Nathan Thompson recently asked me to share my perspective on Preterism and the end of the age. Knowing that I have read an enormous amount of resources on ancient manuscripts which date back to the founding of the early church. He wondered what I thought about preterist ideology and the belief that all prophecy was and had already been fulfilled during the first generation AD.
In this short segment I share my views on why I do not in any way believe that the fullness of prophecy has already been completed. In fact it is my opinion that a large majority of prophecy was laid out for what Enoch describes as a distant and remote generation.
I also share in detail the parable of the figtree which, in my opinion, concludes that those that are alive now would be that generation which would see not only the fulfillment of all prophecy but the second advent of Yahushua Christ. This prophecy, when understood in my opinion, confirms that it could only be during our lifetime that the narrative for the last days could be completed as laid out in Scripture. And that it would be His return which ushers in the end of the age and the separation of the tares as children of perdition from the wheat as children of promise. I pray that all of us are worthy to be numbered among the elect and to have through Him The guarantee of salvation and eternal inheritance. Praise Yah
Video Source
Thanks for sharing your views. But I don't think that you adequately. Most of your time was spent sharing your own speculations. Not faulting you, just saying.
THE SPIRIT BEING THE SAME FORM AS WOMAN IS NOT SECONDARY WITH ALL RESPECT BECAUSE IT IS THE IDENTITY OF ARE GOD JUST LIKE JESUS BEING THE IDENTITY OF GOD…..
ALSO IT IS ABOUT EQUALITY IN TRUTH !!!
Zen; A true man of God! 👍Great stuff as always.
The 10 kings were IN the Roman empire…the 9th was Nero…when John was writing, and the. Galba… the one that would be only for a short time
Revelation could not have possibly been written before 70 A.D., which would have placed John's vision around the time or shortly after Paul was still writing his epistles to the church. John was an old man in the 90's so he would not have been an old man in the 60's A.D., and Nero had no interest in exiling Christians but loved murdering them. Why would Peter and Paul die under Nero's reign while John didn't?
And what other events in the 1st century A.D. are ever claimed as taking place 2 or 3 decades earlier (or later, for that matter)? With all of the accurate records kept during the Roman Empire era and surviving today, there is little room for such a vast difference being feasible. It's commonly believed that Jesus died around 30 or 33 A.D., Paul and Peter were martyred in the 60's, Nero lived from 37-68 A.D., etc. No one says Jesus died in 3 A.D. or 60 A.D., or that Peter and Paul were martyred in the 30's A.D. or 90's A.D., or that Nero actually reigned around the time of Jesus' ministry as recorded in the Gospels.
The majority of scholarship places John's writing of Revelation in the mid-90's, but somehow preterists think it's ok to switch this around by 3 decades? The great fire of Rome took place for nearly a week during 64 A.D., but no one places it in 63 A.D. let alone 34 A.D.
A powerful earthquake in 60 A.D. devastated Laodicea. And yet no one ever says that earthquake took place in 30 A.D. 30 years prior. With the vast majority of evidence to the contrary, preterism literally rests on this single pillar of the dating of the book of Revelation.
2 Corinthians 3:7-11 and Hebrews 10:9-10 both clearly show that both the Old and New covenants could not have existed side-by-side. The Mosaic law had long since finished by the time of the 2nd temple's destruction. Even Hebrews @-13, which preterists love to quote, says the Mosaic law had already become obsolete so it's impossible for it to have still been 'growing obsolete' at the time of it's writing pre-70 A.D.
Many Old Covenant saints came out of their graves for a short time after Jesus resurrected and appeared to a lot of people (Matthew @-53). One could reasonably infer that they testified about who Christ is while they walked the earth again for a short time. Christ is the end of the Mosaic law for all who believe in Him. There was nothing left to still be in effect after the cross. The laws of purification were superseded by the Jesus' blood. There is no longer a requirement to stone those who don't celebrate the Friday night to Saturday night Sabbath. Those who celebrate the Jewish feasts and holidays are on equal footing with those who don't (Romans 14).
What was left to still be in effect for about 40 years from the cross until 70 A.D. with the fall of Jerusalem? Sacrifices? Jesus was the last sacrifice, and there was nothing forgiven under the animal sacrifices that took place after the cross. To say otherwise is blasphemous to what He accomplished for us.
The animal sacrifices after the cross until 70 A.D. were not authorized to forgive sin and were an insult to the cross. Remember Nadab and Abihu in Leviticus 10 when they brought unauthorized sacrifices? They died horribly, by fire. No such thing took place after the cross. Why is that? It's because the Mosaic law was finished, and the New Covenant of grace was in effect and showing mercy to give them time to repent in Jerusalem before it fell. Had the Old Covenant somehow still been in effect, there would have been mass casualties at the temple since Jesus was the only way to forgiveness going forward.
No real evidence for a pre-70 A.D. dating of Revelation, a position in diametric opposition to nearly 2000 years of overwhelming scholarly consensus of a post-70 A.D. writing, and no way for the Mosaic Law to exist alongside the New Covenant… A very, very shaky foundation indeed.