27 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. 28 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. - Matthew 16:27-28
Note: Don Preston is a full preterist and therefore his teaching cannot receive full or blind acceptance. His many videos on YouTube are worthy of listening and interacting with in a timeline manner.
At this point we might enter into confusion. Occasionally I have to defend Mr Preston. Occasionally I need to correct him. I want people to be clear on the fact that I agree alot with him. But I don't agree on the most important things.
@1:10: The first objection is that the passage is being taken out of context. I honestly believe I address this better than Mr Preston. Partly because I believe I understand the question a little more. I think specifically this individual is thinking of the saving and losing of the soul (16:24-26). The question here really lies on the link between Jesus describing His death (16:21) and the subsequent warning to follow Him with our own cross. If this is taken in the sense of salvation, than one can see why the accusation is made that Mr Preston is losing the context.
However, when one looks at the book of 1 Peter it seems that Peter links Christ's death to our present persecution (1:6-7; 2:19-25; 3:13-18; 4:12-19). I hope it can be seen that a reasonable argument can be made for Christ saying "take up your cross" as a future indicator of the practical persecution the early church would bear.
@3:40: Mr Preston is right and wrong on this. He is truly practicing Scripture interpreting Scripture. This is a portion of exegesis. The accusation can remain that not a single Hebrew word was evaluated to confirm the intent of the OT passages. These were linked with NT passages but it was not shown that the context and content of the OT passages could only be speaking of Christ's return in judgment.
One example would be my major disagreement with Mr Preston's evaluation of Daniel 7 and how I believe that affects greatly his perception of when the kingdom is established. This only occurs because Mr Preston doesn't properly exeget Daniel 7 and the "Coming of the Lord" which he continually refers to in his comparative analysis of the passages.
