Okay people.
I thought I would let you know that come this Thursday, Melvin, the Benevolent Dictator. will come out of his little kingdom and try his hand/mind at a real time debate - with a full preterist by the name of Don Preston. Here’s the press release announcing the event:
June 26, 2008, 8 PM EDT:
Covenant Radio will be hosting another Eschatology debate between Don Preston and Melvin Jones. This broadcast will be live as usual at http://live.covenantradio.com)
Debate details:
Don Preston:
Resolved: The Bible Teaches that the New Heaven and Earth arrived at the time of the passing of the Old Covenant World of Israel at the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Melvin Jones:
Resolved: The Bible teaches that the New Heaven and Earth is yet future, and will occur at the end of the 1000 year Messianic reign of Christ on the earth.
Mr. Preston is apparently well known in both Preterist and debating circles. It should be interesting at the very least.
good luck Melvin! Just remember that whoever yells the loudest wins, especially in eschatology debates
This many be interesting. Those Preterists are heretics to the core.
I guess we will have a little appetizer time lol before the meal of futurism, because there is sure a lot of “time” left in this “age” Ephesians,3:21.
destinycreature, while we agree full Preterists are heretics, I have to ask you a question.
I noticed your URL under your user account goes to “deviantART” and I was wondering what the icon is that shows up atop my browser tab when going to their site (aside from the obviously odd sounding name of the site), it looks like some kind of horned demon or something, what is it?
Good luck, Melvin but - I am confused. If this person is a Christian, what exactly does he do with the contradiction that 2 Peter 3:4 presents to his theology? How can it be that “all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation” and yet, a new earth and heaven arrived in 70AD? Perhaps I missed something?
We’ve debated them here in this old thread.
Since then it’s a topic that mostly remains mute.
Personally, I agree fully with the Hyper Preterism Renounced proclamation. Full Preterism is full heresy.
And I don’t feel Melvin should debate with hardened heretics, that have repeatedly rejected the truth that has already been repeatedly presented before by others.
But I certainly hope Melvin’s efforts help someone see the truth.
I.C. you really need to stay out of this because it doesn’t involve you. Do what you do best, punch and run. It’s your motto. Big Mel is not scared to stand up to something you and other’s run from. He’s the only one with the testicles to stand for what he believes is true. All you do is throw stones from a safe distance. I read the so-called renounced site and it’s no different from the rest. They use the same scriptures out of context.You think that proves your right by saying them. It only shows that your “weak” in your “truth” lol. If we can tell it, you never answer anything! Once again stay on the side and whine to yourself about your so-called truth doctrine. Btw way this should be easy pickins for futurists, lol. The only way you can see is to take off your 3d traditions glasses lol. The name calling makes me laugh at one point then on the other hand I say that somebody must be scared. Prove all things I.C. man up and call in with your “truth”.
DTG, I had my dance with you as others already.
Many have tried to help you out of your heresy and you continue to embrace it. Far be it from me to continue with a man who repeatedly rejects the truth and claims a false jesus, who he can’t affirm resurrected and ascended into Heaven fully in the body He walked the earth with, glorified. And fails to understand all saints have a coming resurrection of our bodies, 1 Corinthians 15:50-58.
2 Timothy 2:16-19 (English Standard Version)
So no, I won’t dare waste another single keystroke on you.
I.C. as the unbelieving Jews were so are you Matthew 23:37 and you would “not” Jesus is “not” into the begging business. Btw Big Mel don’t ask for his help lol
walksbyf8h, to respond to your initial question. 2 Peter was written about those unbelieving Jews, who did not expect the end to come soon, because it had already been quite a while since the original prophecy (Deut 32, Isaiah, etc.). Peter was telling them the final hour was there, yet they were mocking, not believing it was going to happen. Peter was writing this BEFORE the events happened (per the preterist view); we are living on the other side of the event, so his words are not applied to us. The scoffers he was referring to were in his time and age, prior to the end at 70 AD. Hope this helps.
(MN: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!! My systems have detected a preterist in the locality! Shields up. Warning! Shields up! )
MN - thanks for jumping to conclusions and not extending any Christian charity in your views of my comment. The question asked was regarding how preterism deals with the issue, and I explained what their view says about his question. So, just because I KNOW what they believe, you sound the alarm that I am one. Whether I am or not, your jumping to an assumption just shows how quick Christians have become to label and attack each other without question. Another reason there is such division in the body of Christ.
I didn’t jumpo to conclusions. You said “we are living on the other side of the event, so his words are not applied to us.” I don’t see that it is a jump to conclude that you were speaking of Christ’s return and that it has happened. Is this not the basic Preterist position?
By the way, the debate was quite enjoyable. It definitely helped me to see where I need to raise my game.
I had to WORK and MISSED IT!! They took out the wireless from the office and I’m trying to pirate signals to hear the thing LOL!!
No Jeff, you have misunderstood. I’m well aware of what the person is stating. They are incorrect. People are now, in this day and age still saying the very same thing. That was the point that I was trying to make. Peter’s words apply directly to our generation since the Second Coming of Jesus Christ can not and could not occur prior to the rebirth of the Jewish nation. Nor could it occur prior to the end of the sixth Jewish “Week”.
I’ve prayed that God will let you be at your best.
To destinycreature I surly don’t see the word heretic the opposite side of futurism do we. You need to look up your Greek for one that is 141 to start. Then your English second you must be catholic lol. Three Titus,3:10 doesn’t apply to your futurism here because Paul “didn’t pass that down for sure” Fourth check your
four father’s for that the traditions of men. BTW do you
really believe the bible?
MJ, I pray your strength and wisdom in God and I thank God for your commitment and this medium by which we are able to stand in and on the truth of His Word.
By the way, why is it that the so-called “evangelicals” do not speak out against the “mend of gawd” that constantly distort the Word of God, but would publicly go after a politician who does not make a claim to be a preacher of the Gospel, but makes a passing comment on Scripture? Go figure.
Sola Scriptura,
DOC
I hope the nay sayers listen in, we all know what we believe, let’s see if what we believe is indeed what the bible teaches. For his truth
by the way IC, you debated no one on this site. you stated your so called scriptural point of view, which was just that, your point of view not scripture. Listen in tomorrow because Mel deserves your support. By the way IC. just for the record, I believe any form of futurism is a heresy,
May i ask what a preterist is?
(MN: Yes you may. Go ahead and ask. Or just click on the word. )
WoW! Mel, Nice pic! You should be in movies. Oh wait, never mind.
Kyle
Charlz I don’t know you, but you should also ask yourself what is a futurist. Also listen in to the debate if you could.
Again IC, their are other 100 or so scripture that do not support your concept of a future or should I say “soon coming” of Christ. You know I.C you’ll be able to call in and ask questions, I hope you will, remember contend and defend. Stand Up put and you truth to the test
Well, actually, for a more structured formal debate such as this, we really won’t have any time for call ins. The time limits and questions have already been established, and is already going to be almost 2 hours long. Any additional questions at this time would be hard to fit in.
Bro. Melvin, I am in prayer for you even now….
I wanted to make some humorous and/or sarcastic comment which is my modus operandi but you will be engaged in some serious work for the kingdom so may God’s grace make you adequate for the task. Be blessed.
(MN: Thanks. Although humor and sarcasm are always welcome. )
To all concerned,
My question is, why debate an issue if it has no soteriological significance? For the entire time that I’ve even known about this issue (and debated it here), the participants have stated that it doesn’t matter so far as someone’s salvation is concerned. (I disagree on this point) That is unless you go to their private websites. The preterist believe just as strongly, if not more so, that the futurist is a heretic. This word heretic needs to be nuanced if it doesn’t mean: false teacher, Christ denier, and one to be rejected after the first or second admonition (Titus 3:10). If the preterist is a heretic, then he is not a brother and should be rejected. If the futurist is a herectic, then he not a brother and should be rejected. Debates in this case would only be useful to lay out the arguments and facts. However, if one of the parties is unregenerate, then they need the transforming work of the Holy Spirit. I hope that this debate will be the beginning of that work. I’m praying for you Mel.
BLD, is someone who denies the full body resurrection and ascension of Christ and denies the coming resurrection of our bodies a brother?
I know you’re playing the analytical role, but there is no “if” or nuance here. Full preterism is heresy and on this blog it’s gone well beyond the first and second admonition. Here the matter has fully become a case of Matthew 7:6 and the LEAVEN should not have been allowed to remain here as long as it already has!
To I.C. what do I say to you man is get help and a lot of it. YOUR lies will only stand but so long. Maybe you should become a politician because they are famous for lying but smiling at the same time like you and deceiving people. BTW I thought this was Big MEL show!!!
I.C you need to repent, I know of no convent eschatologist that believes that Christ resurrection and his ascension was not in a body. I’m not sure after being told countless time that you, mind you I said “YOU” continue to misquote Preterist point of view, you need to recant, repent and get real
Tryed to log in but wasn’t getting any sound. So I’ll check back to hear the recorded debate later. Am sure it’s worth hearing at anytime.
So I am late to the game on this one…if preterism is true why are things so goofy right now? Isn’t the return of Christ supposed to utterly demolish all evil and restore creation fully to God?
Christopher, you should check out this thread where questions like yours were asked and not given a suitable answer because preterism fails to agree with reality.
They don’t believe in the Lord Jesus resurrecting and ascending to Heaven fully in the body He walked this earth with, glorified. They likewise deny all saints have a coming resurrection of our bodies, 1 Corinthians 15:50-58.
Also Hyper Preterism Renounced, regardless of how they deny it, the words there are true.
Full Preterism is heresy.
Okay, so how do I hear the recorded debate? Who won?
Full Preterism is heresy. I debated one extensively about 14 months ago. Wack.
Partial Preterism, OTOH, is pretty attractive. Fun stuff.
Don’t forget to make the resurrection one of your crucial points! They got nothin’ on that.
Thanks Melvin and DTG for the insight….it was very helpful.
Listen to complete debate, more like a civil adult conversation, for a change. This is a needful discussion, I find that when I remove the traditional positions, i,e futurist, preterist, & simply read & apply text appropriately. A better understanding can be obained. The biblical text TMU cannot be assigned dual understaning, it says what is does or not.
“This GENERATION shall not pass away, till ALL these things be FULFILLED.” Matt 24:34
There’s nothing I can do with this but, except what was said, my GENERATION cannot be the one Jesus spoke of. IMO, not a preterist view, just what Jesus said.
Thank you, Melvin & Don for this constructive conversation.
To Rhology join in with the pet pev word but it want help you. It only brings more denial don’t forget to use Acts 24:14 please. As Gary V would say whooooooooooooooooooo I’m shaking with the heresy word. I’m not going to call no names no need. BTW can I have the name of the person who told you the truth. 1
Thess 5:21
Read the book by Hank Hanegraaf “The Apocalypse Code,” or “Apocalypse Code,” and read the inserted scriptures within this text, so as to compare and contrast.
Did you put a threat out on Pastor Jenkins?
(MN: No. However, I did get a couple of e-mails from a couple of morons today. Here is the text from each one:
First one I read:
Second one:
One has to wonder if this is a misinformation effort of some kind. But it’s so ham handed and stupid that I can’t believe it’s from John K. Jenkins, the pastor of First Baptist Church of Glenarden on the Kettering. )
You know, I just can’t resist addressing these morons.
(Moron 1) “Word has spread around my church that you attacked Anatole Jenkins, Pastor Jenkins’ nephew.”
(GV) Well, at least SOME sort of word is making the rounds at FBCG for a change. Now if we can only get your pastor to make it GOD’S WORD. NAHHHHH….
(Moron1)”They are saying you hit him at a grocery store….”
(GV) This is a lie. I did NOT hit him in the grocery store. I hit him right in the nose.
(Moron1)”…and told him he and his whole family was going to die because Pastor Jenkins thinks he is God.”
(GV) You mean, if Jenkins stops thinking he’s God, his whole family will never die??
(Moron1) “I know for a fact that the security department was looking out for Pastor Jenkins and his family a few sundays ago because you said you would kill them.
(GV) Do you have video tape of this alleged threat?? Audio tape?? A transcript?? Did you receive this knowledge through tongues and have JKJ interpret it for you??
(Moron1) Your crazy for doing that and a coward for saying you were going to do it and not.
(GV) Why is it that misspelling, inappropriate punctuation, and indecipherable word groupings that can only be loosely referred to as sentences seem to pop up so often among the pimped??
(Moron1) “… your even worse for attacking his nephew, he is like 16 or something. Your insane!
(GV) And YOU’RE in need of remedial English. It’s funny though that you claim Mel is insane, while you hand over fistfuls of cash (which should have been used for education of some sort) to a man who claims that God wants you rich.
Tell us, are you as rich as JKJ yet?? Why not?? Isn’t it insane to give money to a rich guy (year after year) because he tells you (year after year) that you “Breakthrough” is right around the corner (but just never THIS year)??
(Moron1) I HATE YOU I HATE YOU I HATE YOU I HATE YOU I HATE YOU I HATE YOU I HATE YOU I HATE YOU I HATE YOU!
(GV) Ah yes. The teaching at FBCG comes shining through.
Second one:
(Similarly Grammar Challenged Moron2) “how dare you threaten my pastors life and the life of his family. It takes a really sick demonic person to go to a 17 year old and tell him to his face that his uncle is the devil and that he along with the rest of his family is going to die. Youve really topped yourself with this one. I beg you to ask for gods forgiveness as soon as possible.”
(GV) Had you been using your Bible for something more noble than stuffing it under your sofa cushion to rectify that annoying sag in the springs, or had you been attending a church rather than an edifice erected to glorify one man’s ego, you might have come across this passage from Scripture:
Exd 20:16 ¶ Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
That little gem is contained in something we like to refer to as “The 10 Commandments”. I know you don’t get that deeeeeeeep into the Word over there at FBCG. But, if you’d like, my 7 year old son can break it down for you.
I have an overly suspicious mind or perhaps God has given me discernment. Has any credible person actually confirmed that Pastor Jenkins’ nephew was even threatened? Or could it be that this event was made up so that Melvin’s credibility and character would be called into question so that folks will discount everything on this website?
I really hope no one is actually threatening Pastor Jenkin’s family but at the same time this sounds so ridiculous …so juvenile…that I question the accuracy. This just sounds like something a child would make up. But if I am wrong, then I am wrong and just forget everything I said.
(MN: My observation at the front-end of this thing was if it is an effort at smearing, it sure is ham-handed. But then again, the fans of John K. Jenkins, the pastor of First Baptist Church of Glenarden on the Kettering, are likely dim-witted enough to want to believe it. Anything, I suppose to keep themselves from seeing that they are being pimped. )
I’m a member of FBCG, am debating leaving right now. I’m a firm believer in all that you talk about and the pimpery of the church, especially FBCG which is why I wanted to come to you directly before just assuming things.
About a week ago the security at FBCG was on high alert. Apparently, someone had threatened Pastor Jenkins’ nephew, Anatole. He told him that Pastor Jenkins was a fake and was a pimp. He was screaming obscene things at Anatole and he also told him that Pastor Jenkins was going to die that day, as well as the rest of his family. I know this because im good friends with one of the police officers at the church. They had security all up and down. Apparently, they thought that you might have been the one who threatened Anatole but wasn’t sure. I know you are a man of the truth so i’m just going to ask, was it you? Im all for all you have to say about John Jenkins but if you would go so far as to threaten his family and life then I might have to re-valuate everything you have told all of us, your readers. So was it you, if so why and what exactly did you say to his nephew?
(MN: I must admit that this is most interesting. Just today two morons sent me e-mails fussing at me for threatening their pimp pastor. No, I have never, ever threatened John K. Jenkins, the pastor of First Baptist Church of Glenarden on the Kettering. Running this site and warning thousands of people about his pimpery is both more effective, a good deal more fun, much safer, and legal.
I have no idea where the supposed threat took place, when it took place, or even why it took place. Though I suspect the fellow was feeling really frustrated at having been pimped and, as it usually works, having his wife stay there once he left.
Why in the world would I do that after all these years? I don’t even know what his nephew looks like. As far as I know I have never seen him; wouldn’t know him if he broke into my house.
It just sounds to me like the chickens…..are coming home….to roost.
I have no desire for John K. Jenkins, the pastor of First Baptist Church of Glenarden on the Kettering to die. I want him to live a long, long time so he can have lots of time to repent from the stuff he has done and perhaps apologize to the many people whose lives he has ruined.
Of course, it would be easy enough to determine that it wasn’t me. They can ask the nephew to describe the supposed assailant. If he doesn’t describe the fellow as tall, incredibly handsome, very articulate, intelligent looking and rather svelte as a result of joining his wife on a Multiple Sclerosis Recovery diet [which actually seems to be working, thank you very much], then it weren’t me.
Romans chapter 12 very clearly says that I should not take revenge but leave room for God’s reaction.
Again, no, I did not take any action toward any member of any branch of the family of John K. Jenkins’ , the pastor of First Baptist Church of Glenarden on the Kettering. )
Melvin….. I wouldnt call them morons!!!!!
Id call them “less-ons”…
Okay, it was a lame joke, but my 10th grade economics teacher used to say it…okay?
oooh, i get it, more, less. yeah, it was lame but it still produced a small chuckle from me. but then again, w/ me, it don’t take much. sorry, laughter is my drug of choice.
By the way, thanks for asking before making assumptions like the two half-wits I quoted. It’s quite refreshing. But of course you would take the rational route given that you are considering leaving First Baptist Church of Glenarden on the Kettering.
Allison,
What is happening at FBCG happens at all the “big” Churches. The Pastor gets so big, powerful, and wealthy that he always needs to look behind his back. Now that something happened to his Nephew the paranoia begins. I can only imagine the laundry list of enemies “so-called” that went through the Pastors mind. Melvin was on the top of his list because of the positions he takes on his website. However, paranoia and facts are mutually exclusive. Pastor Jenkins needs to recognize that what Melvin does here takes a modicum of intellect and is far more effective and “yes” legal then threatening a kid. The idea of having a blog dedicated to the repudiation of the Prosperity Gospel/WoF does not and should not be equivocated with physical threats. Think about it. What Luther did when he put his thesis on the doors of the catholic Church was far more effective then threatening the Priests with physical harm wasn’t it? So in this case why is it any different. Let me expound further. You see it’s much easier to create a boogie man if you will when something goes wrong. It’s easy to point fingers at Melvin because of his stance on this current movement in Christianity. That being said, just like Luther the Catholic Church attempted to smear him so too FBCG is attempting to smear Melvin.
In closing I would suggest leaving any Church that preaches the WoF/Prosperity Gospel.
Kyle
DTG aka love me or hate me,
the pet pev word but it want help you
OK, good deal, you won’t mind if I use “heresy” about you, then.
It’s not supposed to “help”, it’s supposed to serve as an accurate label of your position. It’s a timesaver.
Acts 24:14
Which makes no reference to anythg related to HyperPreterism.
BTW can I have the name of the person who told you the truth.
You could’ve just gone to my blog and looked 14 months ago, you know.
His name is Adam B Dada and he’s a huge heretic. An amazing heretic. What’s even sadder is that I met him on an Emergent blog where they were defending him as a good brother in the faith. Sigh.
You know, why even bother acting like “heresy” either bothers or doesn’t bother you? If HyperPret is true, nothing matters. There’s no sin, no judgment, and so no morality. I could murder you, rape your corpse (I of course have no plans of doing so) and it wouldn’t matter in the slightest. You’re resurrected after all!
If this is the Kingdom, the Kingdom sucks.
Peace,
Rhology
its funnt you should say “if this is the kingdom, the kingdom sucks. I can hear the jew saying, if this Jesus is the one, then this sucks
Difference is Hannah, Jesus came just as He was described in prophecy. The Preterist kingdom looks nothing like what the prophets describe. They have to allegorize and spiritualize every recognizeable characteristic away to fit their ideas in. Nothing means what it SAYS in Scripture.
I find it odd that people need to ask if you really threatened some nobody kid or anyone else for that matter. I don’t know the intimate details of your life at that church but I don’t understand why people are so quick to assume you didn’t leave peacefully. Why are these people so quick to assume you’ve jumped from a forum to physical violence. I don’t know if I were you I’d consider suing for slander.
Dear the Benevolent Dictator, next time listen to your brother in Christ. This thing is an art and a science.
Acts Ch 8 v30-31
One Luv Pastor Xerxes
PS Don Prestons arguments were weak! heard the debate
Pastor Xerxes
can you expound a little on the above scripture?What “thing” is an art and a science?…explain please.
(MN: I think he means getting your behind kicked up between your shouldermblades while you attempt to defend a position you were not sufficiently prepared to defend. )
(MN: I think he means getting your behind kicked up between your shouldermblades)
you have been watching way too many cartoons. i caught a visual (i’m prone to do that) and i had to laugh. you know the deal- with mav, it don’t take much.
ok, it’s late. i think i’ll take my silly self to bed now.
:o)
To Pastor Xerxes can you please tell me the “weak” points on my site or Don’s site please. Your a Pastor so this should be easy for you to “explain” yourself. All hide in the shadows and make your comments. Lets hear your “strong” points lol.
Know what bothers me Derrick?? Here’s Acts 1:11 word for word from the Greek:
Acts 1:11 who also said, `Men, Galileans, why do ye stand gazing into the heaven? this Jesus who was received up from you into the heaven, shall so come in what manner ye saw him going on to the heaven.’
(GV) How was Jesus received up into heaven?? Because He’s coming in the SAME manner.
Physically. Visibly. In full view of witnesses.
Not “spiritually”. Invisibly. Without a single witness.
Which way did He supposedly come in 70AD?? Was it the way the angel described,just the way He left?? Or was it secretly, in direct contradiction to God’s Word??
Mat 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here [is] Christ, or there; believe [it] not.
(GV) This obviously refers to a “secret”coming,since otherwise no one would have to tell anyone Christ has returned.
Mat 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
(GV) This didn’t happen between 33AD and 70AD. No ancient source records great signs and wonders (Biblical language for miracles) by any claiming to be Christs in that span after Jesus.
Mat 24:25 Behold, I have told you before.
Mat 24:26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, [he is] in the secret chambers; believe [it] not.
(GV) Again, the secret coming is repudiated.
Mat 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
(GV) Again, this didn’t happen. Not only did what happen in 70AD happen before (Babylonian captivity), it wasn’t “no, nor shall EVER be again”. In fact, the Holocaust was far worse tribulation, killing 6 times the Jews killed in 70AD (1 million in 70AD, 6 million during WWII).
Rev 1:7 Behold, He cometh with clouds; and EVERY EYE shall see him, and they [also] which pierced him: and ALL KINDREDS OF THE EARTH SHALL WAIL BECAUSE OF HIM. Even so, Amen.
(GV) Not only did every eye NOT see Him, not a SINGLE eye saw Him in 70AD. And when did ALL kindreds of the earth WAIL because of Christ in 70AD?? Shoot, most of the nations that had even heard of the destruction in 70AD celebrated it as a glorious Roman victory,they didn’t WAIL over it.
Mat 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.
(GV) When in 70AD did the possibility of no flesh being saved occur?? Even if you want to limit it to the Jews only,there were huge Jewish populations outside of Israel (in Alexandria, Egypt for example) who would NOT have been affected by what happened in Israel in 70AD. So,the “no flesh would be saved” doesn’t fit there either.
Rev 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
Rev 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
(GV) Now, even taken VERY figuratively, if satan is bound RIGHT NOW,that stinking chain has WAY too much slack in it, because I sure don’t see him restricted in comparison to the past. And, not only that, but the nations aren’t supposed to be deceived by satan any more for a thousand years. Take that figuratively as well, but tell me when has it ever in history been the case that the nations were no longer deceived??
Color me unconvinced, buddy. No animosity, and I hope you don’t respond that way. I just can’t wrap my mind around this in light of Scripture..
Don is looking to debate this Issues again Gary V, can I toss your hat in the ring? sounds like you got it together, should be easy pickings
Michael, you should talk to Derrick. We’ve already been through this.Neither of us can see the point of debating another Christian on eschatology. Find me a Mormon, or a JW, or a Moonie for crying out loud, rather than asking me to debate how many angels dance on the head of pins.
I can’t fathom a more egregious waste of time than debating fellow Christians on when Jesus returns when we’re overrun with pimps and cults……. unless there’s someone who wants to debate what color His beard is, or what size sandals He wore.
Frankly, it borders on spiritual malpractice
I’m simply pointing out that I can’t wrap my mind around Preterism with the internal contradictions I pointed out. And yes,I’ve seen the responses and found them quite inane. Preterist Planet is quite a resource.
BTW Michael, it may be time to stop hiding behind momma’s skirts. Why don’t YOU respond to the questions if you’re so certain??
To Gary V.
First I hide behind no woman’s skirt.
Secondly: DTG is his own man, and he’s my bro, unlike some of the brothers I’ve spoken to on this site, He’s more than able to handle you guy’s
Thirdly: and this might be difficult for you to wrap your head around.
DTG was asked my Big Mel (your Bro) if he desired to debate Saiko on the subject of Covenant eschatology, Saiko had for reasons he can explain misquoted Don Preston and stated “Covenant eschatology teaches Christ as a spirit” Derrick declined for reasons he can explain to you , and asked me if I’d like to, I said sure, I told DTG these guy’s do not respect us so I contacted DTC and told him since Saiko misquoted Don I’ll ask Don if he’d like to engage in debate with Saiko, needless to say Saiko sat down declining for reasons he can explain., There’re a host of subjects that Big Mel and I disagree on, but Big Mel “ready to give an answer for the hope he has” Stood up and accepted the Challenge, in my book a real man amen. Don and Mel meet and debated; I believe Big Mel got his head handed to him (my opinion), Don answered every question presented to him and more. The debate as you know is on line so you can access it, the answers to your questions are also answered on the broadcast, I’m sure Don can help you wrap your head around the difficult ones. I will not discuss this subject on PP out of respect to Mel, you know our ( DTG, Don’s and Mines) site so come by and visit us some time
As far as the pimps, you keep up the good work, and expose them for what and who they are, but to insinuate that the validity of scripture is not worth the time is strange coming a man standing on the shoulders of other men,
By the way Gary V, if Covenant eschatology is such foolishness, such a lie why was it not exposed as such during last week’s debate?
(MN: Don’t judge a set of doctrines by the efforts of one developing debater working pretty much on his own. Don has been defending Full Preterism for quite a while. I have been defending non-preterism for…let’s see…if I count the last three years…hmmm…two months. )
Michael, none of what you wrote has a thing to do with my response to you. Every time the questions are raised, Don is brought up.
Forget Don.You’re not Don. You’re not Derrick, who is my brother and with whom I’ve discussed all these issues.
You have a lot to say about standing on the shoulders of men, but you’re hiding behind Don rather than doing the job yourself. How come we can’t stand on the shoulders of great scholars of the past but YOU get to hide behind Don or Derrick??
BTW Mike, YOU stand on the shoulders of the learned men of the past EVERY TIME YOU READ THE BIBLE UNLESS YOU TRANSLATED IT FROM THE GREEK OR HEBREW PERSONALLY. Did you Mike?? Did you translate the Scriptures yourself, or are you standing on Tynedale?? And Wycliffe?? And Robertson?? And many others??
Or did God personally reveal the languages to you??
Again Gary V, you sound a bit tense Bro, The bible is inspired so the shoulders I’m standing on are shoulders inspired by God 2Tim 3:16, unlike you who prefer to stand on the shoulders of uninspired men ( That’s why you have that problem with your head) If I told you “God personally revealed the languages to me” would you believe me, of course not, so what’s the use of answering your question in this form, I’ve asked you before , come on over to my site we can discuss your scripture, you told me that you know about as mush I did, no need. No that’s not it Gary, at my site you have no audience, no one to read you sarcastic responses and cheer you on. Sorry Gary V I’m not behind anyone skirt, I’m right in front of you, turn around and stop trying to excite the crowd. My site is the only place I will answer your questions or any ones concerning Perterism. So come on over and let’s see how much of a tough guy you are when your Boy’s are not around.
You must be kidding, or jesting at best. Anybody with an understanding of historical preterism, would laugh at the idea of the insane preterist position. I would ask all to affirm the word of God or Bust Hell Wide Open. And DTG please dont try to ask with a trite
qualification to my pastorial calling. This is Reformed practice not reformed THOUGHT, and only reformed thought. That would qualify as argumentum ignorantium
What ever, Mr. Xerxes. As ALWAYS I ask for you to give me your so called strong points, and as ALWAYS no answer!!! Your talking to the wrong person about calling yourself a pastor. You must not know about me so ask hyper-futurist I.C. how I feel about self-called pastors. Better yet read Black and Reformed site. LOL, Pastor, sure!
Ok. Maybe I’m missing something on this “Pastor” thing. Are you saying that pastor is not a biblical term to describe an ecclesiastical office Derrick? What about “Elder” “Deacon”, etc? I guess if one takes your premise “D” that you don’t consider NO ONE to be a pastor, then I guess that your conclusion could go as far as your children calling you “Derrick” without putting as the old folks used to say “a handle on it”? Again, I’m just asking dude. Just b/c you may have issues with titles (of which I don’t) that doesn’t mean that we have the right to ignore or jettison INSPIRED words of the text to describe offices in the church that the Holy Spirit described that’s all I’m saying.
(MN: By benevolent edict - you people get two back-and-forths on this with nor more than a total of 300 words total between the replies. )
Who gives the so-called pastor his authority, who validates his calling? Christ said that even he could not validate his own ministry, where in scripture does it say “God Called a believer to pastor” scripture only speaks of Bishops 1Ti 3:1 (the superintendent, elder, or overseer of a Christian church) and mind you this office is a “desire” and not a calling from God. Using scriptures like Eph 4:11 to validate ones so-called calling is a bit disingenuous, the tense is past (he gave) not present (he is given) the term pastor is an Old Testament term not a New testament term see Jer 2:8, 12:10, 23:1. My point is this, you can call yourself, bishop or elder, the terms are interchangeable, and it’s a good thing to “desire” to aid your brothers and sisters. The problem arises when one claims their call to leadership is divinely inspired, if this is so then the use of 1Ch 16:22, Pas105:15 is justified.
This is it for me Mel
Hey Msamu,
I actually disagree but I have went to the far left. I am saying if Pastors (synonymous with Bishops/Elders/Shepherds) are currently needed then so are the other 4 (or 3) giftings listed here. I can’t say we have reached full maturity because I believe that will only come when Christ returns (which you and I disagree). However I struggle with those who somehow come to this verse and says “we don’t need prophets and apostles, but we still need teachers, evangelist and pastors”. The word until means until and if we don’t need the first two we don’t need the rest and I would agree either they all operate today or they all don’t. These verses give me no other choice.
Next I believe that those who desire to meet together in the name of Christ chooses their elders by their gifting and maturity (I actually wrote about that). I will post a paper by a guest blogger shortly (saturday or sunday).
So I agree I don’t believe anyone gets a “special” calling but I do believe they have a special gifting and this is exactly what Paul states here in Ephesians 4:1-16). However this man is to be recognized for his service, maturity and personal life and not his “theological” education. And the collective body chooses such a man.
My question to those who object (not you or DTG but others) where do we ever find in scripture elders appointing elders? We see the body choosing and then Paul sending delgegates to appoint and teach them a bit more about the faith (we have to realize there was no NT and no clear instruction at what this looked like).
To Saiko, as Alicia keys said, NO ONE, NO ONE, NO ONE! Eph 4:11-17 does not validate you- it validated THEM, past tense (he GAVE). Just because you guys love to be called rabbi, rabbi as Jesus said doesn’t mean I have a problem with titles. What my kids call me and what you WISH I would call you is two different things, LOL. My eschatological view is why I feel this way. If you “desire” to be somebodys pastor, you have that right in your building. ONCE AGAIN, dude I don’t have an issue with titles just the misplaced concept of it these days.
(MN: Let me help you out here - Since you believe Jesus returned in 70 AD and that the New Heaven and New Earth are in place, the things that Bible says about Christian leadership/relationships no longer apply. They applied only prior to Jesus’ return, prior to 70 AD. As a result, living in the New Heaven and the New Earth, we have no deacons [Old Earth], no Pastor/Teacher [Old Earth] and no elders [Old Earth]. Sure the New Testament talks about these things, but in essence, all of these things have passed away with the coming of the New Heaven and the New Earth. Is that about what you are saying? )
I believe what the bible says about relationships, the principles still apply for ages to come. The leadership concept in the church don’t because we each have our own bibles and don’t have to wait for a letter from the apostles to tell us what Jesus is saying.
(MN: And this is where the Hyper-preterist view comes into play. I have been trying to put together the various parts of the whole thing. Your responses are helping me to do exactly that. The parts in the epistles dealing with leadership in the Body no longer apply as you see it. Thanks. )
We all know for ourselves what Jesus says! I don’t need a pastor or deacon or denomination shoving their tenets down my throat. If you guys do that’s your choice. My tenets are the 66 books of COMPLETED scriptures and fulfilled prophecy.
Is this “unity” we have now what Jesus is coming back too? With over 360 denominations claiming they have the “truth” which one is Jesus soon coming back for?
wait, i know i didn’t read what i thought i just read…. Wait, let me read this again. *rubbing eyes*
BY the way Mel, our site is up for you also
Hyper-preterist, OMG LOL
Dear Micah rightly dividing Scripture is both an art and a science. Hermeneutics takes more than just a lexicon and a couple of commentaries, or Greek dictionaries. The question is what is your world view of scripture and how do you apply this to the text apriori or apostiori
depending on your view, Dan has a corrupt view based on how he comes to his idea.
Any person looking at the issue knows this. So I say affirm the word of God, and quit playing the
Theological game maze. And to be honest Gary v closed the argument. deal with Gary first. Because if im not afraid of TD Jakes, Hank the CRI stealer, Frank Pastore, Billy graham, and the infidel guy, im not scared to argue my points. I would say at least have something to argue, rather than hash up dead theological ideas. Please do current apologetics.
One Luv Pastor Xerxes
DTG I dont hide behind a blog page, nor do I argue with
ideas that is either limited or non Scholastic. You can’t prove your premiss, so do I engage in hackned playout
arguments? No! I said that anyone that has covered this field of study knows better but I guess by looking at the article on your blog, you think otherwise. No DGT Theololgians have argued this premiss before and your position is found wanting. And as for the pastor statment, thats what you called me. you are still showing yourself yo be more ignorant or uninformed. It could be that im speaking to someone that does not posess the Illumination of the Holy Spirit.
One luv Pastor Xerxes
If those of you trying to refuse Preterism are really motivated to do so, you need to do better. So far I only see mockery and personal attacks coming from this crowd. Come on folks - if you want to be taken serious, throw in some scripture once in a great while!
Virgil, You just LOVE to pick fights where ever you can. It is your consistent with your nature and testifies to your heart. I guess you now you are considering yourself the great defender of the Preterist faith. Turning the cheek. BLAH Right! Forgiving 70X7, BLAH Right!
BTW, I have some really interesting content that I have posted to my blog. (Oh yes, I am updating it daily and have been since I turned it off.) So please get a life, else you WILL FORCE me to turn it back on. And I promise you, you WILL NOT LIKE IT. Or maybe you will since warring with others is your second nature.
Preterist Heresy
Hey secret preterist heresy can you give us your site so I can know the nature of YOUR heresy.
(MN: Xerxes, three things: 1. Brevity 2. Punctuation 3. Paragraphs )
Virgil were not motivated by mockery and personal attack, Ive always understood it’s better to be thought
Ignorant, than to speak and remove all doubt! Virgil Scripture has been given over and over, by more respected Theologians on the subject. Their premises are better than the one’s argued, so far. So if the Preterist argue a timeline of prophecy it fails to pass the hermenuetical test based on the evens surrounding AD 70. Everyone knows that the date of Revelations is more in agreement of approx95 Please note
(Regarding possible writing dates for Revelation, Bible scholars generally recognize two possibilities. First, the early date is shortly before A.D. 70 (ca. A.D.68) during Nero’s reign (A.D. 54-68).21 Second, the late date would be ca. A.D. 95 during Domitian’s time (A.D . 81-96). 22 Significantly, a futurist would not have to change his eschatological thinking if a pre-A.D. 70 date for the writing were to be established. However, the preterist position is eliminated from consideration if the late date of ca. A.D. 95 can be validated.23 All discussions of Revelation’s writing date are divided into two categories of evidence—internal and external. Regarding internal evidence, this writer has
foregone any discussion in this essay for two reasons. First, it is too voluminous a
subject for an essay of this size. Second, Revelation contains no direct statements
as to its writing date. Therefore, the subjectivity that could be introduced through
biased eisegesis (by both positions) would generally skew the discussion and would
not be decisive. Put another way, because of the frequent use of figurative language
in Revelation, one could easily read one’s prophetic choice into the interpretation to
prove his historical and/or theo logical conclusions. On a matter of this importance,
it is best to avoid those kinds of questionable speculations and look at the more
objective witness of history. Theorizing and hypothesizing one’s way to a
conclusion proves highly unsatisfactory, regardless of one’s eschatological leanings.
Therefore, several salient points of external evidence are relevant. First, the
history of dating Revelation decidedly favors the late date. From the second through
the eighteenth centuries, the late date was essentially the exclusive view. Only in the
nineteenth century, when postmillennialism was a dominant influence, did the early
date enjoy a brief time as the majority view. Certainly in the last two centuries, the late date has rebounded to its former place of prominence. Though challenged by
a few in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, the vast majority of Christian scholars support the later date, regardless of their eschatological beliefs. Second, only direct statements from primary sources should be considered.
At least four direct witnesses in the second to fourth centuries A.D. support the late
date.24 However, only several obscure sixth-century witnesses and the ninth-century writer, Theophylact, advocate the early date. The earliest historical attestation to Revelation’s date of writing clearly supports the late date. A general axiom states
that ancient documents whose date is closest to the historical event reported contain more accurate and reliable information than documents further removed in time. Third, the historical conditions of the seven churches of Asia Minor in Revelation 2–3 point to a late date. The status of the churches is radically different
from the immediate post-Pauline days of the late 60s.25 Therefore, that they represent churches much later than the 60s is the reasonable conclusion, thus
eliminating a pre-A.D. 70 writing date for Revelation.
Fourth, if Christ’s parousia had actually occurred in conjunction with Jerusalem’s fall, it was certainly to be expected that John would then have taught
something so important after the fact and that John’s teaching would have been reflected prominently in the writings of the church fathers. However, there is nary
a word about an A.D. 70 paro usia of Christ in John’s post-70 writings or in the fathers. Far more critical than establishing the writing date of Revelation is
uncontested evidence that the late-first- and second-century churches were preterists. Here overwhelming testimony points to the fact that they were premillennial.26 Though admittedly such discussion does not prove once-for-all that Jesus
was a futurist, it does argue strongly and even demand that He was not a preterist. The burden of proof is on the preterist to overturn such compelling external evidence for a late date o f Revelation’s composition by John. In spite of valiant attempts, preterists have not accomplished this. As an interesting final comment, even the introductory notes in the New Geneva Study Bible, for which Dr. Sproul served as
General Editor, state, “Most scholars favor a date about A.D. 95” (2004).
Masters Seminary Journal 2004
see we covered this topic long time ago. And I dont think your argument or preparation of treatse
is better than Dr Sproul but if he concedes a latter date from the majority of the Theological community guess what your argument is found wanting still.
Evidence is a Dog!!!!!!!!!!
One Luv Pastor Xerxes
To Xerxes, ONCE again we’ve got someone standing on the shoulders of Men! First off, these are YOUR church fathers not mine. They had there time in history that’s it. I have heard this dead statements before so please don’t post something else form UNinspired men. Are you new to this site? Where have you been for a year! A partial so-called preterist like Dr. Sproul is aka futurist, please man!
By the way, as for your other comment to me, I made a mistake leaving out the ” ” on pastor because I don’t consider any of you guys pastors. Your non answer to my question was STILL NO ANSWER. So let’s try this again. What were the weak points? And as far as you talking to someone not illuminated by the Holy Ghost, I was thinking the same thing about you so I’m obviously waisting my time!
(MN: And the gladiator gets the last, if somewhat misspelled, word in this discussion. )
Hey Pastor X and Melville,
I had a quick question for you. In 1 Thess 4 Paul talks about what is going to happen to those who are dead in Christ and those who are alive. Then he goes into 5 and starts to explain what the day of the Lord looks like. Now Paul says this will be sudden and all of sudden there will be destruction. So they go from “peace and security” to utter destruction. Can you tell me how you squeeze a 7 year period in between this. If I am to use a “LITERAL” hermenuetic then where is the tribulation? Why wouldn’t Paul say “you will be raptured, then there will be a seven year period, then a 1000 year Mill, then Jesus will come back” (again I might add)? Just curious on who we come to this conclusion here.
Though I disagree with DTG also in the fact that the coming of the Lord will bring “utter destruction” to all who are not found in Christ which if that has occured nobody ever mentioned it yet.
(MN: Xerxes - I promised DTG the last word. Sorry. )
Thats cool!