of Preterism, and shows their appeal to make spiritual things temporal in nature subject to time.
Don Preston Matthew 16:27: Jesus said he would come in the glory of his father, with his angels, to judge every man. The normal response to this is that it "obviously" must be speaking of the end of time. "Jesus has not come and judged every man has he?" we are asked. To answer this we must see that Jesus did in fact predict not only the fact of judgment of all but he said it would happen in his generation. In Matthew 23:29ff Jesus said that all the dead all the way back to creation would be judged in that generation. In Matthew 13 he spoke of the end of the age when the righteous would shine like the stars. The wicked would be condemned at that time also. Daniel 12:1-7, the prophecy upon which Jesus' words are based, tells us it would be fulfilled "when the power of the holy people has been completely shattered." Peter tells us that Jesus was "ready to judge the living and the dead" when he wrote 1 Peter 4:5; and Revelation 11 tells us that the time had come for the judgment of the living and the dead. Finally, in Revelation 21:12 Jesus quoted the very words he had uttered some thirty years earlier: "Behold I come quickly, and my reward is with me to reward every man according to his work." Now unless Revelation is speaking of a different "judgment of all" from the "judgment of all" in Matthew we must believe the subject to be the same. Revelation, no less than five times tells us the events under view are imminent. Matthew 16:27-28 has a certain time-frame limit, i.e., "some standing here shall not die till they see the Son of Man coming...." Matthew speaks of the coming of Jesus to judge every man. Revelation does also. Matthew says Jesus would come in that generation. Revelation says he was coming quickly. Where is the delineation between the two? What we see then is a pattern of consistency. From Jesus' words in Matthew 16:27 until his words in Revelation there is the prediction of judgment of all. And this is always set in a time-frame of imminency.
0 comments
Labels: Generational Gaps, Pret-Don Preston, Spiritual BUT Temporal, This Age / Age to Come, Typology (Natural Anti-Types)
Don Preston
(John 12:31-32) "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." Preston reveals himself to be only thinking naturally by seeing judgment as a final end point at the Destruction of Jerusalem. He states "Are we to understand that there are two totally different and disparate judgments in view in these two epistles?" This statement is designed to make non-preterists look ignorant or dumb for not seeing his own natural thinking logic. He will argue until he is blue in the face, and he still won't see. He sees a single generational judgment tied to the destruction of Jerusalem rather that seeing the unbelieving generation who do not obey the gospel which affects all generations. The unbelieving generation like the present heavens and earth, or this present age, is characterizing those who fail to put on the new man and are outside of Christ. Unless, Preston can prove that this single judgment is the final ending point (for ALL men, Universalism?), or unless he can prove that people are no longer judged for not obeying the gospel, how in the world can he draw this conclusion that this event Paul is speaking of is temporal in natural or occured in 70ad. Are we to believe judgment is temporal also? Is our flesh what is judged for spiritually breaking our covenant with the Lord? For example if you fail to obey the gospel (sin) and your judgment is frying in a electric chair (destruction of Jerusalem), is that the judgment Paul is referring to?
Don Preston Peter's emphatic declaration of the imminent judgment and his rhetorical question about the fate of those who do not obey the gospel sheds light on another very significant eschatological text. In 2 Thessalonians 1:4-12 Paul said Christ would come "in flaming fire, taking vengeance on those that obey not the gospel." Who would these be that would suffer such a fate? It was the very ones that were persecuting the church, vs. 7-8.
What we find then is that Peter poses a question that Paul had already answered. This is why Peter's question is rhetorical. Paul's Thessalonian epistles were well known to Peter's readers, 2 Peter 3:15-16. Thus, when Peter asked the question, his readers could directly reference those epistles.
Are we to suppose that Peter was concerned with a different fate for "those who do not obey the gospel" than Paul? Are we to understand that there are two totally different and disparate judgments in view in these two epistles? (Spoken like a true Preterist)
When one acknowledges Peter's positive declaration about the imminence of the judgment upon "those who do not obey the gospel," then unless it can be categorically demonstrated that Paul and Peter were speaking of two different circumstances, two different judgments, two different groups of "those who do not obey the gospel," two different fates for these groups, then it must be admitted that Peter's chronological statement governs and identifies the judgment of 2 Thessalonians 1.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=152&Itemid=61
0 comments
Labels: 70ad Judgment Ends, Pret-Don Preston
Sam Dawson
Dawson not unlike Preston ironically use II Tim. 2.17-18 in order to fight off futurist who believe a future physical resurrection. They don't even see that they open their own system to a huge attack which puts them in the cross heirs of Paul. While I agree with them that the resurrection is spiritual, it is funny they miss the fallacy in their own system that the spiritual resurrection is a past event. If Hymenaeus and Philetus believed the resurrection was in fact spiritual which Dawson and Preston admit, and Paul says no "stupid" a spiritual resurrection can't be a past event, how is it not ironic that Dawson and Preston using the exact same argument that Hymenaeus and Philetus did to say that the spiritual resurrection is a past event. Oh I see it is about time. Their nature was correct but "they were mistaken on the time element of it". Dawson not unlike Preston make the assumption that this was a timing issue, rather than a issue about spiritual things being placed in temporal boxes. How is it that they assume that spiritual things are temporal historical events. If something is temporal and historical, is it not anti-spiritual. If something is a past event, how is it also made to apply to you or I. The only answer I find is that Paul's accusations are targeted directly at modern day Preterists who in their commitment to truth who made a huge error in their position to maintain their 70ad position. In fact is has done exactly what Paul said it would do which has overthrow the faith of many. As Dawson states at the end of his article which he applies to futurists rings so true of Preterists also. . . "how could our teaching be any more mistaken than that of Hymenaeus and Philetus"
Sam Dawson Question: How is your teaching any different from that of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who taught that the resurrection is past already?
II Tim. 2.17-18: ...and their word will eat as doth a gangrene: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; men who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrow the faith of some.
Answer: It's a good question, as many people assume that Hymenaeus and Philetus were teaching about the resurrection of physical bodies out of holes in the ground. But think about it: Do we know anyone today stupid enough to believe that the physical resurrection of physical bodies has occurred already? Do we know anyone stupid enough to teach such? How hard would it be for us to refute such an absurd contention. It would have been so simple for Paul to have refuted it. He could have taken those fellows to a tomb and shown them the bones of the dead! If they couldn't have understood such a demonstration, they wouldn't even have had to be baptized, would they? They could have gotten in on the "kiddie ticket." End of debate! Don't you think Paul would have thought of that? Why did not Paul suggest that? Is not the answer inescapable that Paul was not teaching and expecting that kind of resurrection?
It's evident that Hymenaeus and Philetus believed in the resurrection as the hope of Israel as the gospel which Paul preached, but they were mistaken on the time element of it. Daniel prophesied of the coming resurrection of Israel (Dan. 12.2-3--which Jesus quoted as about to be fulfilled in Mt.13.43.) "when the power of the holy people" would be "completely shattered" (Dan. 12.7) at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Dan. 9.26, 27--which Jesus quoted in Matthew 24 indicating it would "be fulfilled in his generation").
http://gospelthemes.com/eschatologyfaq.htm#hymenaus
In David Green's own words "IF futurism is true and the Resurrection has not yet happened since the time that Paul wrote II Tim. 2:17,18, then preterism is indeed -- in the words of II Tim. 2:17,18 -- "ungodliness," "gangrene," a deviation from the Truth, and a Faith-overthrowing doctrine. If the Resurrection of II Tim. 2:17,18 has still not yet happened, then preterists are certainly heretics." http://www.preteristcosmos.com/if-futurism-is-true.html
0 comments
Labels: Hymenaeus / Philetus, Pret-Don Preston, Pret-Sam Dawson, Resurrection, Spiritual BUT Temporal
Don Preston
Preston avoids the tough answers that express the hole of Preterism. Even he has questions due to the implications and assumptions that he has made. But those assumptions can't be wrong. What about the ungodly, Mr. Preston? Are they in the Age to Come, New Present Heavens and Earth? Preston SAYS YES!!! How could this be, you might ask? Outside the New Jerusalem you say, in the lake of fire you say? How is this NOT the present heavens and earth which you say passes away in 70ad. Were they found worthy to enter in, to obtain the age to come, Mr. Preston? How about judgment Mr. Preston. "I find that a lot of the passages that I have traditionally applied to an eternal concious torment, do not have that application." Cuase it ends in 70ad!!! I don't care how you white wash Preterism, to say it is ongoing or an application of the destruction of Jerusalem. It is still Universalism.
Don Preston Are full preterists biblical universalists or do they believe in a traditional hell? What do full Preterists believe about the nature and character of hell - is it literal or symbolic? When are unbelievers judged and when are believers rewarded?
Response: Well, this is an issue (Hell), that I am personally struggling with, and, I might add, so are a lot of other preterists. There are those who do take a hard line on this, but as I have stated to some of them (good friends of mine), until I can be shown that this is an issue of salvation, I am not going to take that hard line. To this date, no one has convinced me that this is an issue of salvific faith, so I am not going to disfellowship those on either side of the issue! I find that a lot of the passages that I have traditionally applied to an eternal concious torment, do not have that application. On the other hand, I am not totally satisfied that there is no merit to that idea either. There are passages that, to me, teach the reality of punishment after death. Where I am at for the moment (I call this my A-T-T position, because it is where I am at "At This Time"), is that the wicked are punished, without any doubts whatsoever. I think Revelation presents this clearly, for, after the time of the end, there are still nations outside the city, and outside the city are those who reject the Truth, liars, etc.. Those outside the city can, however, enter the city for healing! (RIGHT! ALL THE UNGODLY IN THE NEW HEAVENS AND EARTH. 2 PET 3:13 SAYS ONLY RIGHTEOUS.) That punishment of the wicked is eternal. Permanent, unchangeable. I thus reject the doctrine of universalism, and have written against it in my book on 2 Peter 3. A person is judged today, when they either come into Christ, or reject Him. When they die physically, they receive the results of that judgment.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=482&Itemid=90
0 comments
Labels: 70ad Delusion, 70ad Endings and Beginnings, All in the Age to Come, All in the New Heavens and Earth, Pret-Don Preston
Don Preston
Don Preston Well, you are correct about Josephus, but the reason why people have a problem with the A.D. 70 coming of Christ is because they believe, as you seem to, that while Jesus may have come in the destruction of Jerusalem, that he is also coming at the "end of the world." I reject that concept, and believe that the A.D. 70 coming of Christ was the end of the age parousia predicted in the scriptures, and that there is not another yet future, "end of the world" coming of Christ.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=508&Itemid=90
0 comments
Labels: 2nd Coming, 70ad Delusion, All in the Age to Come, All in the New Heavens and Earth, Mere Past Events, Pret-Don Preston
Don Preston
Preston is another which believes spiritual things are really just temporal events. Just look at the quote below. The key to understanding the book of Revelation is placing them in the proper historical context. All allegorical symbols, and symbolic terms are really just about nations, and events that occurred so long ago. Mere PAST EVENTS. I love this particular quote, because it expresses Preston's letter based approach to focus on the temporal rather than the spiritual. While he tells us it is spiritual in 70ad, it is really just temporal events that occurred in 70ad. He is no different that any futurist who places the fulfillment at the end of time. Still it is focused on a external non spiritual event, tied to historic cataclysm. The failure of his system, is the direct result of his own dispensational line which he establishes in 70ad, where he places ALL including the ungodly in the New Covenant, or New Heavens and Earth, or in the Age to Come. I guess this is the only conclusion one draws from a system that removes the OLD things in history rather than Christ.
Don Preston Article: Why Debate the Dating of Revelation? Most paradigms today, either totally ignore the temporal parameters, or deny them. They deny the historical context, the covenant source of the symbolism, and the covenant nature of the book, and extrapolate it into our future, resulting in one failed prediction of the end after another. This is a shameful situation that needs to be corrected. Setting Revelatin {sp} within its proper context of history can help us correct these hurtful situations.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=579&Itemid=61
0 comments
Labels: Pret-Don Preston, Revelation
Don Preston
Preston removes the old heavens and earth in 70ad as do most Preterists. What he does not tell you is that he places ALL in the New Heavens and Earth. According to his view, along with the FINAL dissolution of the present heavens and earth, the judgment of ungodly men also sees its FINAL dissolution in 70ad.
Don Preston (On Matthew 24:36)"We believe we have shown that in Matthew 24:36, when Jesus said "But of that day and hour knoweth no man," that his reference was to "that day" that would climax "those days" leading up to the final dissolution of the Old Heaven and Earth of Israel at the return of Messiah in 70 AD." (Those Days - vs - That Day)
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=307&Itemid=61
0 comments
Labels: Passing of the Heavens and Earth, Passing of the Old Covenant, Pret-Don Preston
Don Preston
Don Preston Contradictions Let me make an argument based on Daniel 9:24-27 and Matthew 5. Not one jot or tittle would pass from the Law until it was all fulfilled. "The Law" included the prophets, the Psalms, and the Decalogue. Daniel 9:24-27 posited the fulfillment of the entire body of prophecy, i.e. the Law, within the confines of the 70 weeks. (Seventy Weeks are determined to seal vision and prophecy). Since not one jot or tittle of the Law could pass until it was ALL fulfilled, it is therefore impossible for "the Law" to have passed at the Cross, while constituent elements of "the Law" remained valid and unfulfilled. Remember, none could pass until all was fulfilled. Jesus did not say some will pass when some is fulfilled! He did not say all would pass when some was fulfilled. He said none would pass until all was fulfilled.
Back to Daniel 9. Daniel 9 posits the fulfillment of vision and prophecy within the confines of the seventy weeks. Vision and prophecy is "the Law." The terminus of the seventy weeks is the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (as Terry seems to agree). Thus, the Law, and obligation to keep the Law, would remain valid until the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=541&Itemid=61
Don Preston I do not use a precise mathematical calculation for the 70 Weeks. I believe that it is a symbolic period of time, marked out by the beginning point, and the termination point, with "markers" in between. I do this for several reasons. There is no mathematical calculation that I have ever seen that comes out precisely.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=538&Itemid=92
0 comments
Labels: 70 Weeks Ending in 70ad, 70ad Endings and Beginnings, Contradictions, Pret-Don Preston
Don Preston
Preston really misses the mark in his book Elements will Melt. His comments below show that he sees the dangers of his own system but does not see the correct link between Universalism and Preterism due his own 70ad theory by making it the line that seperates the Old from the New rather than Christ. Maybe we should hold Preston responsible for not only the "implications of his doctrine", but also hold Preterists responsible for leading the way to the logical end of what they teach. Universalism. Preston sees Universalism as a dangerous error. Maybe he misses the fact that most Preterists placing ALL in the age to come, place ALL in the New Heavens and Earth, ALL in the New Covenant which does have the result of Universalism. So is Preston calling his own teaching a dangerous error? YEP, that is exactly what he calls his own view.
Don Prestons Quotes from Elements will Melt First, I am not ascribing to all preterist universalists (hereafter PU), the logical implications of their doctrine. It is easy to take a position without fully understanding the implications of that doctrine. This is clear from 1 Corinthians 15. Some seemingly devout believers in Corinth took a position concerning “the dead ones,” but they did not think through their position. Therefore, Paul began by showing them the implications of their doctrine. Paul did not say that they believed what he presented. He said that if they believed what they taught, then, logically, their doctrine led to other conclusions that they themselves rejected. For Paul, to accept one was to lead to the other. He did not charge them with the implications of their doctrine. But, he held them accountable for leading the way to the logical end of what they taught.
Patently, the issue of universalism is currently a matter of widespread discussion in preterist circles. (I wonder why?)
I consider it a dangerous error to take the position that there is no such thing as sin today, and that all men, regardless of their faith in Christ or lack thereof, are destined to receive the blessings of his atonement. (If the law of sin and death is defeated in 70ad, then what stands to condemn?, Saying this passes, logically means sin has been removed. Instead their must be a new law, and a new death in the Age to Come, or New Heavens and Earth in order to maintain this seperation. This also is a complete delusion and unscriptural.)
My point is that you cannot teach a doctrine without implications. And if the implications are dangerous, then the doctrine is dangerous. (SO IF PRETERISM HAS IMPLICATIONS RESULTING IN UNIVERSALISM, SHOULD IT NOT BE ALSO CONSIDERED DANGEROUS? LOL)
0 comments
Labels: 70ad Delusion, 70ad Endings and Beginnings, Pret-Don Preston, Universalism
