Torrey Gazette is the combined work of everyday Christians blogging on books, family, art, and theology. So pull up a seat and join us. Family Table rules apply. Shouting is totally acceptable.

The Dating of Revelation - Don Preston Review #15

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.

For you it may feel like no time. But for it has been almost a full month since I've watched one of these Preston videos. Sad in a sense because I was enjoying them but other things (right now for me it is the middle of August) called me away for a time. Let's see if I can shake off the dust.

@1:30: Oh Don how I have missed you. Yes martyr vindication! 

@2:45: These passages should be familiar to those who have read this blog. I agree with a lot of these Matthew texts pointing to the end of the "Jewish age" and the end of the Old Covenant era. 

@4:13: This is one of my favorite chapters in the whole Bible. And I do think that Jesus has a A.D. 70 perspective on this. There has always been something inherently kingly and vindictive about the passage. 

@6:25: I do have a heavy "Jesus was a preterist" hand. My problem is that many of the things Jesus taught go through a significant transformation under the apostles. I'm not saying the apostles changed what Jesus taught but they underwent more explanation and further development.

Our Lord doesn't speak of election the way Paul does. He doesn't speak of Baptism the was any of the authors do. He doesn't speak about Himself as High Priest the way the book of Hebrews does.  And the gospels in general do not give any indication of the critical doctrine of "justification by faith". In short, to limit our understanding of the New Testament solely to the scope of hos "Jesus taught" would be to eliminate many topics that are foundational to the church.

Well it shouldn't surprise anyone that I don't feel the weight of his conclusion. There doesn't need to be a "prove they're different". All that needs to be seen is evidence of expansion of the idea. I think that exists. That's why I'm a partial preterist and not a full preterist. 


Ask Doug: Roman Catholicism and the Eucharist

A Survey of The Days of Vengeance: Ethical Stipulations or In The Path Of The White Horse (Part 9)