Mr.

Smalley, do you believe that abortion is moral?

Oh, boy, I'm glad I'm debating him instead of you.

This is Apologetics Live to answer your questions.

Your host from Striving for Eternity Ministries, Andrew Rapaport.

We are live Apologetics Live here to answer your most challenging question, questions you have about God and the Bible.

One of those questions we're going to deal with tonight, and that is a question of full preterism.

Let me bring in my co host, Mr.

Drew.

How are you, sir?

I'm doing well, doing well.

How are you?

Good.

I am feeling sick.

So I, I thought, as I told you, I will probably, you know, take myself off camera as I cough and sneeze on everything else.

But while you're wearing that, that sweater, it's so you can wipe your nose.

And my bride made me this sweater.

I will not do that.

Oh, okay.

I wouldn't do that.

It looks, it looks nice.

It is, it, she, she made it when we went to a, a cruise to Alaska at our 10th wedding anniversary.

And I'm finally wearing it 20 years later because she, she, she made it and she kind of just guessed how long my arms were.

So it always, it like would go like this, my fingers would stick out like this.

So she, she was always like, I should fix that.

So she did, she actually took the time to take the shoulders off and take it out.

So.

But I like it looks nice.

Yeah.

You got to love a good sweater.

Yeah.

So, so I, before we introduce our guest and, and the show we have, I told you, I may or may not be making a big announcement here, but.

That's right.

Yeah.

Shocking one too.

Yeah.

I, I, I, I'm gonna have to admit, man, if there's ever been a case, I must be post mill.

I mean, Donald Trump got elected and everything is good in the last nine days.

I mean things have just radically changed.

He's doing everything that's happening.

If there was ever an argument for postmill, it would be what's going on right now.

Because I'm seeing things I never expected would be happening, especially in America.

Apparently RFK Jr went from supporting abortion, full term abortion to now every, every abortion is wrong.

Every abortion's wrong.

So I mean the, the like we're see, I mean, you're now saying, hey, you do you're really bad criminal.

What?

You're here illegally.

Okay, we'll ship you to Guantanamo.

Your country doesn't want you back.

We got a place for you.

Yep, that's right, we do.

I mean, excuse me.

Yeah.

I.

I am just.

I am.

As much as I thought Trump might do as president.

Wow.

He is.

He's done more in nine days or ten days now.

Well, then Joe Biden did, like his entire four years, but that's not saying much.

He's been in.

Yeah.

Maybe all 50 years.

60 years in Congress.

Yeah.

Or said it.

So let me bring in Dr.

Sam Frost.

So let me explain how we got around to this topic of full preterism.

And then I'm going to let Dr.

Frost introduce himself and see why he is in here for this.

And.

And this is an appeal to any of you Twitter followers that were there wanting to tell me how, you know, full preterism cannot be disputed.

Now is your chance to come in and prove to us how unrefutable your position really is.

Is this.

This episode started because.

And Sam, you've been here before, but we did.

Have we.

I put out a post innocent enough.

I just asked people their views.

Mill.

Post mill, pre mill.

This is probably the least controversial post Andrew has ever put.

I didn't make any claims.

I just asked everyone their view.

Right.

Simple enough.

The full preterist came in in groups and I kind of, you know, I.

Look, I've drew, you know, I've dealt with the black Hebrew Israelites and I've taught how to deal with them and how they.

They do that group think where they.

They never come in one at a time.

They come in a bunch at a time and feed off each other and ignore what you say because they're just really talking to each other and then going, yeah, yeah, that's right.

You said it.

You got them.

And they don't actually listen to what you're saying.

Well, that's what went on in my.

On my poll there.

And I kept asking them, as I always do, for folks to say, would you come on to Apologex Live?

Let's.

Let's debate it.

I said, if you guys.

Because they were telling me it was undeniable, unrefutable.

And I said, well, then you should have no problem coming in and doing a debate.

And they kept several of them, all appealed and tagged some guy, Michael Sullivan, which I know Sam, you said, you know who he is.

And I said, okay.

And as Michael came in, all of them backed away and said, oh, Michael can handle it.

Okay.

So what ended up happening was Michael says he's willing to do it.

I said, great, I've reached out to Sam Frost and he'd be happy to debate you.

To which he was like, oh, no, that guy's running from two debates for me already.

He won't hand.

He can't handle answering his own book.

He's running from me, therefore I'm not gonna do it.

And then a bunch of people said how Michael agreed to debate and that Sam is running from him.

I said look, on this thread I only see one person who's running and it's not Sam.

Cuz he's not even in the thread.

To which hours later when I told Sam about this, he went onto the thread and said I'm willing to debate ya.

So the record's out there, right?

Which I thought was like the.

Nothing to see here.

It was the classic troll move.

I mean if there were, if there, if Sam, if Sam Frost ever did a Donald Trump move there it was just to get it right out the thing and say I'm here, I'll debate you.

So it was, it was funny because this guy, Michael Sullivan and I could see Sam, why he, he's afraid to debate you because basically he.

Remember all I did was ask people what is their view Amil post mill pre mill.

And he told me and for regular listeners you'll get the humor in this.

He told me I need to defend Amillennialism.

To which I said why?

And he said because you made the claim, you have to support it.

I said all I did was ask what people's position is in a poll.

Yeah.

He says no, you're Amil.

To which I said no, you know, I said if you, if you're really good at debating, you should learn the first thing is to know your opponent.

I'm not a mill.

To which this one woman who kept telling me she, she's willing to have a written debate.

Which I told her I wouldn't.

Written debates are not good because people like as she was doing just ignore what, what I'm saying.

And you can't do that when you're actually like in person.

And so she, she posts in a response to this guy, Michael Sullivan.

She actually, I mean this is just classic.

She posts a link to our doctoral statement at Striving for Eternity and claims he's not Amil.

I read his doctoral statement.

He's post mill.

To which two out of three you'd.

Think you'd think they could get one of them.

I know you're free, Bill.

And I'm like yeah, you got one more guess.

So somebody else finally responded and said because she said, she read it and someone said he's premil3 the last one you got right?

Yeah.

Well, that was someone else that's not a full predator.

So two full preterists got it wrong.

Yeah.

And so it was.

It was just hilarious because she said she read it and she was like, we.

She told me I was running from a written debate from her.

I said, and my response was, as a woman, you shouldn't be teaching the Bible.

So I would never have agreed to a written debate with you.

So you should repent of both teaching men and your.

Your false teaching of full preterism.

So.

So, you know, Sam, the.

A competence and reading level of a good deal of full predators.

Yeah, I mean, that's why I played the intro that we did with.

With David Smalley where he, he didn't want to debate me.

He, you know, he'd rather debate Matt Slick over me.

Well, I guess, Sam, all the full preterists are here backstage that wanted to debate you.

I'll bring them all in.

Right now.

You see them all.

Oh, wait.

I should have done the thing that I did for the.

You know, it's undeniable.

But they're all afraid you're.

You can't defend yourself.

But none of them are here.

Funny how that works.

And so, you know, Sam, you probably don't know I did this, but many years ago, we had black Hebrew Israelites that kept telling me they would debate me, but they would never show up here.

And so we actually had one scheduled.

It was going to be me against three black Hebrew Israelites.

And like Tuesday.

So the show's on Thursday.

Tuesday, they all blocked me and the moderator, so we couldn't give them the link, which then they went around saying that we were.

We wouldn't provide the link because we were scared.

And so on the show we announced, you know, we.

They blocked us and we could.

We can't provide a link to.

So I, I told the, I told my.

The moderator.

I said, look here, let's have a debate.

Just do a debate.

Introduce me.

I'll do the opening.

Introduce.

The black Hebrew is lights.

He's like, who are you going to have.

They, they.

They blocked us.

I said, just do it.

He had no idea what I was going to do.

So I do my opening.

He said, we're going to have the black Hebrew Israelites that are going to debate Andrew here.

They're going to introduce themselves.

And I threw up a picture of an empty chair.

I should have done that here.

So, Sam, the empty chair for Elijah.

Yeah, that's for Passover.

That's correct.

So introduce yourself.

So folks know, I mean, first off, Introduce who you are.

Let's give a high level overview of full preterism, what it is for folks that may not know and, and then explain why it is that you'd be here.

Because you know, I love.

He bows down so we can see the rest of his books as, as I am selling, I'm selling all my.

I'm selling my library and it's, it's so hard to do.

And, and I get this, I've told him before the show I want to come to his house and just you know, like get down there to see that library.

It just like goes on and on and on.

That's.

Well, that's not all my.

It's my two boys.

One's works at the state capital here in Indianapolis, but he's a poly major and then my other one, he's in Indiana University.

And they grew up with me so they buy books just like I do and they didn't have any place for them so they end up downstairs and.

They become your books.

Building and adding shelves and going around the corner and everything.

So can't bring ourselves, you know, to get, to get rid of them.

But they're all top tier reference and specific, you know, non fiction kind of, kind of works that we look for.

Hand picked, just very specific.

Right.

You can't buy everything.

Though.

We want to.

The popular stuff we get rid of and just focus in on the more impactful kind of.

Well, like this one.

This one was just sent to me as a gift.

Oxford Handbook on the book Revelation by Kessler.

And I was wanting to get this very expensive and someone sent it to me as a gift.

Elton Holland, who you know.

Thank you, Elton.

Nice.

I can't wait to dive into this thing.

I just got this yesterday.

I need friends like yours, people sending stuff.

So after a few years.

Yeah, you massive collection.

The only thing Drew ever sends me is bills.

Huh?

The only thing Drew ever sends me is his bills.

Oh, Bill, I need someone to pay him.

So full preterism.

Well, people have said some of your debaters probably on Twitter.

I just got asked this by a Phil Jones on Facebook of how familiar am I was full preterism in order to debunk it.

Well.

You wrote the book.

This is Misplaced hope.

I wrote that in 2003 as a full preterist.

You know, this was one of mine that sold thousands of copies of this one.

Tim King and Max King put, put that, put that one out.

And then I wrote this one Exegetical Essays.

This got sold out and I republished it.

Don Preston, who is, bar none, the most prolific full preterist author out there.

He now publishes this book.

I've asked him not to, but he continues to publish it.

He says it continues to sell as one of the best full predator books ever written.

That tells you anything that I don't understand full preterism.

But I, I, I can easily debunk that because Don Preston sells this book still to this day, even though I renounce full preterism.

And then you mentioned Michael Sullivan and there I am.

And there's Michael Sullivan with him.

House divided.

Now when I left, of course they had to take my name and chapter out, but there it is.

So those are the three works that I have that I participated and spoke at over 25 lectures across the United States from 2003, 2008, had one of the very few full preterist acting churches which we founded and pastored in St.

Petersburg, Christ Covenant Church and was producing a lot of CDs and materials and pamphlets and booklets and things of that nature.

I, you know, sold my, sold my life to it.

I, this was, this was, I, I knew Max King personally and Tim King and I know Don Preston personally and Ed Stevens personally and I met Jack Scott and William Bell and all these guys we roomed together.

Doug, you know, David Curtis, you know, we personally would, you know, fellowship together in hotel rooms and, and hotel lobbies and conference hall lobbies and things of that nature.

So I got to know these guys pretty well.

And listen, you know, a lot of these guys are nice, you know, American nice guys.

You know, guys you wouldn't mind needed some, some help or whatever.

But the, the theology of it, a full preterism, which basically is that every prophecy that's in the scriptures from Genesis to Revelation is exhaustively fulfilled by the time of 70 A.D.

the 9th of AB, which would be what in the Jewish, would be August 9th.

So by that time all the prophecies from Genesis to Revelation are all exhaustively fulfilled by that time.

And so after that time there's no prophecy left in any way, shape or form to be fulfilled in our future at all.

And that's the full predator, what I call the hyper predator's view.

That's basically the, the view.

So that's, that would be the, the, the declarative statement or the, the statement of what it is they believe all prophecy is fulfilled by, by the time of 70 AD.

And then of course, the flood of questions.

If you've been raised in a church or you've been in church for a Few years.

And like all things church.

What about the resurrection?

What about the new heavens and new earth?

What about, you know, these are just immediate questions that will come up and so what about the resurrection?

Well, that's.

What about the resurrection?

What about church history, the early church fathers?

And what about the inconsistencies of views that are out there already?

That's.

So we covered, we covered all that and looking back on it, yet increasingly became more difficult because these questions like we'll take the word death.

Death now is entirely, totally divorced from what you and I know as just, you know, death.

The funerals, cemeteries, getting ill, getting cancer, people in our families, in our lives that we're going through, what we're heading towards.

That's not what the Bible's talking about.

The Bible's talking about spiritual death.

So you got to get around all that stuff.

Okay.

Because they kept making an issue over.

That two hours to discuss.

Yeah.

So they kept making an issue over the.

Over deaths.

And death is a big one.

Yeah.

And I didn't, so I didn't know that they make a big deal like, because I asked them what is death?

And I couldn't get a definition from any of them because in my view death is.

Death is separation.

Right.

Physical death is separation of the spirit from the body.

You know, spiritual death is our separation of a fellowship with, with God.

An eternal death is a permanent separation.

You know, so they all have the idea of separation, but they kept using it and, and they kept using it in a way because, because I kept bringing up Daniel 9, which we'll get to the 70 weeks of.

Of Daniel.

But Drew, you had a really interesting point that you had when we talked about this of, you know, because, because as you know, Sam just mentioned, right.

They believe all the, all prophecies are done in 70 A.D.

yeah, I know you're, you're a post mill, so you're, you're close to the truth, but you know, you're not, not there yet as a premill.

You got a premill, an all male.

And a post meal on this show.

Yeah.

And, and we all think we're the right ones.

You know what, we're going to find out who's right one day.

But, but yeah, you had an interesting point though with the, the prophecies that we.

Would you really like to see the full preterists say when it happened.

Maybe Sam could explain when that happened from a, from a full press view, but why don't you get into that?

Yeah.

The one thing that I mentioned with Andrew is How when Jesus talks about his coming, he talks about his.

He will come back as you saw him go, right?

And so we would look at that and we would say, okay, so that's a bodily return, right?

Now as, as a post mill, right?

And we, me and a couple buddies, we even did a show on Apologetics Live where we talked about Jesus is coming in 70 AD was a judgment.

But that's not his second coming.

That's not what Jesus means when he talks about his second coming.

So when Jesus says he will return, right?

And what he's saying there is in the same way he went, he went bodily.

And so they saw him bodily, so therefore he must return bodily.

How do they get around that?

And what's interesting there is, especially among some Baptist confessions or statements of faith, you see, and do you believe in the visible bodily?

And they put that word bodily in there.

You believe in the visible bodily return of the Lord.

Always wondered years, you know, where did that word bodily, where that, when did that get inserted?

Well, the reason why it's inserted in there is because he ascended bodily.

Therefore logically he will, he will return bodily in the same body.

Right?

That's, that's perfectly natural logical to think that what, what the full printers do is that the Jesus is going up in a cloud, is that his body at that point is transformed, absorbed, loses any of its human attributes, qualities, quantity, and is, you know.

Yeah, that, that's really.

Explanations begin because so if you ask like Larry Siegel, who's been in this for 30 some years, you know, like, Larry is an old friend of mine, but he's, he's a full predators and he traveled around with Jack Scott and Don Preston and all these guys.

So he really knows full preterism backwards and forwards.

And he's a full predator.

So he says.

Beyond that we can only speculate, but we cannot reason that Jesus retained his body, whereas the logic would seem to demand it unless I'm specifically told, oh, and by the way, he no longer retains his body.

So the statement do you believe in the visible bodily?

Is because that's just a logical.

It just, it's deduced if he ascended bodily, his descent will be bodily.

So otherwise.

So they don't have an explanation for it.

Right?

Yeah.

So, yeah, because.

Because as a partial predatorist, right.

When Jesus is quot Daniel and he talks about the Son of Man coming up to the Ancient of Days, right.

We would view that as his ascension.

Yeah.

Yes, yes.

And.

And so if he's coming up to the ancient of Days, he's sitting on the throne.

The Lord is making the earth his footstool.

Right.

We all, all that's implicated there is bodily functions, right?

They're seeing him bodily.

He's coming up bodily.

And so how do they, how do they get around that?

Because I'm believe the same about when Jesus quotes Daniel there.

The most likely answer I gave and that Don would give is that that's old vision.

It's just visions.

You're not, you can't take it literal.

That's, that's pretty much it in a nutshell.

Is, is that like the transfiguration?

That really didn't happen.

They had a vision.

So that's, that's how you get around that.

There's.

Because the word vision is there, you know.

Yeah, that word in Greek you can use that.

And usually it's.

They solve it.

They, they saw this, right?

They saw Elijah, they saw Moses and knew who they were immediately.

So I thought, well, that's a little glimpse of the new heavens and new earth right there.

He's giving him a little glimpse of the glory to come.

And then, you know, now we're back into the here and now again.

That's what I think is going on.

And a lot of scholars think that's what the intention of the gospel stories are telling us, that he's giving him a little peek at.

I am the Daniel, son of man.

All glory, power and judgment is mine.

Moses and Elijah are at my right and my left hand.

I'm the supreme.

This is the reality.

But don't tell anybody this yet.

You know, now, now's not the time.

So but they, they get around all of that because it's all just visionary and therefore it's not actual, it's not real.

And so it's.

That's beyond that.

There really isn't any other explanation in that other than the necessity that they have to do that.

Because you can't have Jesus in a human body as we speak right now at the right hand of the Father, which in orthodoxy we retain that bodily.

Yes.

In our systematic theologies.

Charles Hobbs, you can go down the list.

I mean, he has to.

The human being retains space, location in the heavenly dimensions that at the right hand of the Father as a human being, as we shall also in heaven and on earth, in the new heavens and new earth.

So that's resurrection.

They've got to get away from all that language because if Jesus ascended bodily and is now, as we speak, bodily, the man Christ Jesus, Jesus of Nazareth, well, the whole house of cards comes Falling down.

So I wrote an article a long time ago saying you, we got to get rid of the body.

You know, using a Sopranos line.

Yeah.

You know, or Goodfellas or whoever.

You know, we gotta.

You know, we gotta hide the body.

Right.

And they do.

They have to.

They have to do that.

Well, and that's the thing that I kind of noticed when talking with them is that.

That it just seemed like so much of the.

So much of what I was hearing was just redefinition of terms, which always concerns me, and an inconsistency between literal and spiritual.

Right.

So they would just jump, oh, well, that's literal.

That's spiritual within the same text without any basic explanation from the text of why to take something literal or spiritual at different times.

And, and that's the thing that really frustrated me in.

In the discussion, because as someone that does debate, when we debate, we.

We need to have a clear understanding of the definition of terms that we.

That we agree to.

Are you familiar with.

I'm seeing this movement.

I don't know how big it is.

I'm just seeing it in passing through the other things I'm reading.

There's this.

There's this movement among Mormons more.

The more educated or intellectual defenders of Mormonism that are trying to move in and to show how they.

Mormons are actually can dialogue and are at home with evangelicalism.

And.

And they're.

They're.

That we share the same kind of vocabulary.

And we share.

They're kind of.

They're kind of wanting to join in with the evangelical concern.

And I'm like, this is interesting because that's exactly what full preterism is trying to do, is that they're evangelic.

They're trying to show, you know, we all have the same kind of definitions.

Yeah.

We have differences.

And this, that and the other.

Well, there was a book of terms.

And to somebody who's not spent 30 years like myself or you, you know.

Yeah.

On the surface.

And I appreciate that you mentioned that in the beginning.

On the surface, yes.

That can be very confusing.

You know, that's.

That's where they pray at.

Yeah.

So the.

The book that.

That kind of started that dialogue was a book called How Wide the Divide, where they had a Mormon and an evangelical get together.

And when you read that book.

Yeah, yeah.

I mean, well, unfortunately.

Unfortunately there.

What you had was more of the evangelical caving on his views to say, look, we.

We can agree with Mormonism.

The thing, though, a really interesting thing that I see you look at the Catholic Church, which said that when we believed in salvation by faith alone, in Christ alone, grace alone, that was anathema.

That belief in justification by Christ alone sentenced you to hell.

That's what they said.

Now they're trying to say, well, we're Christians too.

There's no difference.

Right.

You had the same thing with Jehovah Witnesses, with the Mormons.

Right.

They say we're the false religion.

And then now they're trying to say, but we're Christians, just like you.

Wait, you can't have it both ways.

You can't be like in Mormonism where, well, the gospel message fell away, but they have the restored gospel in the Mormon Church.

Well, then we don't have a restored gospel in Christianity.

Right.

We have a false gospel.

And they're saying.

But they're like, they're Christian too.

No, I noticed a lot of these, like Seventh Day Adventism, who.

My stepfather was Seventh Day Adventist, but he had, you know, grown away a little bit from it.

But there's this.

And, you know, I, I'm, I'm, I'm pretty ecumenical when it comes to, you know, God will sort it all out in the end kind of thing.

But there, there are these movements, you know, to get away from lng white.

You get away, you know, that prophet, you know, she was a prophetess and get away from.

And I.

So that is going on in Mormonism.

Get away from the Joseph, you know, get away from it.

And that's, that's your roots.

I mean, that's.

Yeah.

So for me, Max King, full printer, is a.

Max King who is a universalist, may he rest in peace.

He passed away last year.

So.

But his, the continuing ministry living presence of Max King, who is, I consider the father of modern full preterism today.

Don Preston and Ed Stevens and all these guys came after him, but he, he became a universalist.

And I'm like, that's, that's your main guy right there.

That's.

Yeah.

A lot of people in full preterism are trying to distance from Max King, from Don Preston.

They're trying to create another evangelical quasi.

We're all in the same camp kind of a thing.

Like.

So we have a pre millennialist and amillennialist and a post millennialist, which I would consider in the same camp, because we affirm the fundamental bodily return, bodily resurrection, new heavens and new earth.

All of those fundamental things we all agree on.

We have some details of how we're going to get there.

But, you know, we all affirm those kinds of fundamental core, basic yeah.

Structures of church theology and systematic theology, whether you're Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant.

Those have been the structures that have confined.

So when you take that main block out, new heavens, new earth, resurrection of the dead, return of Christ, end of history, and you throw it back here in 70 AD you're left out now and just this wide open world of like, like, what happens now?

Yeah, and that's one of the questions I kind of asked one of them.

I said, so if all the prophecies fulfilled, like, why are we still here on Earth?

Like, I just don't get it.

Like, what.

What's God's plan here?

Let me give, Let me just put up some comments that Drew starred.

And so, so we could.

Some people giving some shout outs to you.

We have haps Addison who just said Sam Frost rocks.

So there you go.

But you know, that is haps.

So.

Yeah, well, he, he's.

If there was ever any proof of Bigfoot, that's it right there.

All right, so standing for truth says Dr.

Sam Frost is the man.

And so we have.

I don't know who this is because he didn't use a real name, but shroud 8953 says Dr.

Dr.

Sam Frost.

Exclamation point, exclamation point.

God bless you for taking the time after all these years to help people grow in grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.

So we, we got, you know, Caleb Gordon says full.

A total, full preterism is full blown heresy, by the way.

Encourage everyone to go check out Caleb Gordon's.

Well, I guess it was Twitter, Facebook, whichever.

I think he might have done both.

But.

And Caleb should come in here so, so he could announce that his bluff was called.

But, but Caleb Gordon has got a conference.

You can go to caleb gordon.org for the, for the, the details of the conference that we're.

We're going to be at.

It's going to be, it's the, the Built to Conquer conference.

So Caleb Gordon is where you get the tickets.

But we got.

It's going to be on February 22nd in Bartsville, Oklahoma.

So Caleb.

Yeah, we're coming there.

It'll be.

We got.

Caleb Gordon will be speaking.

I'll be speaking Brand of scalf.

If you haven't heard him.

You want to come just for that.

Michael Stanton, Gabe Wrench, Brett Baggett, some great speakers.

But here's the thing.

I said to Caleb Gordon that, you know, if I come to the conference, would he, would he jump into a cold plunge?

And he was like, yeah, man, you, you get A cold plunge down here.

You find a place for us to do a cold plunge and I'll do it.

Okay.

Well, today he posted a video because I called his bluff and sent a cold plunge down to his house.

So he's, he's got the cold plunge and we're going to see how many of the speakers get into the cold plunge.

It'll be, it'll be a great time.

We have.

Let's see what other comments.

So Chance Summers says, what's up guys?

And if you don't know Chance, chance is from 1689 cigars.

And I think in the topic of full preterism, Chance might have a name, a cigar name that would, would fit with these folks.

It's, it's their flavored, his flavored cigar brand called the Pharisees.

So maybe that's what they should be smoking if, if they were to get some 1689 cigars.

What are you even smoking?

Yeah, Claude Ramsey, who is a great brother in the Lord, says, sam, thank you for being steadfast in the faith.

I love you in the Lord and appreciate your ministry.

Then we have this, this is kind of an interesting one.

We have apologetics dog is is he.

Was supposed to be on here.

Yeah, he's commenting and online and on YouTube saying excellent conversation, fellows.

But he's supposed to be here, folks.

Jeremiah was supposed to be here.

We do hope on top of the hour when he puts his child to bed.

His wife is sick, so be praying for them.

And well, we'll get him to debate Mike Sullivan.

Yeah, so Cl.

Claude also said doing good.

I gleam wisdom from Dr.

Frost.

So a question, a question that came in and it came in from our.

A pre mill in the house.

But this is from Michael, a guy who's, who's local to me here in Philly.

He, he says, he says do all in the camp deny a future 1000 year Kingdom on earth.

So would all in the thousand years.

Is symbolic of the time from the ascension of Jesus, which we'll say 33 AD to 70 AD and in between that time is John's symbolic thousand years.

I'm gonna let that stay right there.

You heard it for me.

I'm not making this up.

I used to kind of.

I wrote a paper when I was a full predatorist on this because I was really.

So here's, here's the break, here's the gist.

Okay, so a thousand years is clearly a nice round, you know, symbolic number even among.

Okay, John Walbert or whoever, you know, they recognize the.

Yes, you Know, it's not going to be 365 actually, you know, right down to the exact.

And then at that second, you know, it's kind of tick off.

So.

But it's a nice, this nice indefinite round period of time.

It's a symbol that's found in scriptures when thousand is used.

A thousand.

God owns the cattle on a thousand hills.

You've heard all this to the thousandth generation.

And without.

So a thousand is this long, this nice symbol for this long indefinite period of time or a large number.

And so that's, that's whether you're all millennial, pre millennial, post millennial.

You can wrap your head around that and say, yeah, okay, yeah.

So since it's, here's the argument, since it is a symbolic number, then it could be 37 years or, you know, 2,000 years or 3,175 years or whatever.

It could be.

So the symbol.

But the problem there is that the symbol thousand is never found anywhere where the actuality of the time that it's standing for as a metaphor or as a symbol is never reduced or less than.

So that's, that's the meta that would break down on the metaphor.

So if you're a millennial, a thousand years can be a much larger actual period of time.

1900 years and counting, or post millennialism, 1900 years or counting.

Or even in pre millennialism, it could go over a thousand, you know, actual quantitative thousand years, it could go over that, whatever.

But the preterist shrinks the actual number that the thousand is representing.

They shrink it to.

What is that?

33 to 70 would be 37 years.

Yeah, so it actually, actually means only 37 years.

Now if you can you clearly see.

Let me, let me say this too, and I want you guys to comment because when I wrote my article on this and I was really like, we got a big giant.

This is probably one of the biggest hurdles next to resurrection of the dead.

This one would be the biggest, the hurdle.

This is the big one.

After you buy into all of the time text and buy into all, all of the, this generation and you buy into all of the old Covenant ended in 70 ad buy into, bring in the Josephus, you bring in and you, you have this whole nice built kind of thing going on here and then you read Revelation 20, you're forced into that consideration.

Could you ever teach full preterism and start at Revelation 20?

Absolutely not.

Could you, could you teach full preterism by starting in First Corinthians 15?

No.

Don Preston And I would agree.

We talked on the phone.

It's like, no, we gotta start at Matthew 24, Mark 13.

We gotta start with those time.

And once we whittle that away and show that all these things must take place within this particular period of time, then naturally you're going to assume or deduce from this thing that we built here.

Then you're going to deduce, well, the millennium has to fit in there.

And you're like, well, yeah, it has to.

And so it's not going to be really a problem there once you've done that.

But if you're coming in from the outside, looking at full preterism and you hear that the thousand years is from 33 to 70 A.D.

and I've said this to people, I travel a lot of churches and Nazarenes and Baptists and Presbyterians and all this stuff.

And they asked this, and they said that's, that's like the deal breaker for them right there.

And they don't want to hear anymore.

That's, that's insane.

Yeah.

How do they do that?

Well, you've got to buy into the system first in order to do that.

Because you'll never get that out of Revelation 20 or, or anywhere millennial or pre millennial.

You'll never get that out of it.

That was the thing I kept struggling with the folks.

I said, look, I kept going to Daniel, the 70 weeks of Daniel.

And I said, it's just math, right?

It's it, you know, I would ask them, okay, so you got 77 year periods.

Were the first 69 fulfilled?

Literally.

And they agree.

I said, okay, so the last seven year period, how do you get whether you want to say that it started when Jesus started his ministry or you want to say that that was, you know, started at his death?

You're still talking 33 plus 7.

How do you get 70 AD?

Well, there's a gap.

Yeah, well, no, because that was the whole thing is they were telling me that I can't have a gap as a pre.

Millennialist.

To say that.

Yeah, like that was.

The irony is like they, they tried to argue for a gap and then argued that I can't have the gap.

And it was like, wait, you can have like it.

It just was hysterical because so in Daniel, in Daniel, chapter nine.

I was going to go here later, but let me just bring it up.

This is for folks that might want to look it up.

Daniel 9, 24 to 27.

What you see is this prophecy given to Daniel of seven.

Seven year periods.

It's it's actually not weeks in Hebrew.

It's seven sevens.

Okay.

He gives here some very specific things that will happen at the end of the 70th week.

He says in verse 24, that when the weeks have been decreed, your people and your holy city to finish the transgressions, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring everlasting righteousness, to seal up visions and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy place.

So there's, there are several things there that are there six things there that should take place.

Right?

So he talks about in verse 25, you see chronological language, right?

7 weeks and 62 weeks for the decree to rebuild for the, for the, you know, of the, the building of, of the temple and then of a completed period and it says verse 26.

Then after 60, the 62 weeks, the Messiah will be cut off.

So we know that Messiah comes after that second period.

So there's a seven week period, a 62 week period, a one week period.

And so, you know, I'm going, okay, so you're saying the 62 weeks occurs with Christ being cut off.

That's his, his death.

And I go, okay, so you got.

They would take that.

Yeah.

So I go, okay, so let's add seven to 33.

If he died in 33, seven years later would be 40 A.D.

not 70 A.D.

i'm like, help me understand the math.

Yeah, well they, you.

And let me, let me say this because I did for a little, I wrote my commentary on Daniel where I worked through translation and then I, you know, had that, had that published and stuff.

So I would take a little bit different.

I'm more of the, even though I'm staunch conservative, I, I kind of side more on the James Charles Worth and the world side.

I guess what you call the liberal side on the.

But that's neither here nor there.

The only reason I bring that up is because they'll use that between me and you and they'll say, see, you guys disagree on the.

Yeah, great.

We just, I, yeah, we all disagree on.

But, but the fundamentals, again, I come back to the fundamentals.

But in their case, where they do take what it is that you're saying, that's how they calculate that.

Yeah, they end up with this gap.

You can't, you can't avoid it.

Yeah.

Went kicking and screaming, trying to do everything he could to get the math to work out, and then finally came to the conclusion, you know, that there was a gap because we would always make Fun of the dispensationalists because they have the gap thing.

That's right.

It was.

One of the strengths of our full preterist argument is that we have no gap.

Well, lo and behold, you do.

Well, what they would do is the way they, they explained it, they gave me a paper to read which basically said, like, yes, the.

The first period of time, literal.

The second period of time, literal.

The third period of time, figurative.

Yeah.

And.

Yeah.

What in the, like, harmonyics, there's got to be a reason that you suddenly change.

You know, you got an agenda going on there.

Correct.

Well, that's the thing I kept saying to them.

Work.

You.

You can't.

It's a square peg going into a circle kind of thing.

And you mentioned this.

The starting point for them, it seems, is math that I, the ones I was debating with is Matthew 24:34.

Okay.

And they start there and then try to read the rest of the Bible into that.

Oh, yeah.

And that's the thing that I kept saying is like you.

Well, it's, It's.

It's a, It's a logical fallacy.

They.

They have a fallacy because they, they.

You have to start with the conclusion.

Right.

And so it's a.

Begging the question of fallacy.

But let me read the passage I referenced.

And that is, it says, truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

So they make a big emphasis, it seems, on this generation.

So it had to have been 70 A.D.

that all these things take place.

And so, like, they start with that.

And one person even said, well, Jesus couldn't give a false prophecy, and this, he is.

Is a prophecy.

Now the debate is really over what is that generation.

Right?

Yes.

Is that the generation that saw the, you know, saw the, the things that we are, you know, like, that we're discussing here.

Or is it.

Is it the generation that sees these signs, or is it the generation that's standing there before Christ?

I will say this if folks listen.

One of the other podcasts we have in the Christian podcast community is called Bible Sojourner.

And Pete Gaiman, who's a seminary professor of Old Testament, went into recently an episode dealing with this, with this verse and showing how the passage here is a future tense.

And so it wouldn't have had to been fulfilled in 70 A.D.

it could have been fulfilled.

He didn't necessarily do that.

He said, this is why I think it's future tense.

But he gave other possibilities, correct?

Yeah, but.

But the thing is, millennial partial Predatorist.

And I'm pointing to the screens as I see them, and you're.

Yeah, yeah.

So you two figure that.

So this generation, that phrase.

There's a wealth of literature.

There's a wealth of literature on it.

And many of the arguments are very.

They have their strengths, weaknesses.

The contemporary idea.

The contemporary idea, that has a lot of strengths to it.

Just because of the usage of this generation.

He's obviously contemporary speaking to.

However, there's.

You go back to the Septuagint and you begin to look at this phrase, this generation, which first occurs in the story of Noah.

And there's a couple of other little phrases.

So people.

Scholars like Ewald, another will note, particularly Deuteronomy, this generation, you know, you have that phrasing there.

And so can that mean brood of vipers.

A.

A generating.

A generating people of vipers, this generation.

And so Jesus is saying, this generation will not pass away until all.

All these things.

Meaning you're going to continue to put up with this kind of people until the end, you know.

Well, okay, I.

Yeah, it gets, you know, regardless, there are multiple ways, I think, in my own work in, in.

In the Greek text is showing that Jesus is.

Even if he is saying all these things, that's in the plural.

All these.

All what things?

Well, if you go to the beginning of Matthew, he tells you what all these things are.

Earthquakes, famines, persecution, hatred.

The gospel will be continued to be preached as a testimony.

There'll be all these kinds of all these things.

These are the beginning things.

These are beginning birth pangs, tribulations, afflictions, earthquakes, financial disaster, you know, all this kind of stuff.

Did that generation see these things?

Yes, but the end, that's separated off.

But the end is not yet so.

G.K.

beale, V.A.

carson, if you want us understand that Jesus is saying, here's all these things, and they're going to continue until the end.

Well, when is the end?

Well, I'm not here to tell you that definite period of time.

Rather than Jesus saying, oh, I'm going to return in this generation, which he never says.

He never says that I'm going to return in this generation.

I'm going to raise the dead in this generation.

He just says all these things will take place in this generation before this generation passes away.

Well, what's going to come after this generation?

Well, another generation.

In other words, time's going to continue on.

Even though I'm the king, I'm the Messiah, all power and judgment, authority is given to me.

I'm at the right hand of the Father I fulfilled.

Psalm 2, Psalm 110, Psalm 16.

All these Psalms are.

Yes, it's all speaking of me.

But there's.

But, but the tribulation, the famines, the earthquakes, wars, rumors of wars.

Those things are going to continue on for how long?

No man knows how long they're.

So what do I got to do in the meantime?

Be awake, be alert, suffer through, persevere, endure.

Oh, that's relevant.

Yeah.

Okay, so I, I think if you take.

And even in the pre.

Millennial circles, you see that idea of alertness, readiness, that kind of thing.

So you, you know, it's an interesting debate.

The only reason, I'm sorry to be long winded, the only reason I bring it up is because here the full predator will seize upon you two brothers and maybe some differences you have.

And that's where we pounced.

That's what this book right here is all about.

And since you two guys debate on what this generation is, the full predator has the answer.

And we, I, I wanted you to speak to that.

So what do you do in spite of your differences and yet you still have these fundamental kind of things?

You know, that's, that's.

As an apologist for full preterism.

We, we seized on that right there as a weakness.

Oh, you guys disagree.

You're fighting.

See, you guys don't even know what this means.

Yeah, you know, so Andrew's.

I know Andrew's method is just to continually tell me I'm wrong, you're wrong.

But no, so, so, so seriously.

So even holding the position, I do the post mill, partial preterist.

Right.

I would hold to the, the Ken Gentry's.

Those are positions that I hold to that I know don't necessarily affect my salvation.

Now if I were to deny the bodily return of Christ, then that would affect my salvation.

You wouldn't be on this.

I wouldn't be on this show.

Well, he might be as someone we're debating.

Right.

So those things don't affect my salvation.

But I know even in Andrew's position, being the dispensational pre millennialists, I know that those things don't necessarily affect his salvation either.

And so we can, we can have these discussions with one another and we can come to different conclusions and we can talk about the hermeneutical methodologies, we can look at how we arrive, find the consistencies, maybe the inconsistencies.

But at the end of the day, we agree on a lot more than just eschatology.

Right?

We agree on the gospel, we agree on who Christ is.

We agree on how you must come to know Christ.

We agree on the bodily return of Christ.

Right.

Those are things that we agree on.

And so because we agree on all those things, we can partner together.

And I can lift up Andrew and encourage him.

He lifts up me and he encourages me.

I mean, I.

Even so when he was talking about Daniel, right.

I did a thing on two years ago, maybe on the 70 weeks, and I sent it to Andrew to say, hey, just listen to this.

You know, I never got any feedback though.

But we've talked about it several times at length.

Two years ago, no feedback.

Well, no, no.

Hey, look, for the record, did, did I not let you come on to this show when I was not here and do a whole show on your view?

That's true.

We did do that.

And you know, and, and that's another thing.

Right.

So there's.

Even holding the position.

I do.

Andrew still trusts me enough to know that I can come on the show.

I can act accordingly.

I'm not going to undermine basically the, the, the feel of the show or the, or the general belief foundation of the show.

And so I have no problem with what Andrew believes.

But it's also that, it's also that I can't hold to.

And I think this is the thing people get a mistake of in end times is we can't hold to it so tightly saying we have absolute knowledge of the truth.

We can do that with the first coming because it's already been fulfilled and documented in scripture.

We don't.

Yeah, we don't have it in the second coming because, you know, like when Christ came the first time, people missed it because they, they had their views and Jesus didn't fulfill what they expected.

Now if you're a full preterist, that means everything is fulfilled.

So there shouldn't be any disagreement.

We shouldn't be able to find anything that we could disagree on like it.

It.

We have to see it all having been fulfilled.

And there's, there's comments.

You know, let me try to get to some of these because there are some people that are raising things that would be interesting to see.

By the way, folks, I would encourage you guys share this on social media right now, especially if, you know, any full preterists, challenge them to come on in and refute us.

I mean, they say their positions unrefutable.

Let me say this real quick, Andrew, just to follow up.

I'm just doubting you could say anything real quick, but, but I'm longer winded than you, so.

Oh, well, But Sam.

So one of the, one of the things that I think benefits me and in my walk with Christ is my friendship with dispensational premillennialists like Andrew, like Justin, like Jim Osmond.

Because I know they're men that if I say something that may be getting a little off into the weeds.

Sure, sure.

They'll confront me and they'll pull me back and they'll talk to me.

And those are things that I need in my life is men who have been around for a while that can recognize that they understand my position, but then they also recognize when I might be getting into something that's contrary to my.

That's a heresy.

Yeah.

And as a minister in Indiana, I'm surrounded by dispensational.

You know, but we all, we love each other, we hold each other accountable, responsibility, all of those kinds of things.

When I see you floating in the weeds over there.

But you know, I, I don't, I just, it's.

You're operating within bounds.

So if I asked Andrew, do you believe in the bodily return and bodily resurrection of the dead?

It's an absolute affirmative.

Okay, then we can, we can fight about the details or whatever, but you know, whatever, as long as you affirm that you're good.

The full predatorist.

All that's off the table.

Every bit of it.

Yeah.

And so I can't have a conversation with you because I don't know what you mean by dead.

Resurrection, death, body.

I don't know what those terms mean.

The, the.

Now I can talk to Andrew or you and mention the word body.

I'm pretty much going to get a straight up definition over here.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Of course.

It's a no brainer.

The full predators.

It's the covenantal somatic body of the transitional change between the covenants.

Yikes.

Well, one of the things in my research on cults that I've always said is cults have.

And I'm not saying they're a cult, I'm just saying it's something that you see within the cults.

But it could be, but I haven't, I haven't done enough research to be make that claim.

But the issue being is one thing I see consistent with the cults is a lack of integrity with language.

They play fast and loose with the definition of words.

And that is, I mean it's, I think it's necessary when you're dealing with cults because they got to be able to make their system work.

Well, like this Lazarus said earlier.

So 1000 equals 40 according to full preterism.

So, yeah, I guess this is Lance.

Some people knew who he was and called him Lance.

But his here he's Lazarus, but it's.

His what, his Eastern Orthodox name.

Okay.

Give you different names.

So.

So, yeah, I mean, that's the whole thing.

It's like all of a sudden, 1,000 really means 40, right?

To make it work.

And, and seven years equals 40 to make it work.

So what they do is they start with the conclusion and then work it backwards.

And that is not how you do any kind of honest, legitimate research.

You don't start with the conclusion unless you're looking to be biased.

Because when you start with your conclusion, there is a logical fallacy called confirmation bias.

And when you start with your conclusion, you're more likely to fall into that because you're looking to prove your conclusion, which you started with, versus saying.

Looking at the text and going through all the scripture to say, okay, does it teach this?

That's a very different way of doing it.

So it's the difference of eisegesis.

Exegesis.

Eisegesis is reading it meaning into the text.

So you start with a conclusion.

You're reading that in exegesis, you're pulling the meaning out.

What the three of us here are doing is exegesis.

We're pulling the meaning out of all these different passages they're reading into it.

How do we know that?

Well, we just gave you the example.

I mean, so 1,000 years equals 40 and 7 years equals 40.

Like the math doesn't work, right?

So here's a civilly minded podcast says, this is incredibly informative and I am grateful for the clarification on a doctrinal fallacy I've rarely, rarely heard defended.

Great panel, Andrew.

So you don't hear.

So they say that they're spreading and all of this.

And, and we were always trying to latch on.

That's why they, they Don Preston latched on to me.

I, I was doing my work at Reformed Theological Seminary.

So I did two years Hebrews at Reformed Theological Seminary there in Orlando.

And so, and, and a lot of the criticism coming out towards or against full preterism was recomm coming from the reformed crowd.

So you had Keith Mathison's book When shall these Things Be, where he gets Charles Hill and Simon Kissmacher and all of these guys out of Ken Gentry, you know, Richard Pratt.

So he was getting these guys out of the reform that was criticizing full preterism.

And I happened to be going to their schools and some of these guys I knew.

So being a full preterist, they latched on to me and say hey, here's one of their guys.

You know, he's in their institutions, Whitfield Theological Seminary.

You know, here's this guy because they're looking for any latching on to legitimacy because there is none.

There is no biblical scholar of merit that is a full preterist.

They don't exist.

Now you'll find preterists, you'll find that kind of stuff, but you will not find any body of a caliber of a, you know, Tom Wright or you know, GK Bill or Carson or Kessler or any of these guys that eat, sleep and breathe this stuff for 50 years at home in the languages, several languages.

And they're quite at home with them, these kinds of guys.

And they've been, you know, reading and writing on this, published, peer reviewed and all this kind of stuff going up for, for decades.

You won't find anything like that that's full predator.

It's just not going to happen.

You will find it in the amillennial world, you'll find a bibliotheca sacra, you'll find it in the pre millennial Dallas Theological Seminary world, you'll find post millennialism in the sky.

But full preterism, it's, it's not on, it's not on the map.

The reason why and my colleagues and people that I've sent this out to over the years since I've left, they've read it and they just shake their head and it says no way.

I would rather so the and I'll say this and you guys discuss this so that you, you have this Bible believing such as we are.

I am Jesus is a failed prophet.

Because in higher criticism or these critical schools, I'll say Bart Ehrman, there's a good representative of that.

Jesus did say he was going to come in that generation and all things would take place before you finish going through the cities of Israel.

The some of you standing here will not taste death until the Son of Man comes in the power of his glory.

So it certainly sounds like however that was written way after the fact, Jesus was a failed prophet.

He may have originally historically had said such things, but then you've got this kind of COVID up redactionism going on that we've got to start adding this long period of time because the first century and we're coming into the second century now and there's been no return of Jesus.

And so now you got a delay of the Parousia that's going on and stretching out and out of this, the church is born and they have to scramble around.

Why didn't Jesus say what he was going to say?

Or why didn't it happen when he said it was going to happen?

That's, that's that context that these discussions take place.

And the full predator's answer to that is, it did happen spiritually in 70 A.D.

that's their answer.

Or Jesus is a failed prophet.

That's a, That's a.

That hooked me in.

I can't have Jesus being a failed prophet if that's the case.

I'm done with the.

Yeah, I'm.

Well, church life is over.

I'm done.

It's like I got other things to do.

That was the argument that one of them used with me, though, with that passage in, in Matthew saying that Christ prophesied that the generation he was speaking to.

And, and yet.

But if you read just.

I mean, I know this is a crazy idea when you read context, just back up a few verses, right?

But what's he talking about?

He says in verse 32, now learn the parable from the fig tree when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves.

You know that summer is near.

Right.

So he's giving you, okay, here's the signs of looking at a fig tree, that summer's going to be near.

So you too, when you see these things, recognize that he is near right at the door.

Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

So he, He's.

He's talking about signs, right?

Yep.

So it becomes a thing where it's the reality.

What we have to do is look and say, is something.

A plausible interpretation of a text.

Yeah, yeah.

And we can't just reject it because it doesn't go with what we want it to say.

Right.

And so we.

Because if he's saying if this is.

If the generation is the one standing in front of Christ, this is their.

I think it seems like their biggest argument they keep making with me at least was, see, then.

Then it had to have been fulfilled.

Well, I, I push back and say, some of you standing here will not taste death until you see the sentiment.

You know, that seems to be a pretty contemporary.

Well, I, I actually think that's an easy one because the, the problem is that.

You know what?

Well, the problem is that we put a chapter break right there.

Because if you look right after that, what happens?

It says eight days later, the transfiguration, where they where they saw those things.

Plausible to argue that.

Yeah, it is.

Right.

It fits perfectly with the context.

Yeah.

So there was.

There were a couple passages to look at.

Michael asked this one, he said, how does this relate to Zachariah 14?

Yeah, so.

So let me bring up Zechariah 14:16.

And.

And he is a pre millennialist, so, you know, that we.

Another word for that would be biblical.

I just figured I'd leave that out there.

I usually.

I'm leaving.

But.

But Zechariah 14:16 says.

Translated and worked through that for many, many, many years.

And it just boggles a lot of people both.

It's.

The prophets, I think, were just.

The prophets were just caught up in such an overwhelming revelation of the Spirit and an ecstatic.

Just overwhelming.

And trying to use words to write down the end.

Just.

Just like what just happened to me.

The genius of their writings is that we just keep coming back.

Like, what.

What is he?

In other words, it's.

It's like.

It just keeps.

It's like the word of God.

It just keeps saying, come back and read me again.

You think you got me figured out?

Come back and read me again.

And it's that word that invites.

It draws us.

And I think Jesus is doing that in John 6, the word, he's the word.

And are you going to leave me too, because of what I've said?

Eat my flesh, drink my blood?

Which is incredibly shocking.

And a lot of people left him when he said that because that's just like, I can't take.

But then Peter says, where else will we go?

Will we go?

I don't understand what you're saying, but your words keep drawing me back in, and I want to understand.

And I keep reading it, and I'm devoting myself to your Word.

And the prophets operate very much like that.

So I love Zechariah 14 because it just keeps reading it and you keep reading it and you're like, man, this is amazing.

What does he say?

And it's frustrating too.

But that's the thing of it.

That's.

Well, this is the issue with.

With future prophecy.

There's some pieces and parts missing.

And you're like, well, I think the.

Issue is when we're on the other side of it, it's gonna be like, oh, that was crystal clear.

Why did we miss this?

Yeah.

So.

So Zechariah 14:16 says this.

Then it will come about that any who are left of all the nations that went out against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the king.

The Lord of Hosts and to celebrate the Feast of Booths.

So I think what Michael's argument there, he was saying is, well, it seems like if all the prophecy is over, then he has to be physically there, reigning, you know, for all the nations to come to him.

Thank you for mentioning that, because the full predators will use that.

And Don Preston will ask you if you guys spot this.

Don Preston and myself.

We would argue that after the day of the lord and after 70 A.D.

so after 70 A.D.

there's this continuation of evangelism and this, that and the other.

Right.

And we would symbolize the festival of Booths as coming to Christ.

So Christ is becoming our covering and all that.

So we would do all that spiritualizing.

However, if Zechariah is prophesying that after the day of the Lord, on this basis of interpretation, if he is saying that, then isn't that a prophecy that's ongoing and is not yet exhaustively fulfilled?

If you have a continuation after 70 A.D.

that.

Yeah, prophecy that's telling me after 70 A.D.

what is being prophesied that's going to happen, then not all prophecy was fulfilled in 78.

Correct.

You can't have both ways.

Yeah, and they fall on their own sphere here.

This was one of the reasons why I left out of the many reasons.

That was one of them.

It's like you can't get around that.

So now you've got this interesting group within full preterism called Israel Only.

And they literally believe that there is no evangelization.

Evangelization.

After 70 AD it was all fulfilled.

The gospel was only meant to be preached to that generation, those nations, gentiles, that got saved under Paul's ministry.

And then that was fulfilled by seven.

And then that's it.

Yeah, that's it.

Well, but the evangelical fool predators like Don Preston, Mike Sullivan, they realize if they go that route, they've shot themselves.

And you're never going to make an appeal to the evangelical world, which is what they want to do.

They want at the same table.

And so they have to have this.

Well, death is destroyed for those that are in Christ, but it's not destroyed for those that are not in Christ.

So death is no more in the new heavens and new earth now for those that are in Christ, but death still.

And I'm like, but revelation says death is thrown into the lake of fire.

You can't see where it starts.

Yeah, it falls apart.

Starts falling apart there.

It just.

It starts falling apart.

Because now you got to make stuff up.

You got to make up these categories and and but how do you also.

How do you also deal with the idea of sin and that sin.

Well, they, the argument they made with me is that sin ended at the consequence of sin ended at the cross.

And so therefore there, there, there is no sin anymore.

So with the.

And that's where I was frustrated because like.

Well, now you're redefining what sin is.

Like, that's not what was meant by it.

So hold on, hold on.

So if so we understand the idea of the consequence of sin ending once you come to faith in Christ, but that doesn't mean you stop sinning.

So are they, Would they say that there is no more sin?

Ask my wife.

If I continue to just look at me like what?

Yeah, well, I, I tell my wife that I don't sin and she just gives me a look like she agrees.

I, I think that's what that look means.

Right, but then wouldn't that's what that look means, right?

If there is.

Because if they're viewing the idea that the consequence of sin is gone as there is also no, no more sin, then wouldn't they be universalist then?

Because then we.

Max King.

Yeah.

We can't, we can't therefore be sinners then.

So no matter what we believe, we go to heaven anyway.

Right?

Because in Max King, who is the.

Wrote the mammoth 800 page cross in the Pharisee of Christ, that is the Bible of full preterism as far as I'm concerned.

That's the book that got me in.

That's, that is the one.

So he in that book was arguing along evangelical lines.

But later on in his life he wrote a book called irrevocable Romans 9 through 11 where he, he's universalist because death is destroyed for all redemption has come to the whole world.

God has reconciled the entire world to himself and so, so all are saved from Adam till whenever unfathomable end of history sun burns out.

The Cosmos stops some 5 billion years from now.

Whatever.

Who knows?

Yeah.

It's so crazy.

Yeah.

So.

So get along in your lives.

Love one another.

Justice, love, mercy.

Walk humbly.

If, if you have such an undeniable view, why do you have to play such games with words?

You know?

Oh, it's a complete paradigm shift.

It's a total different way of thinking.

Yeah.

So from everyday language and, and folks, I'll just, I'll remind folks, share this out, especially if you know any full preterists that want to join.

But you know, we, there's no full preterists that have come in Yet.

But I, I do think it only fair to even up the sides here and bring in some more biblical views.

So here's Aaron Brewster, a fellow premillennialist.

So now we get, now at least we have a 50%.

Aaron is one of, the, one of the speakers at Striving for Eternity and he is a regular guest coast here.

So I think.

Sam.

Sam, right.

Yes.

Yeah, I think we've either, I think we've been on the same show before.

Yeah, we've.

Okay.

So yeah, he's, you're seeing me very familiar to me.

I remember liking you.

Yeah.

I don't know if it's, if it was true or not.

Aaron, were you at the, the pre conference to the why Calvinist conference?

Did you make it to the pre conference?

That's where I met Andrew.

Yeah.

If you, I think if you were there that the pre conference, Sam and Sam and Jeremiah were.

Yes.

Yeah.

Your hair was longer.

Yeah.

And I do remember.

Yes.

Yeah.

Yep.

And the other, you know we have, we have a question here from, from the Apologetic Dog and, and, and I think, don't you think we should ignore his questions until he comes in here because now that it's after his two year old's bedtime.

So, so, so he, he, he sends Sam and I a message saying, you know, he, he can't come in until 9 Central Time because he's got to put his, his or 8 o'clock central time because he got to put his two year old to bed because his wife is sick.

And, and I, I basically said in there that well that's fine, come in whenever you could because Sam and I will just make fun of Jeremiah until he comes in.

So maybe I'll be in a 955.

Yeah, he's actually been, been in twice because he's in under his YouTube and he's in under his Facebook.

Yeah, so he's, so he's, he's, he's watching on both.

So there you go.

But I do think Jeremiah should come in here.

But he does ask this question for you, Sam.

He's, he says ask Sam about Covenant creation.

Full preterists.

And so this is a term I'm unfamiliar with.

So same.

What are they?

Who are they?

What do they believe?

Who are these people?

Well, it's this book here Beyond Creation Science and New Covenant Creation from Genesis to Revelation by Timothy Martin and Jeffrey Vaughn.

And this book is endorsed by, in the endorsements Don K.

Preston, Walt Hibbard, Terry Hall, Virgil Vaduva.

Some of these guys go back A few years are no longer here.

Jim Castler, full predator.

Richard Duncan, full predator.

Norman Boss, who's a full predator.

Timothy King, who.

Max King's son, who published my work.

Jeremy Lyle, Michael Loomis, who has since gone completely awol.

But anyway, that's, that's this book here.

So the book here, which I was.

I'm in this book, they quote me quite a bit because this was written back in 2005 and I was still full predators.

We were a lot of conferences, a lot of stuff going on.

So I know Tim, I know Jeff, and we talked extensively and I told him, you know, I'm not going to go that route.

But the basic thing is this second Peter, chapter three is 70 AD, right?

So all that de Creation language, heaven and earth passing and all that kind of stuff.

And since that 70 AD which is obviously apocalyptic and symbolic language of the temple and the land in 70 AD, but yet the language is a cosmogenic language that's found in Genesis.

Right.

Then the language of Genesis is also apocalyptic, metaphorical, symbolic language of the covenant creation of Israel.

And so Israel is heaven and the land.

And so the destruction of heaven and the land is the destruction of Israel in 70 AD and so Adam is not the first human being.

Adam is the first covenant man that was plucked out of humanity.

God makes a covenant, he exiles him, which is just a recapitulation of the story of the exodus of Israel, Egypt in the land, plucked out, brought into the.

And all that kind of stuff and everything and so forth and so on.

So that you get to 70 A.D.

you can see that this is very elaborate.

Yeah.

And.

And it is, it's this, this is a.

Quite, quite elaborate to get to 70 AD.

So you start with 70 AD is the truth.

And then you go back and you reread the entire Bible now in that light and reinterpret the entire, the entire Bible in the light of 70 AD fulfillment.

That's full preterism.

And they applied it to Genesis 1:3.

So is that going to have any difference in the way that you read Genesis?

Well, we're going to be two ships passing in the night.

We, we don't have anything in common at this point now we're just sailing on two different ships.

And yet we're, we're all evangelical Christians.

And see, that's when this stuff started coming around.

That's when my break began to happen.

I thought this is way.

This is getting.

This is getting.

I mean, we don't know what body is.

We don't know what death is.

We don't know what sanctification means.

We don't know what resurrection means.

And now we don't even know what creation means.

We don't know what it is.

Well, it's, it's the redefinition of all the terminology.

So that's what happens.

So now the whole game has changed, the whole ball game's change with, with this book here and one of your, I guess, Jeremiah's Baptist minister friends, Zach Davis, who was a dear friend with Jeremiah, is now running a full predator church.

And he's the new darling and he's now adopted this.

He's bought hook, line and sinker.

Wow.

He's bought the whole.

Bought the whole farm.

But why not, you know, if every, if the church has been wrong for 1900 years on the return of the Lord, maybe they're wrong about the Trinity and the Bible and creation.

Maybe it's wrong about everything, you know.

But anyway, that I don't have.

I can't come into this conversation from a scholarly perspective in regard to any form of criterism.

I understand basically what it is, but I.

Man, Sam, you, you bring such a wealth of knowledge to this, and so I can't bring that, but I think I can bring what I, what I try to bring every time I have an opportunity to be on the show is kind of a practical, real world understanding of why people like to, like to believe things like this.

And I see it a lot.

There's a, there's a reoccurrence recently in this idea of mysticism.

Now I'm not saying that mysticism and preterism are the same thing.

I'm saying that they have similar roots.

Mysticism in the church is huge.

You know, God told me this.

And I'm not even talking about talking about like, you know, independent Baptist churches.

I'm talking about Reformed churches.

This language is there.

They're not saying that they received visions or anything like that, but it's this language of God told me I needed to do this and God gave me peace and so on and so forth.

And there's a lot of overlap with that and this desire to be able to completely wrap our hands around the scriptures and claim that we understand it all.

But that understanding requires so much spiritualization, so much symbolism, so much interpreting, interpreting things that the scriptures have written as, that was historical fact.

This is a literal fulfillment, whatever the case may be, and seeing it as something it's not.

And I would just, I just warn everybody, I warn myself as an independent fundamental Baptist, dispensational.

I warn everyone here, I warn everyone in the chat that is.

It's very easy for us because we are so limited and so impotent to want to get our hands around certain portions of scripture, the entirety of Scripture, and really be like, I understand this.

Oh, yes, I.

I get how this over here and that over there, and there's that tendency to take the scriptures and to play loose and fast with it and to twist it and want to see things that aren't there.

And the next thing we know, we're slipping into mysticism, we're slipping into predators, and we're believing that all of them have been.

We're slipping into those guys.

I was debating, not debating, I was comment debating with last week, who is also saying that, you know, no, the sin isn't a thing anymore because look at all these verses that say that, you know, Christians don't sin and so on and so forth.

It's just something that we slip into.

And here's my encouragement for everybody.

If you are not comfortable with the paradoxical tensions of the scripture, then you're not comfortable with God, because God is beyond our ability to understand God.

If we could understand him, he wouldn't be God.

We would be God.

So if, if you are, if you just find yourself uncomfortable, so uncomfortable with a passage that you have to run to the Internet, and the first thing that just seems like, oh, it kind of makes sense.

You're like, okay, that must be what it is.

You're gonna be in a dangerous, dangerous place.

We need to appreciate the fact that God is communicative.

He does want us to understand him, but there's a limit to that understanding.

There really is.

And there will be things, There will be things in the scripture that in eternity we will be learning about the Bible and we'll be going, wow.

Wow.

I never would have.

I would never would have understood that.

We see Christ, we see other portions where portions of the Old Testament are taken and applied to things in the New Testament, that if it hadn't been written in the New Testament, there's not a theological scholar on the planet who would have ever known there was a connection between those two events.

We never would have known God had to tell us that.

So be okay with that tension.

Be okay with that level of discomfort and pursue it.

Pursue knowing God.

Pursue knowing His Word.

That would be my encouragement to us all.

No, yeah, yeah.

You know, I, I had you got my post millennial brothers, my pre millennial brothers, my dispensational, you know, you're bringing something to the table, an angle that I might be missing over here, you know, a little angle, little nugget I could pick up off of, off of that and then utilize it like, hey, yeah, let me shift that around here a little bit.

But we're within that bound of those.

We were talking earlier of the fund of these fundamental.

Where we all agree, we, you know, these are, these are our limits.

We're not going to go beyond these.

And, but it is interesting, and it's an interesting thing about cults that they go outside the bounds and they want you to have an open mind and all that.

But they have a stranglehold on the absolute truth that they have.

And they've got it all figured out.

So does that make sense?

Yeah, all the time.

And they've got it all figured out.

And so now you're back in, you're like in this really tight system.

Yeah.

Can't get out of it.

Well, see, you know, things to take dogmatic statements other people have made and completely apply them and reinterpret them in different ways, but they don't allow anyone to take their dogmatic statements and do the opposite.

Which the Bible has a fun word for.

It's called hypocrisy.

We all need to be careful of that.

Yeah, right.

Yeah.

I mean the thing, the thing is, is that, and I say this all the time when dealing with cults and people have to recognize that every system has a solution to their problems.

They will work a way to make it.

They'll come up with some life saving device to save the system.

And it could be the most bizarre thing, the example I give.

And Sam, this will be new to you, but some in the audience probably heard this, even though I haven't told this story for several years, probably by now.

So I had a guy contact the ministry, Jewish guy, he knows that I'm from a Jewish background, wants to convert me back to Judaism.

And so he asked whether I would be willing to meet him and have some dinner.

Okay.

So he makes the argument that only the rabbis can answer the difficult questions of the Bible.

Okay, what questions?

So here was the thing.

He said, well, David was a man after God's own heart, so David could not have sinned.

Now, okay, again, we all see a problem there.

But he says, so David couldn't have killed Uriah and couldn't have had an adulterous affair with Bathsheba.

And so what do they.

So this is a dilemma that the, the rabbis themselves create.

So then they are the only Ones with the solution.

And so the solution was that what happened was Uriah was going off to war and they would have two forms of divorce, A permanent divorce and a temporary divorce.

And so this temporary divorce was in case they didn't come home so that the wife wasn't destitute, she could remarry someone if he doesn't, you know, and just assume he's dead.

And so Uriah gave Bathsheba a permanent divorce.

And therefore when Uriah comes back and is invited back, the reason David asked for him to come back was because David knew he wouldn't go back to his home to sleep with his ex wife because they're not married anymore.

And that's why he stayed with the dogs and didn't go to his home.

And so which makes no sense that you know, it's like, okay, and that's why he helped him get a little drunk and kept him over the next night, right?

No.

So you say, well then why did he have Uriah killed if Uriah is such a righteous man?

Oh, because Uriah called David Lord and that's blasphemy.

It's like, but the word Lord, it was not the word for Yahweh, it was the word he would use for a king.

Right.

And so no matter what answer I came up with, they find a way to save the system.

And that's what I find here is all this twisting of words and language.

And we'll take this, phys, take this literal, but now the same passage will take figurative whatever we have to, to save the system.

It sounds very talmudic.

Yeah, yeah, they go great elaborations just on a very simple point.

Yeah.

If you want to be the only person with the solution, you have to be the person who created the problem.

And that's exactly, Andrew, what you're describing.

They create this problem that only they can solve, but it's only the only reason that the problem exists and needing solution is the fact that they created it in the first place.

Because otherwise that passage is very easy to understand.

Yeah, well, and you know, if you read Dr.

Jason Lyle has a book, the the Ultimate Proof of Creation where he talks about life saving devices and gives examples of them and shows how people do that.

Let me get to some of the other comments that Drew starred here.

This one will be a quick one.

Kathy was asking you the question, is Gary Demar a full preterist?

So he's changed his views.

So she's asking whether he is now a full preterist.

So we got together with A few of us leaders in the reformed community, whatever, because we were noticing a drift of Gary DeMars, you know, he was drifting over, and he spoke at our conferences when I was a full predator and spoke at these conferences.

So Gary would show up and be invited, and he would accept, which I.

That I don't.

Guilt by association.

I don't have any issues.

I.

I'll speak at an atheist conference if I'm invited.

You know, I.

I was.

I was invited.

I was invited to speak.

I don't know how, but I was invited to speak at a flat Earth convention.

And if you're paying my fair.

Well, I.

I've always said, hey, as.

As long as you're not going to restrict me.

They.

So they asked me what my topic would be, and I said I would listen, love to speak on why the earth must be a sphere.

And I never heard back from them.

I don't know why the head explodes.

Like, I don't know where they got my name to invite me to such a thing, but it was like, okay, hey, if you're gonna have me speak, I'll be happy to.

So Gary was asked years ago, would you ever condemn full preterism as heresy?

And absolutely not.

No.

So he's very clear on that.

You know, I think that they're, you know, wrong on some few issues, and these issues need to be studied out.

And I've known Gary, you know, this way, kind of talks, you know, they need to study this out.

We need to see, you know, and I'm no expert, you know.

Yeah, you've been writing books since the 1990s, but whatever.

You figure after a couple of decades, you, you know, they're called doctors, you know, people, you know, that study stuff for 20 years, you know, be an expert there, kind of, you know, so.

But anyway, you know, I'm still studying it, still looking at it.

So that's his evasive kind of way.

Not bothered that was starting to bother, you know, God forbid that it bothers us.

I guess we're not supposed to be bent out of shape or whatever, but.

So we.

We confronted because we were hearing on his podcast, in different interviews, we were hearing things that when you die, you get your body in heaven.

And I thought, oh, red flag, red flag right there.

When you die, you get your body in heaven.

That's.

That's a view within full preterism that alleviates the resurrection of the dead.

When we die, we get our body in heaven, and heaven is the new heavens and new earth kind of thing.

So that's that's the route they go off.

And you know, we really need to look at what Paul's saying about what Bobby means.

It could be a corporate body.

And so clearly he's exploring, but yet he's a teacher.

And not only that, I've been reading Gary Demar stuff since the late 1980s.

I've got some of his original stuff that goes back to 89 and 90, 91.

So he has been very influential in the Reformed, pre, millennial or form post millennial, Reformed Baptist, Reformed Baptist, post.

He's been very influential in that world in his writings and all of that kind of stuff.

So.

And theocracy and Reconstructionism and all that.

So for him to come down and say that, that as full preterist, that opens that door up.

You see, you remember at the beginning of the thing I was talking about legitimacy.

See, that just cracks that door open because Gary Demar is no slouch.

So that cracks that door open and saying, see, Gary accepts us and that lets us in.

And I'm wanting to shut the door.

Just.

No, I'm not.

You can't come in here.

That's.

That's really the issue.

So then we ask him, do you believe in the end of history?

Do you believe in the resurrection, bodily resurrection of that and the bodily return of the Lord?

And he did not answer.

They said, these things are not as defined as what you think that they are in the scriptures and they need further study.

And that's where he's at now.

Now, is he a full predator?

No, he's still operating under a post millennial global evangelism kind of a thing.

And eventually, you know, help, help me out here, you know, this Christianization of, of civilization emerging and all of that.

And it's going to take however long that's going to take.

So he still has that going on, which is a fulfillment of prophecy as, as post millennial is to understand these things, which is.

That's.

I have empathy with that and understand it.

So that wouldn't make him a full predatorist.

However.

However, if everything is fulfilled in 70 AD and now being applied post, he's trying to answer the post 7080 problem.

And that's where he gets stuck.

He's.

He's stuck.

It's the.

You're damned if you do, you're damned if you don't.

He can't.

He doesn't know how to.

He has no end of history either.

Maybe one.

Yeah, it's that really indifferent, evasive kind of thing where Gary's at Which I would call full predatorism.

I.

So yes, I would say Gary is a full predator.

Okay.

More or less.

Or less, if that makes sense.

Does he, does he call himself one now?

Does he call himself a full predator right now or.

No, no.

Okay.

He will not.

Yeah, he.

I'm not this.

I'm not that.

I'm not this.

I don't believe in that.

I don't believe in that.

I, you know.

Okay.

And then he said, but you said you get a new body in him.

Well, you know, I'm looking at the issue.

Yeah, well, it's always good to.

It's always good to.

Teaching.

Well, for folks who are regular here, if they remember back when Godless Grandma came in, that was.

That was her tactic.

Everything, Everything.

You know, she would, she would come up with an argument and every time you answered it.

Well, I, I don't really know about that.

I, I don't.

I'm not.

I, I gotta.

I haven't studied that.

I, you know.

Yeah, you know, and the classic, the classic in there was the part that, I don't know, maybe I should play it.

But the classic was when she, she brought up the issue of that Christians, like, the danger of Christianity was that we were not taking vaccines and people were dying because of COVID She brought it up and then like six minutes later, I'm saying to her, you know, I'm like, I gave her six minutes of me and Drew giving her answers to the COVID vaccine, to which she gets frustrated, says, you know, I'm not prepared to talk about that.

That wasn't supposed to be a topic.

You know, you bring these things up and you throw it at me.

And I'm like, you brought it up, Kelly.

And she's like, I did not.

Well, okay, maybe I did.

I'd like to meet Godless Grandma.

Oh, I like the name, though.

That's a good.

She, she.

She was an interesting.

Yeah, it.

That was fun.

So let me put some more of the comments here.

We got special.

This Elton help says special thanks to Dr.

Frost for sharing his knowledge and expertise on the subject.

It's been an honor working with him and learning from him.

God bless you.

To make my head really big.

Well, then we got this.

Well, so I'm just going to read this as it is.

And I mean, I'll just, you know, haps Addison says what?

Full pretty view on community and baptism.

Now, I did, I did say if there was ever any evidence I could buy of.

Of Bigfoot, there it is.

And even his English would fit the Way.

If Bigfoot could speak, what in the world was he trying to say?

I think I can interpret this and I don't know if I should be proud of myself.

Yeah.

What do you speak in tongues?

I think he's saying, what is full preterism?

What is full preterism's view on communion and baptism?

Haps.

I'm sorry.

Okay.

On communion and baptism, we are gonna.

Have to wait to see if.

If haps.

Comments in the.

In the community.

Yeah, As a biblical counselor, I.

I have to.

I have to interpret a lot of stuff that I get verbally and written and I think that's my best guess.

We will have to see if Hap says that's right.

But.

Okay, let's go with that.

What would be full preterm's view on Communion and baptism?

33 ascension to 70 AD no longer applicable.

Really?

So.

So you do show forth the Lord's death until he can.

Well, he can't.

Yeah, well, you don't need to do that anymore.

Okay.

Same with baptism.

Baptism.

Like Mike Sullivan would argue that baptism's.

Note that was a Jewish thing from the transition generation from the Jewish Old Covenant to the in Christ New Covenant, Transitional generation from Ascension of Christ to 70 A.D.

baptism was a symbolic gesture of getting out of that old covenant, coming into the New covenant.

But now that we're fully in the new covenant, new heavens and new earth, you know.

You know, take it or leave it.

Okay, so kind of along the same lines then, maybe Kathy is asking the question, what does verse for what is.

First Corinthians 11:26.

Whenever you eat of this bread and drink of this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

So I guess it'd be a similar thing there.

Yeah, the church has been wrong on that then.

According to them.

Yeah.

So Darren Steed says, excellent topic.

Wish I had gotten here sooner.

Well, that's your own fault, Darren.

You know we always start 8:00 Eastern Time.

You should just be here.

You should be here at 7:30.

In fact, actually, I'm going to tell you this.

I.

I got a private message sent to me.

Sam, I know you just read this.

He.

Someone says to me, what sovereign timing for this conversation.

I've just got a friend or.

Sorry, I got a friend who just came over and told me on Monday that he's gone full preterist and he and I are supposed to have a talk soon.

Wow.

So get a hold of me.

Yeah.

So can I give him your email?

I get a lot of emails.

Probably Three or four a week of that very kind of thing.

I've been.

Yeah, I get a lot of emails.

Churches, church pastors, elders.

We've had to operate some excommunications because the people were just being very, very, very divisive.

They wouldn't go away.

And I'm like, that's just disruptive.

And look, if I'm going to a dispensationalist church, I'm not going to go in there proclaiming.

I'm going to respect the.

You know, it's just respect.

It's just common courtesy.

Don't do that.

So that just tells me something about you right there.

When you start doing that, that kind of stuff.

It's like, you know.

Yeah.

Know where you're at and read a room and.

Yeah, a lot of these guys are very disruptive.

And you said, you know, you did a lot of counseling and stuff in psychology.

What, you know, what's the reasoning behind that?

What, because you think you've got the truth and everybody needs to hear it.

Yeah, well, the.

We all believe what we believe, and we believe it passionately.

And as Christians, we try to take everything that we believe back to biblical command, you know, backwards, the biblical truth.

And so it's the same thing that happened to the.

The fundamentalists in the 80s, 90s, in the early 2000s.

And I think to a large degree, some of them still today, there's, you know, not understanding the degrees of separation, not understanding that there are certain things you absolutely must separate from somebody over, and certain things that it's okay that they believe differently than you, it's okay that they dress differently than you, but it's.

It's really.

What it is, is pride and arrogance.

It's arrogance that I am right.

I.

I cannot be wrong on this subject.

You have to be wrong on this subject.

And if that's the case, if there's no wiggle room for you to potentially be right or for there to be liberty in this, then I have to convince you that you're wrong.

And I'm going to take every opportunity I can to do that.

Yeah.

So another thing, another thing.

We got Claude.

Claude Ramsey says y'all should check out one of the more recent debates with Dr.

Frost.

Did.

We did a review on it.

So if you.

The review.

I asked him where to find that review.

And if you're on YouTube, it's the here I Stand theology podcast.

Huh.

And I'm the best.

I mean, there's Ward Finley who says, I don't sin anymore.

He's Perfect.

And we had fun with that one.

William Bell, who's been around for a long 30 years, he's with Don Preston.

William Bell's like one of the pioneers, I think.

Anyway, it's all on YouTube.

Yeah.

So.

So specifically, somebody was saying in the, in the chat that they thought that you were saying that we don't need to take the Lord's Supper anymore.

I said, I believe that you were speaking from the perspective of the preterist.

Correct.

Accurate.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah.

Very big believer in Eucharist and the Lord.

Yes, yes.

Yeah.

So we need the Lord's table.

Okay.

And baptism.

Yeah, absolutely.

So Claude, the, the, the, the review that Claude did of your debate that he's referring to is the Here I Stand Theology podcast.

And it is here.

Here I Stand Theology podcast with special guest Sam Frost stuff.

Who.

I really appreciate, Donnie.

Now I'm, I'm gonna say I don't.

Sam, I don't know what, what's going to happen with this.

But he, he, he.

Claude sent this to me and asked if for me to show this on screen if I could find it.

Let's see.

Oh, I think I have to.

Let's see.

It doesn't let me do just the.

I'd end up erasing the entire program if I was doing what you're doing.

Yeah, well, the thing is, he sent it to me as a, as a picture, so I gotta, I gotta pull it up as a picture because there's just a problem when you share.

You can't share stuff in, in with Stream Yard.

It just doesn't let me share as a.

So here.

It doesn't let me share from it, from the texts.

So here.

He wants this.

He puts.

He.

Maybe you can explain this.

What in the world is this?

Oh, my God.

It Sundays.

But whatever.

Dr.

Sam Frost, he sent me a shirt.

That was the shirt.

I get this package in the mail and I'm like, what is this?

Claude Rans.

And that's the shirt.

And I wear that because in the debate I, There's a part where I said, yeah, but whatever.

He thought, I gotta make a shirt, and he sent me a shirt that's my picture.

So we get back to, we get back to.

Again.

You have friends that like to give you gifts?

Yeah, I get these gifts and stuff.

People send me things.

All right, So I love the shirt.

And people don't understand it at all.

And they think I have a big inflated ego and I, I probably.

I, I don't, you know, I don't know.

Yeah.

So let me.

Let me put up the.

What do you say about ego?

What.

What do you say?

So if you.

20 years, Pastor, you've got experience.

20 years.

20 years, 25 years, 30.

So you've been around the block and you're still in.

You're still in the field, you're still doing the work and all this other stuff.

How do you and I deal.

I.

I deal with this a lot because I work also cognitive behavioral therapy.

I teach that in the.

The Henry County Correctional Facility here.

So we, you know, this idea of humbling yourself and walking humbly, but yet at the same time, have you accomplished anything?

And are you supposed to talk about them?

Well, or you're so full of yourself.

There's a big difference between confidence and pride.

Right.

And.

And, you know, people want to attribute confidence.

If, If I'm.

If I'm an expert in a field and I know how to do that and I'm confident, it doesn't mean that I'm prideful.

But now I could be prideful about it.

Arrogant.

There's a difference.

Correct?

Correct.

Yeah.

All right.

So the other side of that is.

And I know you want to transition, Andrew, but the other side of this, this is a huge thing, and people misunderstand that to speak honestly about oneself is not prideful.

I've talked to individuals, I won't go into the whole story, but basically, they would almost rather deceive when asked about what they do.

They would rather so downplay what they do almost to make it seem meaningless so that they don't come across sounding prideful when all they're doing is just giving the honest answer about what it is they do in their life.

You know, And I think that the church, a lot of.

A lot of churches in particular, have gotten this idea of humility that you can't ever, ever say anything nice about yourself.

You can't ever, even if it's just about an accurate statement, lest you be prideful or come across as prideful.

And that's.

That's not biblical.

Yeah.

So let me just put this.

Here's your next book.

There you go.

You know, he just.

I hear this all the time.

So you get these degrees and.

And I don't care.

You know, the degrees are because I like reading.

And someone said, you know, you like reading so much, you might as well get some degrees while you're at it.

Well, okay, so.

But it's not a but.

If I bring them up, especially in some circles of the church, it's like, well, that's just man made degrees.

You just, they didn't come and I don't know how to respond.

It's like, man, I'm not trying to be what prideful.

I'm.

But I thank God that I did go through Semin.

I, I very thankful for the people that I met and the professors and the, the whole experience.

It was a real mind stretching.

I got stretched and grew.

And you learn a lot.

You go, you, you know, you go into seminary thinking you have all the answers.

You come out with go going, all I got is questions.

Right.

So, but, but it's good.

You know, you mentioned for Aaron, that's his next book because obviously Aaron, you know, Sam's been checking you out because he, he knows that you finally wrote your first book, which is.

I got in my hand right here and it's called Quit, Quit.

How to Stop Family Strife for good by a.m.

brewster.

That's a bold claim.

Yeah.

And what's really hilarious about it is that with a title like that, it's 100 pages long.

Yeah.

So not only is it going to stop down.

We strive for good, but it's going to do it succinctly.

Yeah.

It's going to do it quickly.

All right, so let's let us.

I know we don't have a lot of time, but let us bring someone back from the dead.

Lazarus is here.

Or Lance.

Hi.

What's up?

So back from the dead, and I'm here to say full preterism is nonsense.

I've been there.

I've been there, done that with him.

Single handedly destroyed an entire Facebook.

Full predator room.

He almost single handedly destroyed the entire.

So Lazarus, you or Lance?

Your name is Lance, right?

If I, if I remember correctly.

Yeah, you can call me whatever.

Okay, Whatever.

Yeah, that's fine.

I mean, if that's.

If that's what you want to go by.

So whatever you, you work with Sam.

That's what I do on the street when I'm on the street doing evangelism.

And I want to get someone's name so I could be respectful to them and, and they'll give me something like whatever or, you know, you don't need to know.

I go, that's a funny name.

But if that's what your mom called you.

Okay.

So you don't need to know.

I got a question for you.

And I keep doing that till they get so frustrated they finally give me their name.

I was trying to make that funny meme that he just got earlier where it said, okay, whatever.

But yeah, didn't Work, too.

Well, yeah, y'all can call me Lance.

It's fine.

So you work with Sam, from what I gathered.

You get questions or comments?

Yes, Lance.

I've known him for, what, 20, 15.

20 years now?

20 years.

So he was a full printer.

Said that?

Yeah.

That's funny.

All right, that's crazy.

I've known Sam for a long time now.

It's kind of.

Wow, you hate to admit it's been that long.

Live that long.

Damn.

It was that long.

Yeah.

And he went to a few conferences, so there used to be a lot of conferences from 2003 to 2008.

There was probably like four or five a year, and then that died down.

Now you're getting, I think, Don Preston's Preterist Pilgrim Weekend.

You have David Curtis, the Brand Bible, and then Zach Davis here.

He.

Here's.

This guy coming in again.

Is starting to have.

So there's.

They're starting to kind of sort of ramp up again.

At least they're trying to get him to ramp up, but ever since Zoom and Covid, conferences are really, really hard to.

Real hard to put together.

Yeah, they are.

So, Lance, we got.

We got about eight minutes left in the show.

Any.

Any comments that you wanted to.

To add or help out with, to discuss?

I just wanted to say, like, you know, the.

The implications of full predatorism really kick their butts all the time.

So, like, you know, William Bell's trying to deny it now, but he's a full predator.

And he's.

He goes into this whole deal now where his.

His followers are like, oh, polygamy is great.

Polygyny.

We should.

We can all do that.

And I'm like, okay, so since everything's fulfilled, sin was ended in 70 A.D.

can y'all marry whoever you want?

Do whatever you want?

And they're like, yeah, of course.

You know, And.

And, well, then you get William Bell, and he's like, no, no, that's not right.

But then, like, why are your followers saying that then, bud?

Like, that's crazy.

And same thing happens with Don Preston.

Like, you know, you have this all the time where, like, there's.

There's, like, this disconnect from the leader from the actual follower.

And then, like, but.

But it's a.

It's all a cult tactic because.

Because, you know, me and Sam Frost, when we were full predators, they were saying the same stuff to us all the time.

But now when they, you know, get exposed for it now it's like, oh, well, I.

I'm.

I'm just a good Old boy.

And I'm in the good old boy club.

And you, you gotta listen to us.

You know, polygamy is not acceptable.

And, but then they'll tell you it's okay later.

You know, Frost has had similar experiences on this.

So you get back to what.

But I think they've gotten worse.

About earlier, we were talking about this double speak that goes on.

Yeah, yeah.

Within these real stranglehold kind of views.

That, that's what I love.

You know, we've got so many variations of views, eschatology, but there's this boundary.

But then.

Yeah, you get into this.

My debate with Ward Finley where he couldn't.

I, you know.

Do you still sin?

No.

Do I still make mistakes?

Yes.

Oh, wow.

Really?

He went that.

Right?

Wow.

Okay.

You know, so, so I was gonna say this earlier, but you know, I've.

Had that too though, in conversation.

Yeah.

You know, I was gonna say earlier we, we have the different.

We have the different views.

Right.

Sam, you're not Mill.

Drew your post mill.

I'm pre mill.

All we needed was Dr.

James White because then we could have had one person who was all three in one, because he's held to all three views at one point or another.

But, but Yeah, I think four square gospel dispensational prem.

I mean that was 1970s, so I'm 57.

So that's in the early 70s all throughout.

So I was raised that way.

And then post millennial.

I was that way for many, many years in Bible college and afterwards, full preterist and then swing back and now I'm all millennial.

Yeah.

So let's.

Let me.

Yeah, I have.

Great.

That's why I, I, I'm not.

That's not a separable issue.

Yeah.

So let me put.

I'm going to do this one comment and then, you know, Dr.

Frost, I'll have you let folks know how to get a hold of you.

But Wesley Roberts says this.

I love seeing men.

I love seeing guys who met at the conference last year in each other's shows.

True fellowship and community in the body of Christ.

I met Andrew, Aaron and Sam at the conference and talked to each of you guys.

It was a great time.

And Andrew, thanks for the books.

So he's speaking of the, the why Calvinism conference that we had down.

That's where we had all met.

And it was a great time of fellowship.

So, so let me just wrap this up by, you know, asking, you know.

Sam, the only Presbyterian there, there might have been two of us.

I don't know.

No, There were definitely two because.

Because Greg Moore, who is the MC of the event is a Presbyterian and.

Oh, how sweet.

I just saw that.

Yeah.

For those who.

Those who are, you know, not watching live, you know, you.

Aaron's.

Aaron just had somebody whether.

Whether wife or daughter.

I I couldn't quite see.

I assumed that but I was.

I.

I couldn't really see too well because it was kind of quick.

I was reading comment and almost missed it.

It's time to get off.

Yeah.

That was the, the kiss good night.

That was.

I'm going to bed Daddy.

So Sam, let let folks know how they could get a hold of you.

If there's people that.

That do end up having questions do want to maybe like like this friend of mine, Chris who is you know going hey, I'm gonna be having these conversations.

I'll share with him, you know, privately.

Your.

Your email if it's okay with.

Since you said that was okay.

So.

But.

But how can folks get a hold.

Of you email Samuel M.

As in mother Samuel M.

Frost Yahoo.com and then any more today because after you know, eight years of doing this debates and so just Google my name Samuel Frost preterism and just everything will show up.

But my blog is Vigil V I G I L dot blog Vigil Blog and that's where all my stuff is really at.

And then I'm on Facebook with Lazarus Lance, you know, Demolition crew there.

So a lot of without Facebook full predatorism would lose a massive tentacle if there was no Facebook because that's it would.

And I see that they're starting to go on Andrew, as you said, you know, check out this Twitter.

So I I don't go on Twitter a lot.

I should more but I don't.

But you said about Facebook though is true liberalism as well because they don't.

Know how to use it.

They know how to use.

They've been on there.

They've got a problem.

I mean the.

What I end up seeing is they just as I said in the beginning, right.

One jumps in and must share it with the others because they.

They all come in in a.

In a group and then they talk to each other like you don't need to be there.

They're going to be patting each other on the back for things they say as if they really nailed somebody by not by ignoring what they actually said and making up a.

You know.

You really said this.

No, no, I didn't.

In fact it was almost like who who was it that's being at the confirmation.

I I can't remember if it was RFK Jr or one of them where they were asked a question.

I think it was RFK Jr.

And.

And it was like, you know, do you.

Do you deny vaccines?

And he says, no, I don't.

Yes, you do.

Like, people play that game.

Yes and no questions.

Don Preston does that yes and no question a lot.

Listen, in the.

In the flesh, if a group of guys is going to try to convince me that I can't sin, that I can make all of these choices and do all these things, and I don't have future judgment and whatever else, I.

Mean, man, oh, man.

In the flesh, I want that.

Like, yeah, of course.

You know, so, yeah.

The more opportunity they have to get in front of the biggest group of people who are looking for reasons to excuse their lifestyle.

Yeah.

That they're always going to have an audience.

Yeah.

I'm gonna.

So when I'm done with the show here, I'm gonna go hit my crack pipe.

You know, you got to be careful because.

Did you hear that?

I think he denies communion and he's gonna go his.

Because I don't sin anymore.

It's great.

That's floss for you.

Oh, that's false for you, man.

Come on.

Well, that's a great.

A great way to end the show on that kind.

So Lazarus has.

He's repeatedly.

So can I go smoke crack now?

No, that's not.

Why not?

Why not?

Well, if asked him so much times, why can't I.

Why can't I do this?

They're like, oh, that's terrible.

Why?

I'm like, why?

Why is it terrible?

Well, you know, we had.

So, Lance, we had a guy that came in here, an Indian guy, who believed he was a sinless, he never sinned.

He was basically teaching Gnosticism.

And so I went with the classic Gnostical argument that, you know, can you sleep with a prostitute?

Would that be a sin?

Here.

Here's the clip from that episode.

Are you saying that someone, a believer, can go sleep with a prostitute and it wouldn't be right or wrong because he's not under the law anymore?

So if he.

If he sleeps with a prostitute but has faith in doing it, then it's okay.

Yeah, it's okay.

Okay, I'm going to ask this again because I want to make sure that I heard you correctly.

Yeah, it's okay.

It would be.

As long as you have faith, he can do that.

Wow.

Okay.

You're saying that as long as we have faith, whatever we do in faith is not sin.

Yes.

Yeah, so.

So there you go.

Hey, this is what I want to ask Don Preston and Mike Snowman, but they're too scared to debate me and Frost, so.

Well, so, Andrew, what you should have asked him was, is it okay for me to kill you?

Yeah, see, what he says about that.

That would reveal the hypocrisy for Andrew.

Well, see, Super Andrew.

Aaron, you're missing the point, though.

As long as we're over, you know, technology like this, they're going to say it's fine.

It's when we're in person holding a gun that they might disagree.

Right.

You know?

Yeah.

All right.

Greg's post.

Greg just came on.

Yeah, no, I'm gonna.

I'm gonna post that.

So.

So Greg Moore from Dead Man Walking podcast goes, what the heck did I miss?

Prose substitutes and crack pipes.

He says.

He says, geez, I.

I gotta go back and listen to the rest of the show.

Yes, you do.

Yeah, that's right.

Buckle up.

Yeah, buckle up.

But, hey, this.

This was a great show, Sam.

It's always great having you on.

It's.

It is always so informative.

I mean, I thought I really understood full predatorism the last time you were on, and there's, like, so much more that you got into them, like, okay, that's just different.

So anytime you want to come on, if you ever.

If you ever have someone that wants to debate you, we could do it here.

I know.

You know, same with you, Lance.

I know.

There was a bunch of people on Twitter they were willing to debate until we mentioned Sam's name.

And then they all ran.

Yeah.

And Mike Sullivan being one of them.

Yeah.

And so see what happens.

So, for the record, like, Lance is mean.

I don't want to debate him.

Yeah.

For the record, you.

You see that scrolling at the bottom?

We have, during the entire show, an invitation for anyone to join Apologetics live dot com.

You just go there, you click on the duck icon, the stream yard, and you can join the discussion.

We.

We've been asking for the full predators to come.

We posted this is going to be there.

None of that.

Them showed up.

And I think what we see is that they do very good when they're in the echo chamber, not so good when they actually have to answer questions.

So here's an appeal to any full predatorists, if you would like to come on here.

We got Sam Frost, we have Lance, we have Jeremiah from the Apologetic Dog.

If you want to debate any one of them, I think they'd all be happy for the debate.

And so, come on, Just contact me, email me.

Info striving for eternity.com info striving for eternity.com and we can set up a formal debate.

Since your view is so undeniable, we think you should be willing to come in here.

Should be able to kick the butt.

Should be able to come in.

It should be, as I said to the one person, if Sam is so bad at debates, you.

You should want to do it.

Yeah.

So that is the challenge.

You should be able to totally annihilate that snowman.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

And until then.

But until they come in, I'm gonna just say that my position is that until they come in, they.

They can't even defend their own view.

And that's why I think they're not here.

But, hey, maybe someone will prove me wrong.

I did the debate with the black Hebrew Israelite by debating an empty chair, and it actually brought a black Hebrew Israelite that came and debated me, which was great.

That's what we wanted.

The funnier thing with that was that, you know, Sam, you know how, you know you won a debate?

It's when everybody who agrees with the person, like in this case, it was the black Hebrew Israelite.

I had a whole bunch of black Hebrew Israelites tell me that that guy didn't do a good job.

That's how you know you won.

When people with his view he did well, he didn't do a very.

Someone else would really defeat Sam Frost, but that guy didn't do it or that guy did.

Well, folks, if you think you could do a better job, come on in.

And we'd love to host that debate next week.

I think we're going to do an open Q A.

So if you guys got your questions, email me info striving for eternity dot com.

Because the couple weeks ago, Drew and Tom took care of a lot of the questions we had in the backlog.

They're fun ones.

I was glad you had fun with those.

And so if you guys want to have some questions answered, we prefer for folks to come on in, but we will be doing that next week.

So just remember until then to strive to make today an eternal day for the glory of God.

We'll see you next time.