Not a full preterist, but I do believe that the Olivet Discourse & Jesus's statement in Matthew 26:64 were fulfilled in AD 70.

Being a Preterist, that is a perfect explanation. First book to read, “Last Days according to Jesus” R. C Sproul

Partial preterism definitely has substance, but I personally just can't get on board with full preterism.

I found Bruce Gore's very detailed YT lectures Apocolypse in Space and Time very comprehensive on understanding the book of Rev. He also sees Rev as being written pre 70 AD and he too had to be persuaded, before coming to that revelation.

The 3 books Wilson mentioned are fantastic.... Read Wilson's "When the Man Comes Around", a great explanation of the book of Revelation.

Amen, this was a great explanation

Thanks for the clarity and very intriguing topic.

I had a friend who got caught up in full preterism, it was destroying his faith… thankfully God saved him out of that.

I think the problem is that most American Christians somehow think that Preterism, whether full or partial, is somehow outside the realms of orthodoxy. This is NOT the case!

I really loved this explanation. I am a partial preterist

I would highly recommend "The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation " by David Chilton / Dominion Press

"The problem with Preterism is that is has great explanatory power. It explains a lot of passages very well." That's a problem? 🙄

great explanation.

It looks very unorthodox but that is where scripture would take you,

This video only furthers my belief in full Preterism, thanks.

Doug Wilson Rocks!! I have the dvd he did with Christopher Hitchens as well as the debate with Dan Barker.

The problem futurists have (and I was one) often breaks down to not understanding apocalyptic literary forms as well as a lack of historical perspective. I think there are some matters of eschatology that will always be a bit shrouded in mystery but that is not out of character for God to keep some things to himself.

Good distinction. Full preterism is gangrenous

I am fairly new to this concept. I am reading Lynn Louise Schuldt's older book titled "Prophecy Paradox". In addition to referencing every claim made, she gives a lot of history on the Jewish Wars. Her's is a classic preterist book.

Doug, it's time to become a full-preterist. There are no holes. Sola Scriptura or Sola Creedo?

What about: "Absent from the body. Present with the Lord?" II Corinthians 5:6-8 "Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: (For we walk by faith, not by sight:) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord."

So many pitbull FP’s here. Brethren, if you are the ones in the possession of truth in this matter, feed us with the truth! Wisdom is peaceable, and some of you are only vindicating a contentious spirit.

“When you buy a new hammer, everything looks like a nail”. I got to use that sometime 😁

It certainly wasn't a "shiny hammer" in my experience. 'Twas very cautiously, even reluctantly approached, with a wide theological understanding essentially "Reformed", with justification by grace alone upon faith alone right at the heart of the gospel...Like many positions (e.g. "Reformed"), "full preterism" isn't monolithic, and I too am sensitive to certain concerns such is Christology. But here's the thing: every element of what put together equals Full Preterism has shown up in part in different Partial positions historically. And simply, there is no hermeneutic warrant for sorting NT passages into "AD70" vs "yet to be" that isn't begging the question. If you stick to redemptive historical covenants and a biblical redemptive history (yet with an awareness of the principles that are inherent in them per a sound understanding of "theological" covenants - again, not a monolithic treatment that latter) and realize that Paul, as he stated, preached "nothing but the hope of Israel" with regards "the resurrection" (Acts 24,26,28) and that that hope is the consummation/establishment of the New Covenant inheritance (resurrection from the Adamic curse having received post-Judgment justification by the gift of righteousness) - that the eschatology of all the Law and Prophets, Psalms, Job, synoptics, letters, epistles and finally Revelation is one and the same, and the timing and nature accord, there it is. For my part, I believe in the ongoing humanity of Christ, as well as his deity, and that the resurrection/kingdom inheritance won by virtue of the atonement subsists in Him. I also believe when those in Christ die, they obtain their physical resurrection body in consummate form, no gap. But just as our bodies cycle through a whole new set of cells/atoms every 7 years (quicker for many parts), so which set of atoms mixed with other things will a physical resurrection body so-dependent obtain(?) the biblical heart of the doctrine of resurrection has always been spiritual - that is, to be raised from the dead spiritually by virtue of justification unto reconciliation to God - so everything physical depends on that. It's not an either-or, it's a question of logical priority : obtain the spiritual seed, see the fruit in time. In essence, my view, while full preterist of a sort, even entails a (spiritual, gospel, not structures of this world) postmillenial-esque "increase"/manifestation of fruit. And the picture at the end of Revelation, per Isa 65,66 from whence comes the "New creation" language (and strong Partial Preterists like Edwards called this present earth a new [covenant] heavens and earth, too) isn't the same as what is demanded by a "what appears" reading and expectation. But it is representative of a covenantal reading. In reality, seen properly, in my eyes this is the furthest view from a Gnostic/Platonic Dualist conception of soteriology, eschatology, and anthropology, very much in tune with the ancient Hebraic and Old Testament conception of "the body" (both personally - "man is a body who has been made a living soul/spirit, not a spirit who has a morally corrupt body" - a frequent asceticism in theology - and corporately - "in Adam"/the body of death/sin/a broken covenant of works - "in Christ"/raised, alive from that death, a covenant of grace"). That is, rather than foisting an essential dichotomy between the spiritual and the material, it makes the distinction properly, and grounds the physical properly in the spiritual. No disjunction or "second redemption", as it were, for the physical. And an ongoing salvation of people, an ongoing living fellowship with God in Christ (no veil of the Law after judgment!, tabernacles fulfilled) and grace upon grace as new creations for eternity (forever time not a "disjunct" from "time"). It is supposed to be better in our experience and conception today, I believe, and eschatology is not supposed to be fractured, complicated, and all over. It's just meant to be understood as the redemptive history of soteriology, the establishment of the covenant kingdom of Christ with the Father, saved man raised as sons, heirs of God, joint-heirs with Christ, with a glorious future and ongoing fruit of it because of a finished redemption.

Good explanation. I would be interested in hearing more specific detail, which passages you believe have a preterist explanation and which don't.

Preterism is true. Doesn't do away with the Church.

I am a full preterist now and started out as a partial preterist, but I kept persevering with the more "difficult" aspects of the full position and I'll tell you it was worth it. For example, when you dig into studying the resurrection, you discover that the problem is not with the FP position but with the fact that (1) we have been heavily seeded with futurism and (2) we come face to face with a decidedly different culture (ancient Judaism) which is far different than our modern American culture. When you take a serious look at the "resurrection" in the New Testament it is saturated with a "spiritual' resurrection position. For example, "You died and your life is hidden with life in God." and "It is no longer I that live, but Christ." Salvation is resurrection! You died with Him and you were raised with Him. Jesus said the "flesh profits nothing." We're redeemed spiritually which is the center of the issue. From there you have the opportunity to overcome everything including physical death! Remember...Adam died spiritually instantly, but it took almost a millennium for his body to come to an end. There are good teachers on the more difficult aspects of the FP position and not so good ones, and also still more areas that need to be studied but as long as you keep with the two basic pillars: time stamps and audience relevance you will remain anchored. Keep on persevering. God bless!

The problem I have with preterism is that it ignores the parable of the fig tree. The blossoming fig tree is the main parable and sign that Jesus' return is soon, even at the doors! Israel was not blossoming in 70 AD, in fact it was cursed by Jesus just before His crucifixion and Jesus even declared them as "desolate." Luke 13, Matthew 21, Mark 11, Matthew 23:37-38. The fig tree is representative of Israel and other trees as other nations. Hosea 9:10, Joel 1:12, Isaiah 33:9. But Israel must be blossoming and not desolate, not withered when Jesus returns. This was not the case in 70AD. See Joel 2:22. This whole chapter is a 'Day of the Lord' passage which parallels Matthew 24.

I was a full preterist for years. It was only by the grace of God that my heart was softened. Otherwise I never would have known how far I had drifted. I now see full preterism as horrible. It strips the promises of Jesus right out of the NT.

I am a partial preterist thanks to Gary Demar and Hank Hanegraaff

If you haven't studied the late Max R. King's work, The Cross and the Parousia", you really haven't seriously studied Preterism (Covenant Eschatology). Both R. C. Sproul and N.T. Wright studied eschatology under Max. With all due respect, none of the books mention even come close to decisely addressing the subject. For starters, Paul begins the resurrection saying Jesus died for our "sins" not for our "skins." He closes the chapter with the same theme forming an inclusio for all inbetween. I would be happy to have a discussion on the resurrection with a partial preterist or futurist.

Apparently Christ told His people He would return before some of them died did He not.?? And if He did not that would make Him a liar would it not..? Some kind of a fancy word preterism..! The bible says He would return like a thief in the night and cause earth changes and move islands out of their places,, and one place it says He will be seen in the clouds and the dead would be raised up to meet him in the clouds and then the rest will be changed and beamed up or taken up to meet Christ in the sky and then this earth will be burned.. Do I have that correct.?

Well said. I'm also a partial-preterist. I believe that the great tribulation ended in the 1st century but that the rapture/2nd coming of Jesus will happen in our future when the world is judged by fire. The Church will be saved from the wrath to come. Full-preterism is extreme and destroys the hope of bodily resurrection and the new heaven and earth.

Woah, Moscow, Idaho. small world!

Many verses say Yahshua was returning soon, in that generation, like in Matt 16:28, 24:30 to 34, and Rev 1:1 to 7.

I have been a full preterist for 20 years or more. :) When I buy a new hammer..............everything does not look like a nail. weird analogy you have presented.

The bible or the creeds, pick your choice.

Exellent job of explaining the terms...Can you give me your thoughts regarding our biblically honest responsibility to each other,how we interact with those who we may not be in 100% doctrinal agreement with(everybody!) versus what I see as condemnation/judgement for even questioning the status quo doctrines? The extremism on both sides of futurism and preterism scare the hell out of me...frankly. Thanks! Mike

*Historicism is biblical* Declaring *the end from the beginning* and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: {Isaiah 46:10} “Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;” {Revelation 1:19} Prophetic continuance is histrorisim.

I've been looking into Preterism lately and I have noticed that some full preterists seem to be verging on some unusual beliefs. Full Preterism as I understand it means the devil has been defeated and there is no activity today, only human evil. Some preterists argue satan, devil is not a real person and the only evil is perpetrated by man.

I was looking for an actual response and I'm bummed by this answer. Full preterism wouldn't say that there's "no terminus". My understanding is that if it were true then we would obviously be living in the little season at the end of the millennial reign. If that were the case then we'd simply be awaiting the final judgement. How's that for a terminus?

Mt 16:27-28 "For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

What are your thoughts on Dr. Don Preston?

I believe that the second coming of Jesus is when He saves us. A lot of the scripture that is considered to be about the end of time fits perfectly with Jesus’s death and resurrection. I don’t discredit any views though. In reality, the only thing that matters is that we’re saved by grace and have a personal relationship with Jesus.

Hmm... great explanatory power of full preterism vs association of the hammer and partial literal interpretation?

Was Revelation written around 90 AD?

1:20 "The problem with preterism is that it has great explanatory power, it explains a lot of passages very well" Pray tell Doug, how is this a problem? FP is a problem because it explains you right out of the traditions of the elders and makes the Bible the authority... How is this a problem for Doug Wilson?

You can't separate Daniel 12, from Daniel 9. And Mathew 24, the resurrection is from Daniel 12, Jesus and Paul's source of the resurrection doctrine, happens when the abomination of desolation is set up, also taught in Daniel 9 and 12 and Mathew 24, and that would all take place in Jesus generation Mathew 24:34.

I am following partial peterisam

“But full preterist is the shiny hammer that makes everything look like a nail. It thinks because it has great explanatory power here, here, here, and here, it explains absolutely everything. We’ll the problem is it explains you right out of the orthodox Christian faith.” If it explains everything, and explains you right out of the Christian faith, maybe the “Christian” faith or religion we have today isn’t right? Maybe we’re trying to inject ourselves into Israel’s redemptive story? Maybe we are trying to apply the redemptive plan for Israel to us today? What it sounds like you’re saying is….since it explains so much, and it doesn’t fit into my paradigm, it must be wrong.

This is one man’s view of preterism and not what all preterists (full, hyper, partial) believe.Dr John Noe is an excellent source for explaining preterism.Some others are Gary DeMar, Dr Lynn Hiles and Don K Preston.

Do not let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 11 Thess 2 : 33.

So the problem is that it is not consistent with tradition. Riiiight.

Yes it is very interesting that Doug appeals to the creeds and church history to refute full preterism rather than the bible. Partial preterism is fundamentally flawed. I've read all those books Doug mentions and the theology within them is so inconsistent it boggles my mind that the relevant authors could have written them and not see it themselves. Tradition and orthodoxy are very powerful things. Seriously, when will those of the Reformed tradition begin living up to the call of 'Sola Scriptura'?

I'm full preterist and have been for a few years. One scripture that is causing me problems is 1 Tim. 2:14. "Creation of the world" is always associated with a covenant established by God with his people. It is shown with Israel, and in the New covenant. However, Paul seems to be taking a literal interpretation of Genesis in stating that the woman was not created first and was deceived. I believe in evolution and so the exact date there was a delineation of male/female would not be in the same era as humanity's struggle to hold to their moral obligation with God. Am I missing something?

gotta check all possiblity. Read on MBTI functions: 1. If it happend, where the new earth, heaven, judgment? 2. If It didnt happend, well, was jesus a false messiah apocalyptic preacher? 3. if is future, dont make sense, because the disciples and Paul expected a imminet return. Why would israel return back, and go through the trib? lol does that make sense?

To be blunt, the so-called "partial-preterists" may just as well be called "futurists". Either you believe "all things" were fulfilled in 70 A.D. (the Preterist view) or you don't believe all things were fulfilled in 70 A.D. (futurist view).

Is 2 Timothy 2:17-18 Preterism? 2 Timothy 2:17-18 Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some

I feel sorry for people with no hope.

You gave no substantial argument that it did not occur in 70AD besides 'be careful, you may leave Christianity if you dig too deep' which yes you're right...I go directly to God now. Like we all can

I’m am not a partial Preterist , I’m a Preterist just like Gary Demar is. Same camp

I was a full preterist (very briefly) about 20 years ago. If you are interested in checking out my channel, I refute the full preterist heresy extensively and definitively by submitting numerous proofs for a 70 AD start to the millennium. I also do a thorough critique of J.S. Russell’s and Dr. Duncan McKenzie’s position on the New Heavens and New Earth. I also look at a few partial preterist incongruencies.

Matthew 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. 32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. (Jesus was referring to the generation that would be gathered in the caught up event with the Elect by Angels)

With all that is happening in the world today...how can anyone say Matthew 24 has already happened.

This is great, but I've never seen a Partial Pret explain how they divide this out since every time statement, and I mean every one of them were all for that generation, audience, etc...This is why people who see the Partial view are forced by the time statements to figure out if perhaps the resurrection is not exactly what we think it is. Doug should really take a deep look at this, and produce a video of how he knows and where he finds, the cut off, otherwise, its just arbitrary and makes Partial Prets error in the same way other futurist do.

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 8:10-13, 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 27:51-53). 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.

Question to full preterists. What are the consequences of not believing in christ.??? As an atheist, what do i miss out, or what do i face, if i dont believe in christ / bible??

Full interview?

The main reason why Christians argue against preterism is because it shows that the Bible is dealing up to 90CE, and not past that point. Full preterism follows the original context of the Bible, while others redefine it fit their particular viewpoint, and preterism does not get new members, nor does it sell books as well.

Decent explanation and I know this is a short video but we have to be careful combating what the Bible says with how church history interpreted it. Church history does not have the same authority as the Bible; everything has to go back to the Bible so though it is true that the historical church did not hold the preterist view this does not make it untrue. I would encourage listeners to look at it Bible verse by Bible verse and compare the different views Bible verse by Bible verse I would also recommend getting a literal translation such as Young's translation or Green's translation because a lot of translations tend to be translated along doctrinal issues and are not word for word translations of versus that demonstrate preterism to be true such as time indicators found in the Bible. They are often simply removed because the church can't explain them; a great place to start is Matthew 10:23 where Jesus is telling his apostles that they won't be able to make it out of the cities of Israel before he returns.

Tongues and Interpreting " Preterism is a Metaphor for Messiah crucified , 666 died , went to Hades cooled the fires , rose from the dead , and ascended on high IS imputed to true Jews in Jerusalem " This is the true statement " Salvation is Israel " " Elijah is the Head of true Christianity - the Holy Catholic Church - Messiah's new name is Solent " Son el t. Or Son of God, the Cross. Preterism.

It explains everything because it allows scripture to interpret scripture which is what it's supposed to do, and it does not explain right out of the Orthodox church, let's not forget the core tenets of our faith which is the finished works of CHRIST ON THE CROSS and the great commission commandments, problem is dispensationalists put all their eggs in the eschatological basket which is why they keep date setting and always end up pushing the dates forward it's redundant and rediculous imo

Don Preston destroyed him in their debate.

" This generation will not pass away..." IMHO Jesus simply means, " The generation I am speaking of..."

An important note regarding Irenaeus, a preterist talking point: Preterists such are either being extremely disingenuous regarding Irenaeus, or they are unaware that Irenaeus wrote not once but twice in his work 'Against Heresies' that John survived into the time of Trajan and not just Domitian. How then can there be any question about whether he was referring to John's vision or to John himself being seen near the end of Domitian's reign? At best this is sloppy scholarship. At worst it's a willful deceiving of those who haven't read up on Irenaeus. That's like if you had a grandparent who passed away in 1995, and you said they were seen almost in our day towards the end of Ronald Reagan's presidency in the United States. Reagan obviously left office in the 80's so it makes no sense to relegate their life to an earlier time when they lived beyond that time frame. And yes, Irenaeus got Jesus' age wrong on account of a faulty interpretation of John 8:57. But to then make the claim on a completely unrelated topic that it is also suspect thanks to this error has yet to be extended to any other writer that I'm aware of. It's the 'Irenaeus treatment', as I like to call it. Let me ask you this, the reader if you're a preterist, have you ever misinterpreted a verse? If so, does that disqualify you indefinitely from ever making a true statement? Is everything else you've ever said automatically wrong thanks to your misinterpretation of a Bible passage? If the answer is no, then why is this supposedly the case with Irenaeus? Has every written statement by Josephus or others preterists rely on been proven factual beyond a shadow of a doubt? If there is just one error anywhere to be found in their writings, why wouldn't this be an automatic 'disproving' of everything else they stated? This is cherry-picking to the nth degree. Has a trusted relative or friend ever told you something they genuinely believed true that you later learned to be false? How, then, can you trust anything they say ever again? And why is Hegesippus never addressed by preterists? He recorded John's banishment under Domitian and not Nero. And he wrote this decades before Irenaeus ever did.

But if the hammer works might as well use the hammer.

"everything thing looks like a nail" in not a rebuttal of full preterism. I like Pastor Wilson, Ken Gentry and others they do some fine teaching but their poisoning the well with "Hyper-preterism" / "unorthodox" statements is again not a rebuttal. It is mind boggling the same men who teach sola scriptura appeal to "Christian Orthodoxy" what ever that may mean. Or appeals to "church" history or the "creeds". In every other area they teach the bible alone is our standard but in this area they appeal to "orthodoxy".

So the 100lb. hailstones, worldwide pestilence, waters turned to blood, mark of the beast, Jersusalem split into three parts from an earthquake, moon turned to blood, sun darkened, and the rest of the seals, trumpet, and bowl judgements have already happened? Yeah right!!!!

the creeds were man made so we want o stay away from those as authoritative. appreciated what you said about hyper not explaining our eschatology.

The book of 2 Esdras chapters 11-13 tells us that we are near the end of the Short Season. The wings of chapter 11 are US presidents Hoover through Clinton. Most of the prophecies of the book of Revelation have already been fulfilled. Analysis, proofs, dates, and timelines at my YT channel.

Preterism DOES have answers. See www.GaryDeMar.com

I am an Amillenialist in the sense that most things have been fulfilled. However, obviously Jesus has not returned yet. If you look at this as an apocalyptic book and that we must understand that it had to make sense to the 1st century readers first, this book will make more sense. It frees you from thinking every new event is the mark of the beast when you are able to see it as most things being fulfilled in the time of the first readers.

Who decides which interpretation is the right one? I struggle with the textual historians who date the book of Revelation in the early 90’s and those who date the prophecies of the temple destruction in 70 A.D. ?

He doesn't seem familiar with the IBV fullpret movement but rather the syncretistic view proposed by Max King

The Olivet prophecy was fulfilled within the first century or none of it was. That prophecy foretold of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans and the parousia of Jesus Christ happening at the same time. One was a outward physical sign of the other which occurred in the spirit realm. Jesus said that. Why do people have such a difficult time believing it?!!

Preterism is heresy.

As a former atheist, the only books I research are different versions of the Bible. I believe preterists think the gospel according to Christ has already been preached. It hasn't. Look up the word END. Endure to the end. Mt. 10:22, 24:13. Kingdom delivered up at the END. 1 Cor. 15:23-24. I don't know about you, but if God's kingdom is wars, and politicians, that's a convoluted kingdom. The coming kingdom of God, and repentance, IS the gospel. NOT the message/teaching of salvation. Calling the message of salvation the gospel, is another gospel, and thee be cursed for it. Mk. 1:14-15.

1/4 of the whole earth have not been killed by war, famine and pestilence. Therefore revelation 6 is still future.

The real question is did anyone living throughout the bible ever know and read a prophecy and then it come to pass exactly like they thought it would? So it seems that God is probably going to perplex us and confound us all isn't he?

Problem is, the Partial Prets like Doug have no "defeater" against Full Pret views that I have seen yet. All of the time statements, everything they were expecting seemingly had to happen then, if we are being consistent.

To me, what is the most interesting thing from the perspective of someone who is not a christian and comes from a more jewish background, is that the full preterism debunks completely xtianity from within. It's clear fomr the passages that preterists highlights(some of them are used by gnostics for their own purposes) that the early christians, not the Paul wing, but the ones who were opposing his gospel, actually believed the the end was close to them and that Jesus would come back within their lifetime. Yet, Paul in Tessalonians tells them that this would not happen till the present empire falls(meaning the roman empire, as interpretation of the book of Daniel) which only happened centuries later!!

The explanation is found in Matt 24:32-33 "Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors." The fig tree is unique in that it fruits twice each season, first at the beginning, and again at the end. This tells me that the signs leading to the destruction of the Temple and the end of the Mosaic age in AD70 ("verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.") are a shadow of the time leading up to Christ's return. It has been fulfilled regarding the destruction of Jerusalem, and it is not yet fulfilled Christ's return. Also, since I have never met a "full preterist", I prefer the word "historicist".

There is a need for pastors, Christ has not come back yet, partial preterism is some what ok, but there are still things to come

So if the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in the first century, are we saying ALL the tribes of the earth saw the sign of the Son of Man in the heavens and He sent His angels out to the four corners of the earth, from one end of the heavens to the other, then why don't historical writings from around the world speak of the greatest event since the flood? Did Jesus already sit on His Glorious Throne judge the nations(sheep and goats) were all Christians take to Heaven back in the first Century? What about us Christians today? Are we waiting for a Third Coming? Did the Millennial Reign already start? Is Christ ruling from Heaven? Is Satan bound so as to NOT deceive the nations any longer UNTIL the thousand years has ended? If Satan is bound, and is not deceiving the nations, why have over la billion been deceived into following Islam? Why over a billion following Buddha? Why over a billion following Hinduism? Why over a billion Catholics entrusting their souls to Mary ar the hour of their death? Not to mention atheists, LGBTQ, human trafficking, child molestation and pornography, murder, rape, drugs, alcohol, schools and universities teaching the godless Big Bang and Darwinian Evolution? Jesus in the Olivet Discourse was asked these questions: when will these things be? (The destruction of the temple) And what will be the sign of your coming again and the end of the age? He didn't address the timing of the destruction of the temple because it was a few short years away, BUT He did address His coming again. He said there would be false Messiahs (didn't happen in the first century) you (Christians) will be hated by ALL nations (did not happen in the first century) He Jesus would judge the nations of the world(did not happen in the first century) ALSO, in the Millennial Reign a person dying at 100 would be said to be an infant. Do we say a person living to 100 is a child? No! Also, in the Millennial Reign we will beat our weapons into plowshares and practice war no more. Has there EVER been a time like that in the last two thousand years? NO! I could go on and on. The preterist makes (This generation will not pass away...be literal) and then EVERYTHING else a metaphor!?!

Has the book of revelation already been fulfilled? When was the mark of the beast introduced to the world? When did we lose one third and then half of the earths population? What happened to the anti christ? The global religion? The jews fleeing to the wilderness? The abomination of desolation? The rapture of the saints? the image of the beast? the 144,000 witnesses? The angel proclaiming the gospel? The 2 witnesses? The days of Lot and Noah? The 70th week of Daniel? Am I missing something?

That he recognized the consistency full preterism confirms in Scripture and then negates what Scripture confirms with creeds of men is baffling to me. That man made creeds therefore trump Scripture for him should cast skepticism on anything else he says.

A preterist does not believe that things are just going to go on forever. We are in the little season of Satan, the age of deception. I would love to hear an explanation of what the people living in this time period believe. Do they believe that Satan is given permission, by God, to deceive the nations? Is this guy so wise, in his own eyes, that he would escape this deception? I’d love to hear his explanation on how he escapes being deceived. Then he can tell me how to do it, and my job would become so much better!

revelation has not been fulfilled.

"This generation shall not pass away until ALL these things come to pass." And there are many more statements spoken by Jesus himself that reinforce, unequivocally, this verse. "ALL" means all. Not some, but all, and so full preterism applies. Jesus said that his prophecies would happen soon, the tribulation, the armies surrounding the temple, and his return. This clearly happened with the siege and fall of Jerusalem, which historically was horrific. His return then must have by necessity also happened, because that is what He said. It is not that preterism has only certain explanatory powers, while it lacks other explanatory powers. Explanatory powers are the powers a theory has to explain multiple issues.Biblical text unquestionably indicates that Jesus was prophesying for the first century. His very words repeatedly assert this. The problem then is that Christian doctrine does not correspond to biblical text. Nor does it make much sense, that, for example, all who have "died in Christ" for 2000 years, their bodies dead, decayed, virtually nonexistent, will zombie-like be reconstituted and resurrected. Or that they will be resurrected in some other theological construct, from some other spiritual place where they have supposedly been residing, as if in limbo, in a 2000 year holding pattern. The Bosom of Abraham, Purgatory, Limbo, the Rapture, these are all mere human theological constructs contrived to address logical inconsistencies and contradictions in biblical text when standard dogmas are adhered to. The Bible is, in other words, a confusing and contradictory document, or full preterism applies. That is in part because it is actually many documents, many books, not one book that we now call the Bible, but many books assembled long long ago and written by various authors. Fallible people. The actual Word of God, on the other hand, is His very Being, that intersects with and is the essence of your own being, his first emanation from unmanifest Spirit (incarnate in Jesus Christ) without which nothing that was made was made, resounding then in the depths of Self. That is the Word to know and follow. Not necessarily letters on a page, repeatedly translated, transcribed 1000 times over by weary scribes, the very nature of which necessitates they be misconstrued, edited, or altered, which is proven to have occurred. And as He said, the kingdom of God is within, for in Him we live, move, and have our being. The Bible though is a book written and translated across human languages. These are finite and cannot begin to encompass the infinity of God. The Word, though, is Being. And the Word is within.

THE BIBLE IS THE STORY of Yahweh's fulfilled plan of redemption given exclusively to ancient Israelites cursed with the Old Covenant law of sin and death and pertains to no one alive today, soteriologically and eschatologically speaking. Here's more... THIS IS THE BEST SUMMATION I HAVE TO DATE. FROM Michael Bradley (With THANKS to Ron Schofield). IF YOU BELIEVE THE BIBLE, then you'd have to agree with Jesus in Matthew 15:24, that he only came for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. YOU'D HAVE TO AGREE WITH JESUS in Matthew 5:18, that no jot nor tittle of the Old Covenant law would pass away until the Old Covenant system, temple and people associated with it ( what Jews referred to as "heaven and earth") passed away. YOU'D HAVE TO AGREE WITH HISTORY, that the Old Covenant system, temple and people associated with it passed away in AD 70. YOU'D HAVE TO AGREE WITH PAUL, who said in Romans 5:13, "Where there is no (Old Covenant) law, sin is not taken into account." This of course means that salvation was only needed by those who had sin taken into account, which is not us today. YOU'D ALSO HAVE TO AGREE WITH HEBREWS 9:15, that redemption was only needed by those who sinned under the first covenant, which again...is not us today. THE BITTER PILL OF TRUTH is that nobody has been saved nor redeemed for nearly two thousand years. The "church today" has been in a massive error; a complete hijacking of ancient Israel's exclusive and fulfilled redemptive narrative, the Bible. "BUT...BUT...I'M A GENTILE!" Are you? The gentiles Paul and the disciples were preaching to were either Greek converts to Judaism, or the elect diaspora, grafted-in descendants of the tribes of Israel who had been dispersed among the nations. Through the ministry of the disciple's great commission, they were called out from the nations to again be a holy nation of kings and priests, sealed for the day of redemption, which only they lived to see. Nobody today is a gentile of that sort. TODAY'S SELF-APPOINTED, SELF-PROFESSING "CHRISTIANS" have been hoodwinked into believing they're sinners under a law that passed away, and need a savior who said he came for someone else, who will save them from a sin that's already been removed and a judgement that already happened and allow them into a covenant that was made with someone else. The fact is, we today were never and will never be part of ancient Israel's exclusive and fulfilled redemptive narrative, the Bible.~Michael Bradley