@@toddcote4904 "Strange" is attacking, belittling and smearing without sound exegetical analysis. For the intellectually honest person, watch this excellent refutation... ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fdz2ApLuZ1k.htmlsi=pUvrAJX_nBc6fgf9 It's been very disappointing watching this 'death by creed' end run. I'm truly embarrassed for Doug. This was not a good look. I still respect him and I appreciate him and all that he's done to live out his worldview, but, in my eyes, he's dropped a rung or two with this misguided adhom attack. Assailing the implications of a view without proper exegesis is unhealthy, but to hereticalize others over it makes matters far worse. Arminians don't like the implications of Calvinism, but to reject it on that basis is unwise. We must allow Scripture to speak for Itself. Contrary to someone's feelings re election "not being fair", do we reject it on that basis? Surely not. We handle it with "Bible study". Scripture affirms the view. So, we have to deal with what Scripture teaches, not the way we wish it would be. Heck, perhaps the world will end one day. I'm not opposed to it. But I can't find Biblical support for it. The Bible only refers to it enduring forever. So, I chalk that up to the mystery of God. But to demonize Christians for seeing the inconsistency of postmillennialists is rather unseemly.
Zach Davis and Travis Drum openly asked a simple question to both Jeff Durbin and Doug Wilson : Where do you place the cut between past and future events in the Olivet discourse. No answer yet. If they come up with a valid answer, I might definitely put full preterism aside. Until then it will remain a potential view for me.
@@jb2009BCT ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JNhnxsbxhYs.htmlsi=pIgdhT4IsdxyPXkd This is one video that he dedicated to this particular question but he raised it a few other times inside of other videos he made. I am not 100% set on a specific eschatology but I wouldn't call full preterism a heresy just yet because he makes a very good case in all of his videos. I'm cross examining pretty much everything and I kind of like these tough questions. Travis Drum is another good one. Him and Zach Davis serve in the same church now and even if they don't have thousands of subs, there is a lot of substance in their teaching. Especially the series "The Olivet Discourse" by Travis Drum. It is a long 14 sermons or so playlist but I listen to it in my routine walk.
@@jb2009BCThere’s one I did responding to Doug’s thought (which he reiterated here) that Hebrews 1 is a different event than 2 Peter 3. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-1EtiiojAQH0.htmlsi=roRQtuaGsX8aE2EL
@@mjack3521 I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it is certainly strange. Mr. Wilson always underrepresents the number of full preterists around the world, and basically only points to the creeds to disprove them. What would be so wrong with engaging in discussion with a full preterist? The silence is deafening unfortunately.
If sin hasn’t been defeated then we are all screwed. Sin has no power over those in Christ. Christ didn’t come to save us from physical death, He came to renew our covenant standing before God and save us from covenantal death by fulfilling the law. For the modern evangelical that’s not good enough. They have fantasies about Jesus coming out of the sky riding a cloud like Goku and starting a zombie apocalypse.
I would say that He did do what you stated but why leave out the consummation spoken of in the scriptures? If you've been made new, your body will be as well. ANd why leave out what we are to look forward to, namely, the full glory part? Shining like the sun in the kingdom of our Father. When He is manifest we will be manifested with Him in glory (Col. 3:4). We can be joyful now while knowing that we have not entered the best & final state yet that we are looking forward too.
Yep. I'm a partial preterist myself. But FP is still way more coherent than the futurist interpretation. These futurists just want a real life comic book movie. Ironically it's a similar error that the Jews made with Jesus's first coming, not seeing it as "impressive" enough.
DW would likely argue that he was using the church fathers to show he was not "original". That is certainly true with the writers of the Book Of Concord. I think he is correct that you should worry if you are the only one who believes something, but this doesn't seem to be the case. DW is just ignorant of the people of the past who seem to agree with FP.
@@michaelsullivan6868 They we not Roman Catholic at all. The Roman Catholic church tries to retroactively claim the "fathers" as theirs, but there was no Roman Catholic Church.
Doug often speaks against Full Preterism but hasnt debated the issue yet as far as i know. Michael Sullivan and Don Preston are more than willing. Itd be a real treat
But partial preterists won’t actually engage consistent or full preterists. You talk about them, but you won’t talk to them? Why not, if it’s such a slam dunk? You frequently like to say, we don’t debate heretics, but engage Mormons, JW’s, Roman, Catholics Muslims, atheists, and Arminians. They refer commonly to the ancient Creeds and Confessions, while completely ignoring the fact that the Nicene council was virtually a churchwide debate with heretics. Y’all love to warn of the dire dangers of full preterism, but you never specify precisely what those dangers are. You insist that Christ must return, which implies that he did not complete His redemptive mission. Consistent preterists are quite sure that Christ fulfilled all that was written, and currently reigns at the right hand of God the Father. He now tabernacles in the midst of His people through His Spirit. Our ongoing job is to disciple the nations. As far as the fact, that sin continues in the new heavens and earth, one has only look at Revelation, chapter 22. Note, the dogs, adulterers, blasphemers, and sorcerers are still right outside the walls of the New Jerusalem. As for being an Internet phenomenon, a book which you co-authored has been responded to with a book of its own. And yet Pastor Wilson does not deem it worthy of his attention.
The Bereans [Acts 17:11] were "more noble" than the Thessalonians in that they were "examining The Scriptures" to see if what Paul was saying was true or false. Let us be like The Bereans. Let us test everything and everyone with The Holy Bible alone [Sola and Tota Scriptura]. Let us fear God, not man.
@@michaelsullivan6868 What does Wilson say about Israelite identity? After crossing the Caucasus Mountains, the Israelites were known as Caucasians. Doug Wilson, Caucasian, is an Israelite.
Why not debate Gary DeMar or Mike Sullivan on this subject? Many partial-preterists have different views on different scripture verses. The creeds are not our foundation. Amazing how many partial preterists run to the creeds for their argument. Most scholars believe Revelation was written post-70 A.D., yet partial preterists, like myself, believe it was written before the destruction.
Many will place the writing of Revelation post AD 70 because they might have misquoted Irenaeus on the dating. This 6 minutes video from Zach Davis gives a pretty good exposition of why that is. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-42j0hPZ_h08.htmlsi=fAvQO_Ax509JD7oM
As a newer Christian with zero church background or preconceived notions, it amazes me how people can so easily be tricked and led astray from such basic Biblical teachings and evidence. Sadly much of it comes from seminaries and individuals more interested in defending theological systems and making a name for themselves rather than humbly serving God as a saved sinner….in other words forgetting to be the humble sheep herder David was when God selected him for service. The Book is called “Revelation” because it details Jesus’ REVELATION, and is called a prophecy and is meant to encourage and inform all of Jesus’ followers of when He is coming back to get them…..and that makes perfect sense because it describes a terrible time for the saints and great tribulation prior to Jesus’ return. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence that it carries such harsh warnings about changing it. Now to think “Jesus’ Revelation” and all the thing’s leading up to happened somehow in 70AD is utter nonsense. Mark of the beast, a mark in the right forehead or hand, one cannot buy or sell without it, show me where this occurred without spiritualizing it?
@@matts.6558 OK then what about the very first verse of Revelation 'the things that must soon take place'. Soon...not thousands of years in the future. See also Rev 1:3 Rev 22:6-7 Rev 22:10 Rev 22:12 Rev 22:20 Sounds like everything was about to happen when John wrote Revelation. This is what Doug believes as a partial preterist and as someone who believes most of Revelation was fulfilled in AD70. You have to do some serious exegetical gymnastics to brush those texts away as not meaning what they sound like they actually mean.
@@thecanberean although I agree the term “soon” can seem challenging, but the answer to rebut you is quite simple…you stated you believe most of revelation has come to pass already, yet you don’t believe it has ALL taken place…therefore how can you be ok with the term “soon” and not be a full preterist? So you see…we both have the same issue really, you just think soon applies to Rev1-20, whereas I believe it is more for the messages to the physical churches of the time up to chapter 3 or so. Further, as a partial preterist I assume you believe Rev 22 is still in the future. Note Jesus also uses “soon” in Rev 22:7, saying “Look, I am coming soon! Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy written in this scroll.” So is Jesus not understanding “soon” the way you do? And further are you going to blessed by keeping the words of the prophecy in Rev 22:7, given you think it is past history and not applicable to you? I mean if you’re not looking for any of this and edifying and helping do your part in preparing the church for the prophetic fulfillment of these words? Or will you, this channel, Doug Wilson and all those that allegorize or put most of Rev in the past do harm to the church by teaching optimistic nonsense like post-mil to Christ’s church, distract the church from what it’s mission is and start politicizing the Gospel, rather then discipling believers to endure and remain steadfast through what Christ said is to come.? These aren’t small issues my friend, we don’t select eschatology like ice cream flavours or by whoever is the most convincing presenter. The consequences are significant enough for Christ to tell us and warn us about these things. So I agree with the channel name “ Eschatology Matters”. But believers better darn well they aren’t in anyway doing anything to be part of building the anti-christs coming kingdom. My take on “soon”, it is to encourage believers to keep the faith and not waiver to the left of the right. Also some events are sooner than others obviously which we both have to agree on - unless you go full blown full preterist and depart from the faith (yes, you can actually apostatize fall away from the faith as the Bible claims verbatim) John wrote revelations in around 90ad, it was called a prophecy, we have writings of people discipled directly by John like Polycarp and those Polycarp discipled that say John wrote this as an old man on Patmos during the reign of Domitian (81-96 AD) It is impossible for Revelations to be written prior to 70AD. These are 100% facts if you do your research and understand biblical timelines. Therefore partial preterism is false and a doctrine that should be avoided at all cost.
If Doug is so convinced of his partial preterist position then surely he would have no problem debating Mike Sullivan or Don Preston or even Gary DeMar...So why won't he?
I am curious if Pastor Wilson could provide a historical example of the ancient view of church eschatology that matches his novel partial-preterism model? Particularly, I am wondering if his fulfilled view of 2 Peter 3 is supported by the creeds, confessions, and ancient writers? It seems this is a relatively new eschatological conclusion. And, furthermore, if the Reformed Historicists were all wet on their eschatology, couldn't a precedent be acknowledged that maybe the partial-preterism of Wilson is also mistaken?
The new kid on the block is pre-millenial dispensationalists. The early Church believed and interpreted much more like Doug does in most ways. And that recent change is the greatest act of deception Satan has accomplished since the garden. It has changed the world view of Christians from bringing the whole world under the authority of Christ and building Christ's kingdom on earth, to being pathetic spineless cowards who let everything real Christians built be destroyed.
31:06 Kinism "The reason this is happening is because whites have been vilified..." Wrong. The reason this is happening is because of demographic replacement. It would be just as bad if whites were not vilified but quietly became a minority in their own country without putting up a fight. Doug conflates three things: 1. The church 2. The nation 3. Personal responsibility. Doug is correct that, in the church, all races are equal. It is also required of Christians to treat individuals of any race with dignity. But when it comes to national identity, we cannot apply the same personal requirements to public policy. Churches are not defined by race and ethnicity, but nations are. The problem with Doug and other religious conservatives is that they base their argument on utopian idealism which has no basis in reality. Let me give you an example... I have a dream that in every city in the United States young white girls should be able to walk down dark alleys at midnight without fear of being molested. Do you disagree with that? Of course not. This is a wonderful sentiment, but if you send your 16-year-old daughter down to the corner market at midnight to pick up some ice cream and tell her to take the shortcut through the dark alley, you would be reckless. Therefore, you must temper your idealism with reality. There is a saying that you may not care about race but race cares about you. Implicit in many of these utopian fantasies about race is that the other races are going to be as magnanimous as you are. But this is not true. All racial groups have ingroup preferences and will bias their behavior accordingly. When whites were the vast majority, they had the upper hand that forced minorities to conform to them, but times have changed and now whites are being forced to conform to the foreigners that have flooded into this country since 1965. An example how race triumphs over Christianity is that most black evangelicals vote overwhelmingly for the Democrats. You can convert minorities all day long and they are still going to be your political enemy. In my opinion, I find white conservative men who have children to be as wicked as the left, because they want to lay their head on the pillow at night feeling morally righteous about their racial egalitarianism at the expense of their children who they have allowed to become a minority. Men who are Doug’s age had the benefit of growing up in a country which was 87% white when they were born. Now, their grandchildren are minorities, and they did not say a word to stand up for them. Instead, they have sold them out for their self-righteous anti-kinism. I want men to be real men and stand up for their country and their children.
Not a single exegetical argument against full preterism. This is why it is rising. These guys that continue to attack the position refuse to come to the table and have a healthy debate with a full preterist despite being challenged to one repeatedly. Time for an eschatological reformation.
@@darryld.8616 -Christ 2nd coming already happened -no future bodily resurrection of the dead -we are living in the new heavens and new earth in full now -Satan is already thrown into the lake of fire -no Lord’s supper -Great Commission is already fulfilled
About ten years ago I ran into a guy who just came at me real hard trying to convince me of full preterism. He had his verses and his arguments lined up. I wasn't ready for him. All I had to fall back on was the testimony of the Spirit in my heart and what Doug said. This is a different story than what the Bible teaches. Where is the blessed hope in this? Christ is the first born from the dead. But this guy was saying none of us are going to raise from the dead. The Bible talks about all creation groaning for the revelation of the sons of God. This guy was saying that would never happen. I prayed for God to help me settle the objections and I later read 2 Thessolonians where Paul is talking to believers who had been discouraged by false teachers who had said the exact same thing. They had told them that Christ had already come back. So, this is not a new false teaching. It has already happened even back when Paul was around, and in His Sovereignty God inspired Paul to write a letter to a church. We have it in the Scriptures to encourage us.
@michaelsullivan6868 Thank you, sir! I appreciate the support, especially from you. I'm excited to see you next year in August at the Jonesboro conference!
As Doug says the consequences to doctrine are massive and broad, and I as a Praeterist consequently I have found many false teachings, and now I have a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity' for NT truth.
Imagine an online Master's Degree in Escathology with Doug Wilson, James White, Kenneth Gentry, Jeff Durbin and others?! I think it would be game changing!
? Does not sin(ners) and rebellion remain in the new heavens and earth with the existence of hell...in hell sinners remain unreconciled to God, yes they are being justly punished but not reconciled or redeemed. Maybe this is just a question of location, where is hell to be found within the framework of the new heavens and earth? I am not a preterist, I ask only for the sake of clarification.
Doug can not debate a FP because the only argument he has to defend his inconsistent (partial) preterism is: but what about the creeds and confessions?
2000 years and endless volumes from the fathers to the present age deny and refute FP, it is heresy and ahistorical, and a departure from the Christian faith
DW statement that Hymanaus being a few months off shouldn't matter is utterly ridiculous. Of course it matters that actual events happened if you claim they already did. And of course there would have been theological import to their timing. Obviously they were talking about a different resurrection at at least some level. And while there may be exceptions, there is nobody who believes in FP that is the only one they know who believes it. It would indeed be worrisome if they were. I am not sure about FP vs PP, but I have had many times where I thought that i was the only person that believed a particular thing, but then I sought out to find if others did. i would likely have thrown the belief aside otherwise. But what he really means is that it isn't popular enough a belief, which is utterly ridiculous. both in that it is untrue and that it doesn't matter. Many of his own views are quite unpopular compared to the rest of the Christian world too.
42:04 - If I'm understanding you correctly, what you said here is not entirely correct. It is of course true that a white-majority suburban church would be pressured to reflect racial diversity, however it is NOT true that the same is expected of any non-white majority (e.g. inner-city) church. It's a one-way street, as with all woke standards.
Partial preterism just makes no sense biblically. You have to go full preterist or full futurist. I'd love to know which specific scriptures and prophecies Doug thinks are still to be fulfilled.
If full-preterism is correct, when do you think the great tribulation happened? What do you think the 666 mark of the beast was? Who do you think the miracle-working false messiah and false prophet were? Who sat in the Temple and declared himself God? Finally, when was the second coming, and who noticed?
There’s a reason so many partial preterists are embracing full preterism. DW can attempt to minimize the numbers to make himself feel better. But, it is a fact it’s growing rapidly.
What difference does it matter if bodies are resurrected or not? And why can't the resurrection be a spiritual resurrection? And sin goes on and on now? Don't think Jesus meant 2000 years and counting to get to the next step in escatology.
No it has more to do with people studying their scriptures and seeing events pan out before their eyes the way the Bible describes them and realizing that God created us to live separate from one another. Miscegenation is a sin
Just found your channel and agree with it’s channel name. Quick scan through the vid library and not seeing much on premil, would you mind clarifying your position?
Great question. We primarily deal with Covenental eschatology, and in particular, Amillennialism and Postmillennialism. That being said, we do have a great discussion on Dispensational Premillennialism coming in the next few weeks between Daniel Hummel and Cory Marsh
@@eschatology_matters Thanks for the response. I would think it could be wise to ensure you include all types of premil positions as well, not just dispensation premil. Specifically historical premil, you know what the church believed from the beginning. I would hate to see your ministry come up blank on rewards day because you unintentionally only taught bad eschatology on your channel and didn’t prepare His church for what’s coming
The spiritual "heaven and earth" is the Conscious Mind [Heaven] and the Subconscious Mind [Earth]. We sow spiritual seed into the garden of the subconscious mind, where it grows into fruit. That fruit reflects onto the conscious mind, where it's manifested into the physical realm via the physical body. This is where immaterial spirit meets the material realm. ❤
Lip service to “sola scriptura “ … no verses to support apostles creed clause, refusal to debate serious FP proponents and declaring heretic without scriptural support … shameful
Does anyone have a resource discussing God’s creativity? I have some thoughts and ideas about that, but want to find out if it’s been talked about before like Doug suggests.
I agree with what Doug is saying concerning the view of Sin in the Hyper Preterist position. I will say though that sin will still exist for eternity because Hell is eternal. People do not stop sinning because they are in Hell.
God gives absolutely no credence to skin color. None whatsoever. Jesus was born a Jew, but that is not what made him the Son of God. All must be born again. So much for skin color being of any importance. In fact, flesh is what divides us. However, carnal mindedness is a fixation on flesh. The spiritually minded person cares not at all for any fleshly heritage. Even that of being a Jew after the flesh. That which is born of the flesh IS flesh. That which is born of the spirit IS spirit. "Henceforth, know we NO man after the flesh." Do you glory in being White? Do not so foolishly before God.
Well its either that or there's just so much fundamentally wrong with the position that it not worth the time. I doubt he debates the existence of unicorns either.
I understand Pastor Wilson’s desire that new light from God come from people well versed in the writings of your past churchmen, but God does not always work in ways that man wants. And how could you receive God’s correction, if your eschatology was wrong because it had been interpreted through the lens of Calvin’s opinions about Israel and the Kingdom?
God has given me “new light” on the question of free will. Thus saith the Lord Jesus Christ, “None of My sheep have free will”. I am forever praising and believing Jesus is the Christ, and this is pleasing to God.
Sin and death are defeated now. Jesus said in the Resurrection we would be like the angels. The problem is Cessationists don't understand the Kingdom because they deny the Holy Spirit. There is only one FP church. Even if there is more? There are more Catholics and JWs. Does more make right? Pope Wilson seems numbers make you right. So it's Creeds and a unanimous vote. Not Sola Scriptura.
"the gospel prohibits all ethnic malice..." Jesus said 'I have come only unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel' In the New Covenant appears to be made with only one race of people, as long as I'm letting the text speak
Good explanation of the full preterist position and it's problems. This is what deconverted Christians do with the Bible as a whole. At the 20:00 mark, Doug calls people who focus on one thing a crank. That makes Doug a crank too!
11:43 "sin is defeated." I'm sorry, I just don't know where I can fit that verse into my new testament. What verse says sin will be defeated (as you mean it - eradicated from the world)?
Just because something is defeated doesn't mean that it's eradicated from the world. If we take that position then what did Jesus actually achieve on the cross? Did He not defeat sin there?
UnChristian manner? Like calling your brothers idiots? Doug says some birds of a feather like to hang together. Like FP? Ah they can't. They need to be a part of our exclusive brethren. No nailing anything to the church doors. 😂
John wrote his gospel after AD70 and his purpose in living was to witness the second coming. Revelation was written before AD70, to warn the churches of the coming war. I am a Praeterist and so is the NT, as the apostles before AD70 all new they were in the last time as per John. In this video I am called a Crank, and I have discovered many new things to Christianity, but not new in the NT. Why not newly discovered when access to common people has only recently arrived with Google, before study required indoctrination and we the people are perceived as a threat. For those open to learn I have made a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity', to counter the bunker mentality of different denominations, where they do not seek the truth. My videos prove the breadth of the effect of Praeterism, so massive I have 29 videos so far of common errors in Christianity.
@@james-cq3mi I agree and add that Revelation was John's first epistle, and his gospel written after AD70 as witness to the second coming. I am a Praeterist and I have a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity'.
@@TheApologeticDog Those of us that have eternal live have no care about the “when” questions. I am forever praising and believing Jesus is the Christ, and this is pleasing to God.
Those of us that have eternal live have no care about the “when” questions. I am forever praising and believing Jesus is the Christ, and this is pleasing to God.
@@TheApologeticDog A faith that can be overthrown, should be. My faith abideth forever. 1 Corinthians 13:13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity. 2 Timothy 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. I am forever praising and believing Jesus is the Christ, and this is pleasing to God.
I discovered the question that full preterists can't answer. I was on a full preterist's video and posed the following question. If full preterism is correct, then why did John the apostle who wrote revelation and was alive for at least 25 years after the destruction of Jerusalem never say anything that Jesus had returned and the resurrection had occurred? Additionally, why were people who knew John personally, and probably knew and read Revelation, such as Polycarp, Ignatius, and Papias still looking for a future return of Jesus and the resurrection? They were all very young and also lived through the great tribulation, and none of them ever said that Jesus returned or the resurrection took place. No one could answer the question and I was told that I wasn't using proper bible exegesis or I was relying on fallible sources. Personally, as I began studying end times, I wavered back and forth between full and partial preterism. I eventually settled on a partial preterism/postmillennial view after coming to understand that Satan and death still exist. But when I discovered that contemporaries of John were still looking future to Jesus' return and the resurrection, that sealed the deal.
