The Antichrist, Great Tribulation, and Millennium: End Times Triage

[@roypaul1769]

This man is way too balanced and has way too much common sense to be a theologian…may God raise up a thousand (pun intended) more men like him in our generation!

[@nancywenger2025]

Maybe 10, 000 men

[@mamamia5130]

Maybe 144,000? 😂😂😂

[@JesusProtects]

I don't know, I'm not sure how helpful it is to be meek with everybody. Don't you think that sometimes pastors should put Galatians 1:8-9 into practice? I'll copy the verses here for everyone's convenience. Galatians 1:8-9 "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed" Note that it's repeated twice. When the Lord inspires the writer to write something more than once it's always very important. I wonder if Gavin have done this at some point of his ministry. I have heard him saying "catholics are part of the body of Christ". That's a huge thing to say knowing they consider Mary co redemptor and even higher than Jesus, just to name the most heretical of their teachings concerning the gospel. Let alone every other secondary doctrine. Is this ok? Is this what a pastor should do? I see 99% of people here praising Gavin everytime he tries to build bridges with those that believe a false gospel and I feel so conflicted, because I love Gavin and most of what he says, but when he refuses to stay firm against heresies I feel like I want to cry, because I know it can open the gates of ecumenical thinking, and knowing how much influence he has on his viewers who respect him and trust him so much it could lead to many people to a false gospel. All I can do is pray that no one listening to him end up taking that path that leads to destruction.

[@The_table_242]

In my experience of watching many theologians from many streams, this is actually the norm. Most people who have incredibly dogmatic views are local pastors, who have not wrestled through the deep material

[@bible1st]

I would argue that that is exactly why he is a theologian.

[@dennischanay7781]

Roman catholic here binge listening to my favorite Bible teacher :) another amazing video from Dr. Ortlund. The way I feel about end times things is that I always remember how the most theologically educated of Jesus day, those who had studied the old testament prophecies for their lives, still somehow failed to recognize the fulfillment in Christ because it happenes totally different than they had imagined. That's why Dr Ortlunds cautious but we'll thought out teaching on end times is much appreciated!! Moving on to more Gavin videos now lol. Thank you Dr Ortlund for your great teaching! It's HAS to be hard to find time with family, church, and writing books to give us these great videos!!

[@HillbillyBlack]

@robertstephenson6806when the man comes around. Revelation commentary. Check that out.

[@ProfYaffle]

Mike Winger did a really good talk on this too. Where he also presented different options with strengths and weaknesses of each. He also stated where he stands at the moment and why, but recognised he might change his mind. I find the open honest approach from both of you so helpful. Mike also said that it shouldn't be divisive but concluded that whichever is correct we have to follow Jesus, preach the Gospel, and work to build the body of Christ. (Or something like that). Thanks

[@williamnathanael412]

Incidentally Mike was one of the people who brought me into Partial Preterism.

[@ProfYaffle]

@@williamnathanael412 I need to that talk again, then listen to Gavin. Would be cool if they did a livestream together

[@tammywilliams-ankcorn9533]

That’s the next video I have saved to watch later 😀

[@CasshernSinz1613]

I love those videos. Very long but probably the most honest coverage of all those views. I also appreciate that given the evidence Mike is still Premillenial (which I am also) even though I lean heavily to being Postmillenial based on other scripture. Amillenialism bothers me quite a lot because I find it basically to be the Preterist view but softened to adjust for the times. I sadly think the Church lost its boldness and refuses to talk about Jesus returning because they think it somehow discredits the gospel.

[@johannmeiring4208]

O'l Miky is also a devouted Calvinist. To be avoided at all times

[@thereforebeloved]

I've been blessed to have discovered your ministry and have listened to a lot of your content on Protestant and Catholic issues. And now I am excited to learn that you are a partial preterist! Having grown up in an environment of dispensationalism that took things too far, in my opinion, partial preterism has been a breath of fresh air in my eschatology.

[@TruthUnites]

Glad to be connected, and always glad to meet another partial-preterist!

[@MathewDRhys]

A few years ago I can't believe that the Book of Revelation explains its interpretive rule within the book itself. "What was and what is and what is to come."

[@iQuiiKKz]

Gavin! I would LOVE for you to cover annihilationism!

[@FHmetalguitarist]

Yes!

[@TheScotro]

+1 to this.. I’ve been working through this issue and I’m not sure what to believe.

[@rooderoo12]

As a Christian (Dutch) Reformed Christian, these are also my views on this subject. Thanks for trying to articulate it.

[@Particularly_John_Gill]

Enjoyed the video Dr. Ortlund. I’m always thankful for the nuances you bring to these topics and the thorough treatment you give them. I’m still not settled on an eschatological position, though I would currently categorize myself as post-millennial. I think I’m drawn to it mostly because I like the idea of the Great Commission being successful in a sense, where through the Holy Spirit the Gospel is brought to the nations gradually winning them to Christ before he returns. More so than because of good arguments for the position. I remember reading somewhere that R.C. Sproul was never truly settled on a position, but said something to the effect of “all I know is it’s not the dispensational premillennial view” in typical R.C.-like comedy. I’ve found that funny seeing as how greatly that viewpoint has influenced American Christianity today. Definitely hoping RC was right. 😂

[@Particularly_John_Gill]

@@Reformation1580 I know. I’m pretty sure he’s wavered on his position at times and never held it with strong conviction.

[@jrhemmerich]

@@Particularly_John_Gill Just curious, why do you say that he never held it with strong conviction? Sure, he was humble and said he still had passages which he had not settled on, but why is that a lack of conviction? I'd be more inclined to say that he was convinced (he did write a book after all) but reserved the right to change his mind.

[@stephenbeauregard1101]

I really appreciate the open minded, irenic approach that you take to divisive issues Gavin. We need more like you. God bless.

[@lt7378]

So glad I found this channel from Becket Cook channel! Subscribed, of course. Now I have so much good content to listen to. May God bless this channel to His glory.

[@TruthUnites]

Hope you enjoy!

[@alfonso_barajas]

Gavin Ortland for the win. What an excellent video full of charity and truth. Thank you, sir.

[@kimadams2995]

What a wonderfully well-needed thing. In crazy times, it's wonderful to see the Lord raise up balanced voices. I truly appreciate yours, even when I don't see eye to eye with you on every detail. Keep it up, please, brother!

[@jaydogg2003]

Always a pleasure to listen to a more eloquent and educated kindred spirit. Our theological perspectives are very similar and I appreciate your ability to express your personal convictions in a way that encourages unity above being right. Looking forward to the next one!

[@bountyhunter404]

I've been listening to you for about a month and I've watched your debate with Trent. I must say we agree with everything that I've listened to and I'm not sure if that is a good thing for me and my beliefs or a bad thing for you and yours. My God continue to use you now and in the future. Take care and God bless you and your ministry.

[@pdrsan993]

This is awesome I thought Matthew 16:28 and 24:34 showed that Jesus was a failed apocalyptic preacher but now I see them in a different light

[@bazzy8376]

Isn't that crazy? A whole religious industry was born on calling Jesus mistaken.

[@robertfrank6058]

Sam Shamoun has videos on these.

[@PresbyterianPaladin]

Another partial preterist here, and I became one through R.C. Sproul's lecture series on "The End Times according to Jesus" and he did call himself a partial preterist in that lecture series. 😁

[@TruthUnites]

thanks for sharing that! I was wondering if he did.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

Watching that was what made me start thinking partial-preterism is true. Even though I've never believed Calvinism is true, I still really liked his content and found a few, good nuggets of truth and wisdom.

[@PresbyterianPaladin]

@@Real_LiamOBryan While I am a Calvinist I can understand your sentiment here. Soteriologically speaking I do affirm Calvinism but I also utilize Molinism as a model of God's omniscience and feel it provides the best means to square many of the statements in the Westminster confession and cathechisms. So I would label myself a middle knowledge affirming Calvinist.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

@@PresbyterianPaladin I, too, am a Molinist, my brother. I agree with you, namely, it seems to be the best model we have for understanding God's omniscience, sovereignty, and the relation thereof.

[@Ali_2401]

My church offered a Sunday school class using that video series. The majority of the class leaned futurist-dispensational, but every lesson I found myself drawn closer to a partial preterist view. I learned about it in a New Testament class back in Bible college, but Sproul made it make so much sense.

[@anthonywhitney634]

To add some perspective to this discussion - here in Australia, after 35+ yrs of church attendance I don't remember a single sermon on eschatology.

[@ProfYaffle]

I heard one in UK, but in a church I was visiting. The preacher took us tentatively (not arrogantly) down the prederist route and I thought there was something in it, but it didn't fully work! 🤔 *preterist...I've only ever heard Americans say it!

[@fed99harmony]

They fear that subject

[@pastorernestalbuquerque4770]

Thanks so much Gavin for that video. Respect your views. I'm a pre tribulation dispensationalist.

[@solavirtus1880]

Excellent video, thank you so much for pointing out the inconsistencies of FP.

[@randatatang9222]

Thank you pastor. I have come to believe this for nearly two years now after developing a more common sense interpretation of the bible. When you ask yourself how the immediate audience (or the writer's intended audience) would have understood that text plainly, it becomes clear that this was about 70 AD. I'm glad RC Sproul believed this as well.

[@hazmat5118]

Thanks Gavin. I'm quite partial to partial preterism 😂 I understand some versions of dispensationalism say another temple will be built, which means the Olivet discourse refers to a future temple and not the one right in front of their eyes. For a literalist hermeneutic it's not particularly literal.

[@AnthonyMarcus0115]

As Mid-Acts dispensational Baptist I very much agree with the charity and unity that this video calls for! Let us all study the scriptures and enjoy the essentials of the Christian faith together in the same. God bless you all!

[@tarascoterry]

Mid-acts and Baptist?

[@AnthonyMarcus0115]

@@tarascoterry oh yes! Not very difficult actually (1 Cor. 1:14-17; Acts 16:15,33; 18:8) and like Matthew Poole and John Gill posit as a feasible interpretation in their commentaries I take 1 Cor. 15:29 to actually be referring to baptism being an emblem of our death in Christ and corporeal resurrection in him. So yes I firmly believe that one can hold to a Mid-Acts dispensational view (Pauline dispensationalism) and hold to a Baptist ecclesiology. Just as grounding for the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper for the Mystical Body of Christ comes from 1 Corinthians so does baptism.

[@tarascoterry]

@@AnthonyMarcus0115 Yeah, I've just never heard of anyone holding to both. So do you think baptism should be a requirement for church membership? Baptism is usually not subject to the "charity and unity" which is espoused for eschatology in this video. This would seem to make sense if you believe baptism is necessary for salvation, but that is not a common 'protestant' idea.

[@AnthonyMarcus0115]

@@tarascoterry We’re out there lol. I would say it is a requirement according to 1 Corinthians (1:1- members of the local church at Corinth) & (1:13- all of them were baptized). I do not believe baptism is necessary for salvation, any more that I believe that the Lord supper is, but these are emblems of the sacred grace of salvation which we already have. We observe these in light of our already finished and accomplished salvation as members of the body of Christ.

[@sniderfam5]

In a similar way concerning the partial preterist view, the threat of exile in the OT came to the larger groups of people (Israel and Judah). Yet, there had been several judgments on smaller groups and individuals. I’ve held this view without knowing it. Thank you for doing these.

[@spiff829]

Thanks for these thoughtful videos! I just finished your book, it was insightful (the historical perspective you bring is so helpful) and heartbreaking at times. I was interested to see you didn’t examine the doctrine of hell, which in my experience has been very divisive among evangelicals these days. Any plans to address in a video?

[@TruthUnites]

thanks Greg, will try to do that sometime. I need to study annihilationism more first.

[@spiff829]

@@TruthUnites right on. I’ve learned a tremendous amount from Chris Date, YT channel Rethinking Hell, on the topic of Conditional Immortality (superset of the concept of annihilationism). Including some research into historical perspectives on the doctrine, which I think you’d appreciate. Thanks for the response!

[@stevenkibb7119]

Could u do a video about the differences in church polity and the arguments for each view, also great video

[@Psychoveliatonet]

This was a very helpful video. Thank you for spelling this out! 😀

[@ClauGutierrezY]

I spent my full life being a full futurist but I started openning my mind to partial preterism some years ago. Still cannot make sense of everything (probably never will) but if feel like comparatively speaking makes way more sense.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

What can't you make sense of yet, if I may ask?

[@heathers4961]

Trust the Holy Spirit to lead you into all truth. Not men.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

@@heathers4961 The thing I've never understood about this kind of saying is, doesn't the Holy Spirit use men to achieve His ends?

[@heathers4961]

@@Real_LiamOBryan Hi, yes he does. But scripture doesn't support this idea of shelving or ranking God's word into a hierarchy based on what we think. When Jesus was being tempted in the wilderness he told Satan: Man will not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. In 2 Timothy All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. Jesus warned us 3 times to let no man deceive us by any means, and that people will have itching ears heaping up for themselves teachers and will wander from the truth. People will be giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons. Revelation is the only book with a blessing attached for anyone who would read and keep its words. There is a stern warning at the end about those who would add or take away from the words in it. Truth doesn't unite; it divides. Jesus told us that. However, right now Satan is working hard to unite the world. Unity in itself is not righteous. People can be united for very wrong reasons. Test ALL things and do not believe every spirit.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

@@heathers4961 I don't quite get what you mean when you say, *"But scripture doesn't support this idea of shelving or ranking God's word into a hierarchy based on what we think."* Who is doing that, and how does that apply to the Futurism/Partial-Preterism discussion? I'm sorry. I'm trying, but I'm just not tracking, sister. *"Revelation is the only book with a blessing attached for anyone who would read and keep its words."* Yes, but it also said that the people alive at the time it was written, its original and primary audience, would understand things like the number of the beast if they had wisdom, but that would be impossible on a purely Futurist view. *"Truth doesn't unite; it divides. Jesus told us that."* Yet we are told in scripture to be united and of one mind, as well as to not even argue if it breaks the peace. *"People can be united for very wrong reasons."* Very true! *"Test ALL things and do not believe every spirit."* How do you test them?

[@jrhemmerich]

Thanks Gavin! I think this is really helpful for people. For me it was helpful to learn that it really isn't a question of literal versus non-literal, because most of us agree there is symbolism. I actually find that there is sometimes more agreement between premil futurists and amil partial-preterists than some idealists amil futurists. The main reason is because, the question of whether the symbols are supposed to refer to specific historical events is actually what most people mean when they say they take things "literally." And premills and partial-preterists agree about this in principle, but the premill is usually just saying they don't see it in history. But often it's because they don't know what's there. . The thing about taking passages "literally" is that we are forced to decide, are we going to take references to Jesus' "coming," especially his "cloud coming" as his physical decent (literally) or are we going to take "in this generation" and "soon" in their normal sense (literally). What was convincing to me, is that we see the bible being able to distinguish near and far (not that every context is clear). But in Daniel, it says, "seal it up" for these things are "far off," but Jesus says, "this generation" and "soon" and "don't seal it up." Whereas, when we look at “comings” in the OT, there is a rich understanding of Yahweh's judgment "comings" and "presence" (Psalm 18, Isa. 19:1 the Babylonian attack on Egypt) which do not require that God be made visible at all. When Jesus uses such language, he is actually appropriating divine action to himself. The high Priest recognized this when Jesus claimed, at his trial, that he was going to come on the clouds. This was Yahweh "action" and considered blasphemy. The fact that there is this depth to the OT view of coming is obscured to us because we tend to see "coming" in light of the incarnation rather than the unseen creator being made present through fulfilled prophetic events. And certainly, the incarnation is essential, but we don't want to forget that there is a depth to "coming" and "presence" which is not dispensed with simply because Jesus has come and will descend again (Acts 1, 1 Thess 4:13, I Cor 15:50-55). It's also helpful to see that in Matthew 24:30, Jesus speaks of seeing the "sign of the son of man in heaven." The likely sign being the astronomical events. Another interesting thought, that goes along with this, is that one does not always have to choose between symbolic and literal. For example, the sun turning dark and the mood to blood. These could be symbolic for stable things like one's nation ceasing to exist. But it could also be the natural effect of the burning of a city. Such an event does result in the sun being darkened and the moon seeming to turn to blood.

[@georgeplatt3347]

Very helpful video, thank you for it. I’d like to hear you do one on young earth creationism, old earth creationism and theistic evolution.

[@loleki737]

Fulfilled eschatology (Preterism) is the one that explains history and glorifies God and Christ. Thank you!

[@soteriology400]

Amen to that. Also does not make God look like a false prophet.

[@BillionFires]

Hi Gavin, thank you for this. I find that I think very similarly to you on a lot of topics. Of course, this makes me more and more convinced of your absolute brilliance 😉

[@TruthUnites]

haha isn't it amazing how the smart always are those we tend to agree with? :)

[@BornAgainRN]

@@TruthUnites 28:20. I believe Jeff Durbin (pastor with Dr James White) is also a partial preterist. He made a video awhile ago on Daniel and the Olivet Discourse. He thinks the 3 1/2 years (“times, time, and half a time”) in Daniel 9 is discussing the point when Jesus was crucified, which ended sacrifice. Personally, I am a pretrib premill, but his video is interesting, and I consider him and Dr White to be brothers-in-Christ despite differences in our eschatology.

[@JohnnyHofmann]

Awesome video, Gavin. Very informative.

[@TruthUnites]

Glad you found it helpful!

[@amyclutter7259]

So blessed and encouraged by this. I attend a multi site church with 7 pastors on staff who all hold different views on eschatology and soteriology. They minister side by side in love and God is doing great things.

[@derrick7442]

Thank you so much for this video. It was incredibly helpful.

[@TruthUnites]

so glad to hear that!

[@steph9195]

Great video, Dr. Ortlund. Thank you for always making an effort to take a nuanced, honest approach to theological topics. I too am a partial-preterist, so I was glad to see your take on the matter. How would you personally respond to those who refer to 2 Peter 3:8 to support their idea that when Jesus’ return is described as imminent in the Bible, it doesn’t necessarily mean what we think of as soon but can mean a longer period of time (because one day can be like a thousand years for God)? I don’t find this to be a compelling argument, but I was wondering how you’d articulate your rebuttal.

[@TravisD.Barrett]

41:58 I’m sure you said “more complicated, knotty thing” but I heard it as “more complicated, naughty thing” And did a double take 😂😂

[@craigbennett8053]

Can someone be both a partial preterist and pre trib? By that I mean that a typical pre trib view but with partial prophetic fulfillment? It seams that may of the OT prophecies had a partial fulfillment and then a full fulfillment later on.

[@robertbrangan9617]

Love your channel, brother! One thing I keep thinking about is the often dual fulfilment of biblical prophecy, one near term and another that's far off into the future. We see it clearly woven throughout scriptures regarding His first coming so if you apply the same hermeneutic we should expect to see it with His return. The destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is prophecy fulfilled but I also believe we have yet to see it's greater fulfillment in the tribulation to come. Israel returning as a nation in the last century has profound eschatological significance. The fig tree has put forth it's leaves and Summer is near. The events of Zechariah 12 is the harvest of that fruit. I find myself learning a lot from the way you approach these topics with grace and humility

[@michaelseay9783]

Seems like you really don’t understand the fig tree parable.

[@madrick2831]

🙌🏽Postmill

[@HumbleWarrior7]

I wish we Christians (myself included) would take this approach more often. There are some things that I disagree with you on, but I still have alot of respect for you. I think it all comes down to the heart, it is obvious to me that you are very sincere in your walk with Christ and love for others. And that promotes the unity you talk about.

[@andrewwoods456]

Many thanks Gavin. On his channel Bruce Gore has a very good playlist, Apocalypse in Space and Time covering Revelation from a preterist perspective. Most interestingly the first 9 videos are a historical overview of the apocalypse through church history. The remaining 51(!) videos are a study of Revelation He also has a very good playlist on church history.

[@stephenbailey9969]

Amillennial writers are very good at thematic analyses, dissecting the differences between this age and the age to come. Premillennial writers are good at laying out the chronology found in the Olivet discourse and the Revelation to John. For myself, I found that historic premillennialism coincided with my own reading of scripture and the apostolic fathers. But it is the Lord who knows the first things and the last things, so I'll leave it in his hands.

[@ZachMetzger1377]

Hey Gavin, I was curious which book of Ken Gentry’s you were referring to when you mentioned in the video that he took Josephus line by line and compared it with the middle chapters of Revelation and shows the similarities. I would love to pick up that resource and check it out.

[@MrSeedi76]

In Jewish thought, the day of the lord is always near. There is this idea that if Israel will perfectly keep the commandments for just one day, the end will come.

[@josegeda7807]

Good summary. I have been a post-millenialist for the longest time tending toward and a partial preterist

[@cassidyanderson3722]

From an Orthodox perspective, theological triage is a confounding proposition. Have you had an opportunity to dialogue with any Orthodox Christians about it? I’d be interested in hearing how it went. Within Orthodoxy, I’ve never heard of eschatology being a a cause for division. I imagine most EO are amillennialist, but I’m sure there are those among us who ascribe to other theories. Protestants would probably be surprised at how little attention we pay to eschatology at all. Thanks for the summation of the varied theories - I’d never really considered most of them.

[@nickhanley5407]

You might be surprised to find out the same variety of views on the millennium (pre/post/amillenial) exist in orthodoxy as well. It’s not as though orthodox Christians are quite as theologically United as it is often made out to be.

[@cassidyanderson3722]

@@nickhanley5407 it wouldn’t surprise me at all. If it isn’t clearly expressed by Holy Tradition (Scripture, Creeds, Councils, consensus of the Fathers), we don’t dogmatize it.

[@joefrescoln]

Anecdotal, but most of the E.O folks Ive run across have been historic premil.

[@cassidyanderson3722]

@@joefrescoln that’s interesting. I’ve never personally met any EO that were anything other than amillennial, albeit my experience is limited.

[@joefrescoln]

@@cassidyanderson3722 My limited experience has been with ROCOR. I wonder if different sees lean a certain way or other.

[@williamstrathman7117]

Hi Dr. Ortlund. Would you consider a review of John 2:12 -- After this he went down to Capernaum, with his mother and his brothers and his disciples, and they stayed there for a few days. (ESV) -- in light of RCC perpetual virginity claims of Mary. Also Matt 1:25, and Matt 2:13-14, 20-21, where one wonders why Joseph was not ordered to take his other children with him, if he actually had other children from a previous marriage. Thanks for your work.

[@pipinfresh]

As a postmil partial preterist I really appreciate the balanced view and I completely agree that we shouldn't divide over eschatology. A couple of things I will say is that I do believe eschatology has an impact on how we go about spreading the gospel and making disciples and the impact we have in this world before Christ returns. I believe having a more pessimistic view of eschatology causes us to give up on fighting to win this world. Why polish the brass on a sinking ship? In a more optimistic view like postmil we can have hope for the future and think about future generations and build for the future. Also, I will add that most modern postmils hold a metaphorically view on the thousand years. Not a literal thousand year golden age. We share a similar view to amill in the sense that the millennium isn't a literal thousand years but we have an optimistic view of how history will play out before Christ returns.

[@pixelprincess9]

In my humble opinion, I find it makes the most sense to consider everything before revelation 20, for the 1000 years to be the present, and everything after that to be the future.

[@savortheflavour]

I appreciate a perspective that Mike Winger shared about progressive dispensationalism. This view emphasizes the "already, not yet" aspect of biblical prophecy, making it almost a blending of partial preterism and premillennialism in some ways. It's an intriguing position that I'm loosely holding to for now. More than anything, I'm a pan-millennialist--whatever pans out is fine with me! God knows best.

[@p0ggles]

Amazing Video!

[@reepicheepsfriend]

I do find it interesting that Christians in the 20th century would shift to the more “pessimistic” view regarding the direction of history. Perhaps that’s not so surprising given the world events they were experiencing. My general view of eschatology is “if I remain faithful to the Lord and familiar with the scriptures, I’ll know it when I see it.”

[@BornAgainRN]

When Jesus says “this generation” He seems to be talking about the generation that will see and experience these things, but not necessarily the generation in the first century.

[@jrhemmerich]

The difficulty with that take is that "this" and "that" in Greek, as in English, are different words. If Jesus had been talking about a future generation, the more natural expression would have been "that generation will not pass away until all these things take place" (Mat. 24:34). Also, Mat. 23:36 says the same thing and the context is that the pharisees to whom he was speaking to were going to "fill up" or complete the sins of their fathers. It's too contextually specific to be a later generation.

[@BornAgainRN]

@@jrhemmerich while the Greek has different words for “this“ and “that,“ just like in English the context of the words can determine whether or not it is talking about current or future. In the case of Matthew 23, the context is clear that “this“ refers to the generation of the Pharisees in the first century. But it doesn’t necessarily follow that this same Greek word for “this“ that is used in Matthew 24 automatically refers to the generation of the apostles. You have to look at the entire chapter in order to discern that “this“ generation simply refers to the generation that will see and experience the specific things that Jesus is talking about. In fact, earlier in the chapter, Matthew writes “let the reader understand.“ Matthew is writing probably around AD 50. So, while it is possible that his readers could be the generation that experiences these things, since they would have been reading prior to the destruction of the Temple, it doesn’t leave out the possibility that this could still be talking about a future generation reading this beyond AD 70.

[@jrhemmerich]

@@BornAgainRN, I’m sympathetic with the attempt, I used to try and divide Matthew up. The strategy was to equate Luke’s period of the trampling of the gentiles over Jerusalem with the great tribulation, and so draw out the tribulation into our present and thus put the cloud coming in our future. I still think that what made the AD 70 tribulation so great was that the exile lasted so long, when compared to the 70 years in Babylon. However, it’s just really hard to convince oneself that there is any need to delay the cloud coming once one understands its OT background and we can distinguish judgment comings at the end of the Mosaic age and temple from the second comming at the end of the New Covenant Kingdom age. And the “judgement coming” uses the typical astronomical signs for the burning of cities in war, which were to occur “immediately” after the tribulation that the disciples were supposed to flee Jerusalem to escape. The problem with the “this” and the “that” is that we are stuck with “this” and there really is no reason to take anything in Matthew 24 as having to do with a third temple. If Matthew 23’s context is clear, the transition to the question in 24:2 is also pretty clear and connected with what was said in Jesus’ temple teaching in 23. So far as I can tell the only real reason to put Mat 24 into the future is the reference to the abomination of desolation. So really people are using 2 Thess 2 and Daniel 11:36-12:13 to dictate the placement of Matthew 24. Its understandable that this is difficult. Do you think this last observation on the main reason to be relatively accurate?

[@bazzy8376]

@@BornAgainRN He doesn't just say "this generation" He also says "these stones." That blows away any notion that He's talking about some temple thousand of years away. And if you want context. Look at the chapter before and see Him tell the Jewish leadership that their generation will pay for the blood of the saints and profits. He also told his prosecutors that "they" would see the son of Man come. Why believe Darby over Jesus? And when was the temple destroyed and the Jewish leadership punished? In THAT generation.

[@flyswatter6470]

Which generation witnessed the destruction of the temple? And the fleeing of the Christians from Jerusalem in time to escape the tribulation?

[@edwardlargent4144]

Gavin, how about a video on the various views of hell? Or on old earth versus new earth? Thanks again for the well-made and helpful videos!

[@jonathanvickers3881]

I second this hell idea!

[@laylascott6096]

@@jonathanvickers3881 hell is the grave

[@MCHRQRD]

Couldn't agree more. Knottiness rules w grace, like Christ, Himself

[@stevenfetterly7505]

Almost 42 years I've studied the Scriptures, even after 3 Theology Colleges I've reached greater insight. Let us say, because the Scriptures say this or that .... we let the Holy Spirit speak to the listener as He speaks to Yeshua and on to our Father. I will hear you again.

[@fivesolae5379]

I am personally a historic premillennialist as the Early Church was highly oriented towards that view, with the exception of Origen, Augustine and Cyprian

[@tonyb408]

Hippolytus and Irenaeus both speak of a rapture as does Ephraim.

[@fivesolae5379]

@@tonyb408 not as pretribulation

[@tonyb408]

@@fivesolae5379 yes, as pretrib. Ephraim sometimes speaks of a 3.5 year tribulation but his rapture is still before that.

[@cassidyanderson3722]

@@tonyb408 Will you please provide your sources for claiming that Hippolytus, Irenaeus and Ephraim (or any other early Christian theologian) ascribed to the concept of a rapture as we understand it today?

[@tonyb408]

@@cassidyanderson3722 Ireneaus-Against heresies 5.29.1, Hippolytus read the Christ & Antichrist and understand his chronology (64), see the pre-trib conf presentation from 2021 by Lee Brainerd with 10 additional statements by Ephrem beyond the pseudo document. The first two can be read in the standard volumes of the church fathers.

[@FullLifeFrank]

Can you do one on paedobaptism vs. credobaptism?

[@eduardoan777]

Thank you for this video, it helped me a lot with the questions of eschatology, and one I’ve learned, that I can’t really know every detail and that’s fine. God bless you Pastor!

[@fridge3489]

Good video. Thank you so much. While I've not yet come to solid conclusions in eschatology, I also know that Christ Jesus comes again, judgement happens, and the new creation becomes a reality. I think part of the pull of specific eschatology, for me, is that I'd like to confidently know that I agree or disagree (and why) when a certain position is presented. For example, just the other day a Christian said she wished for the rapture already so she could be taken away from all this. In other words, this stuff is very much a part of many Christians' identity. Makes sense that I study it, but boy can it make my head swim! Also I like to learn, and sometimes people ask me to explain things and I think it's good to be able to. Again, good video. Next I'll be looking closer at partial preterism.

[@soteriology400]

Having a good understanding of hermeneutics first, goes a long ways before actually studying this topic.

[@Christian-ut2sp]

As a partial preterist myself I approve this video lol

[@unit2394]

I am amillennial and a partial preterist. It’s not an easy view to hold in the American South.

[@AMightyFortressIsOurGod24]

Try being a postmillennial partial preterist in the deep South. They think you arw nuts, lol

[@heather602]

Its not an easy view to hold biblically either.

[@ChildofGod98765]

The Lord gives me strength, it’s only because of him I have persevered. I have two beautiful boys both are autistic. My husband passed away years ago. I’m all alone. I lost my job over declining the vaccine. LIKE MANY OTHERS! I declined due to my pre existing health conditions lupus and heart disease. I’ve been struggling to provide for myself and my children since losing my job from Forsyth hospital. I’m now waitressing, and I’m thankful, but I’m not making nearly enough to get by. Groceries are super expensive. Every month is a battle to not end up on the streets with my two children. I’m constantly in fear of losing my home. To even think about being on the streets with two young children is terrifying. But even as I face homelessness seemingly every month. I have faith, God will provide. With GOD ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE! Faith over fear.

[@joshuamitchell5481]

Splitting the church over these issues is sad. We need to be about the Father's business. None of us have this all figured out. There is only one bride.

[@jonathandulin8753]

I feel like the practical effect of views on the millennium is more in the interpretation of other texts like Daniel 7-12, Zechariah, Ezekiel’s temple, the little apocalypses from the Synoptics, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, etc.

[@tammywilliams-ankcorn9533]

I grew up in the preTrib rapture church but never believed. Looking at their timelines, they had two second comings- preTeib and post Trib. I, too, am a partial preterist. I believe in only one second coming, not a third coming. I did not divide over it. Yes, RC Sroull was a partial preterist.

[@TonyThomas10000]

The inherent problem with post-mil theology is that it has created aberrations such the social gospel, Christian reconstructionism, Kingdom Now and dominion theology, as well as Christian nationalism.

[@LuxnoireCollection]

Gavin, do you hold an early dating of Revelation? Before 70AD?

[@zacredacted2137]

How do we know that there wasn't a thousand year reign already, and that we are in the short season wherein we are being deceived? "'After that, he must be set free for a short time."

[@ThePlagueGameing]

Great teaching!. Complicated subject no doubt but how much of this teaching has a bearing on ones salvation?. Thanks for your research.😎

[@user-cs2qk4qw5q]

Enjoyed the video a lot, myself an Amilennialist but jumping from idealism to partial preterism and vice versa, but after your case I'm pretty convinced on the latter

[@jarednel]

Interesting video. And as always, love your heart. 💯 I'd be very keen to hear a more detailed deep dive into why you think the Historicist view is not likely or less likely than partial preterism. What are some of the similarities and overlaps? What are the major differences, etc? Blessings! 👑

[@robertdelisle7309]

Full Preterism is refuted with this verse: “They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. “Men of Galilee, “they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.” (Acts 1:10-11) The world has never seen Jesus descend from the sky to the earth therefore his second coming remains a future event.

[@williambrewer]

You misrepresented James Steward Russell. He strenuously argued against squishing down the millennium. In fact, he actually thought we were still in the millennium.

[@RonT101]

That the thousand-years is mentioned 6 times in Rev. 20 favors a literal interpretation. The future earthly kingdom is very prominent throughout the OT, particularly in the prophets. So Revelation is simply adding the time duration, which was not mentioned in the OT, to the teaching of the future earthly kingdom.

[@ianbell2931]

Dr Gavin, thank you for a balanced handling! Btw, have you been introduced to the work of Dr Philip Kayser? He builds on the work of Gentry and others to make the most hermeneutically sound preterist schema yet, while avoiding many of the common problems found in popular partial and full preterist teaching. I highly recommend his Revelation Project sermon series, available on podcast.

[@TruthUnites]

cool, thanks for the tip!

[@cleob9956]

@@TruthUnites Hi Gavin! I left you a comment over on your practicing gratitude video. Would you mind checking it out? I’ve been wrestling about the Enneagram and was wondering if you might dive into it more for us. Thanks for considering.

[@HumbleWarrior7]

I was always taught preterism was heresy. But I see how partial preterism can have some valid points. I think dual fulfillment comes most to my mind on this topic. I can see how a lot of what was foretold was fulfilled, but a few key things have not yet. Therefore Nero could have been “an antichrist” without being THE ultimate one. The desolation of Jerusalem also being one of the judgements, perhaps foreshadowing an even worse time coming in the future. I see this very similar to passages in Daniel. The wars of the Diadochi line up extremely well with one of his visions, as does the man of lawlessness with the person Antiochus Epimanes. But some verses still really can’t find complete fulfillment in those events but seem to line up more with the actual “end.” Again this could be a foreshadow or taste of what is to come. So in that sense I’d somehow see myself as both a partial preterist and a premillennial. 🤔

[@inseinenstudios6404]

Hey Gavin. Great video. I’m curious, does your view require a date for the book of Revelation being before 70 AD? Because historically the book of Revelation has been seen as being written in the 90s.

[@shanecoris6109]

Hi Dr. Ortlund, Thank you for this video! Since you mentioned that the final separation of believers and nonbelievers is something that Christians should affirm, do you think it would be right to divide over Christian universalism? It seems to me like this view would not meet the criteria. Thanks!

[@TheAtarango]

So the title I saw for this video was "Was Nero the anti-Christ?" So I watched it and got no answer. I appreciate your work, but seems like a lot of words to end without any real decisive points. Maybe you can do a video on why or why not Nero was the anti-Christ and then make decision on it that people can take or leave. I think looking at this might answer some other questions in eschatology that could help people understand how viable Preterism really is.

[@jameswoodard4304]

"Are we going to say that Augustine...are hermeneutically suspicious?" On this particular point, yes. Why not. The leading lights of Gospel truth of any given time are liable to be wrong about some particular area or other. That includes today, which is why we should continue to be careful. This sounds like it's moving toward an "everyone's doing it," argument. Also, your historical examples of who was post-mil and a-mil in the past actually argue for the practical importance of the doctrine in the life of the Church. For example, "The Puritans were Post-mil..." Yes, and their hermeneutic was greatly tainted by Christian Utopianism in which their expectation was that they were building the worldly millennial kingdom on earth by their own personal piety and political/legalistic efforts in the world. This had very real repercussions on the lives of believers and lead to serious error and trouble. The Utopianism and their Post-mil doctrine are not merely coincidental. The travesty of British Israelism and the extravagancies of many cults come from thinkers identifying their efforts or group with "Establishing the Kingdom on Earth." Also, that the main confessions of history have generally been a-mil has allowed them to lessen their apocalyptic expectation over time which the Gospel expects us to maintain. That God is going to once again, when we least expect it, plunge dramatically into the course of human history, has a serious impact on one's stance toward the world and history. Yes, a-mils believe in the Second Coming and Judgement, but that is a closing of the book of history rather than the final glorious chapter. The lack of (Biblical) pessimism concerning the world-system specifically allows more conciliation with the world among a-mils, while pre and post are expectant of a necessary and dramatic distinction (though post-mils see this distinction being eventually overcome). I believe a Pre-mil stance is the most consistent with (note I didn't say "necessary for") the proper positioning of the believer in the world and human history. We are aliens in a foriegn land. We work for the good of people and the world, but we don't expect the world to stop being the world because of it and become disheartened. We aren't going to "save the world" through our Spirit-led efforts. It will still be the messed up world when Christ comes, and *He alone* will overcome the nations, right all wrongs, and establish His throne. An expectation of the eschaton, gracious seperation from the world while laboring in it, and humility regarding our role and that of Christ, placing our hope on Christ alone during the time of our laboring rather than on our labors themselves in Christ, and others are effects which Pre-mil tends to nurture. I will not ignore the abuses of the Pre-mil position either. Some have tended to become fully world-denying or world-hating apocalypticists or at least turn from their responsibilities as "salt" and "light." There are often cults that have apocalyptic stances which come from an idea of God coming any day to smite the nations and set up Utopia. Let's not forget the mass embarrassment and lingering doctrinal error stemming from Miller's Dispensational calculations in the Great Dissapointment of the Millerites. But my point was not necessarily that one position is better or worse relative to hermeneutics and practical theology and life so much as simply to remind us that these issues *do* in fact have such an impact. I am also not arguing that these should be categorized as Second Tier, much less First Tier, doctrines. They *should not* , in themselves, be matters of division. I merely wish to point out that we can also go too far in the opposite direction if we deny the reality of their practical effects.

[@albertito77]

I guess I'm a partial preterite too. I follow NT Wright and remember how Jesus tells Caiaphas that _from now on_ you will see the son of man coming on the clouds. At least some of the apocalypic events described seem to be about the destruction of Jerusalem and attendant vindication of Jesus's claims. Also note that the run for the hills comment was used by the Jerusalem church and fled when Titus besieged it _and they survived because they heeded Jesus's words_

[@beaulin5628]

That Christ will reign on earth on David's throne from Jerusalem for "one thousand years" is mentioned six times in Rev.20:2-7. There is nothing in the Bible repeated so specifically so many times consecutively that I know of. Even the doctrine of salvation by faith is not repeated specifically so many times in one chapter. This has to literally mean what it says. Anyone who thinks Satan is now "bound", and not "deceiving the nations" right now during the Church Age is denying reality.

[@carolynbillington9018]

helpful the different areas of eschatology explained

[@pixieburton3131]

As true believing Christians 1 Thessalonians tells us: For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Thessalonians 5:9 - KJV And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. 1 Thessalonians 1:10 - KJV In Revelation Jesus writes to seven churches. The local churches that Jesus wrote to were along the area’s postal route. These churches represent four different aspects within these churches and all churches throughout history. Aspect 1 - Ecclesiastical, the church’s hierarchy. Aspect 2 - The current issues within the local church. Aspect 3 - A personal, individual application, places in our hearts and lives that may need reflection and repentance. Aspect 4 - Lastly, a prophetic application. These letters actually cover all the churches in the history of the Church Age, from the first to the last. Historically and prophetically the first three churches mentioned are gone but the last four are still here today. You will notice Jesus telling the last four churches that they will be here for the End Times. Please see Revelation 2:22 (Thyatira), 3:3 (Sardis), 3:10 (Philadelphia), and 3:16 (Laodicea). The church in Philadelphia, the sixth church letter, prophetically represents the missionary churches starting in the late 1600’s and exploding with William Carey’s “Inquiry into the Obligations of Christians to Evangelize to the Heathen”. There are many missionary churches today and there are some that are not. Jesus Christ is not speaking to a denomination but to all those with a missionary spirit. My church is a missionary church. Please, are you in a missionary church? Do you evangelize? Revelation 3:10 says to the church of Philadelphia (missionary church): Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. Revelation 3:10 - KJV This is the only church with the promise of escaping the Tribulation. 1 Thessalonians 4:13 - 18 tells us: But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 - KJV This was written by Paul to the Thessalonians who fully understood the Rapture and who were looking and waiting for the Rapture. Many of them were worried that their loved ones, who had died, missed the Rapture and Paul was reassuring them that the dead would be caught up first and then those who are alive will follow. The Pre-tribulation Rapture is to be a source of comfort for those hearing these words, the Pre-Tribulation Rapture is a promise for believers. As we read in 1 Thessalonians 1:10 and 5:9, as believers, we are not destined to wrath. Jesus Christ died on the Cross taking on Himself the wrath we were due without His Willing Sacrifice. Instead of wrath we are now blessed with Salvation and eternal life with Him. There is no more wrath, no more condemnation, our punishment was paid-in-full by our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 15:50 - 54 says: Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. 1 Corinthians 15:50-54 - KJV I believe 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 1 Corinthians 15:50-54 show there will be a rapture. A catching away, an instant change from our corruptible bodies to our glorified bodies. I believe 1 Thessalonians 5:9 and Revelation 3:10 tell us as true believers we will not see God’s wrath. We will not be here when God pours out His wrath on an unbelieving, Christ rejecting world. Those left to go through the tribulation, this is their last opportunity to believe, repent and accept Jesus Christ as the true Messiah, Our Lord and Savior. The Tribulation is known as the Time of Jacob’s Trouble as found in Jeremiah 30:7. Father God is turning His full attention back to the Jewish people and nation in order to bring them to the realization that Jesus Christ is the True Messiah, the King they have been waiting for. Unbelievers will not be raptured and will experience the Tribulation but they can still be saved. The Church Age is finished, there’s no more need for the Church. The Two Witnesses, the 144,000, and the angels will now spread the Gospel. The True Church is gone. Also, another reason that the Rapture is Pre-tribulation is we are to be watching and waiting for the Lord Jesus. The Tribulation is the ONLY End Times prophecy without a timeline for us. The 10 virgins / wedding parable speaks directly to this. Please see Matthew 25:1-13. Throughout the Old Testament, Father God gave Israel everything they needed in order to recognize the Messiah. They didn’t pay attention and they missed their Day of Visitation. In exactly the same way the Church has been given everything we need to know about the End Times except the Rapture timeline. We too must pay attention so we are not caught unaware. For those not raptured, as soon as the peace treaty is signed you will know the Tribulation is starting. 7 years later, exactly, Jesus will come in His Second Coming. This part of the timeline is given. We know midway through the Tribulation, the Abomination of Desolation will occur, the Two Witnesses will be killed and the Great Tribulation will begin. What we don’t know and why we must stay alert and watch is because we don’t know the hour of the Rapture. Everything else in the timeline is given. This is a comfort to those waiting and watching AND listening for the sound of the Trump and the voice of the Archangel. We will not experience the Wrath of God. Another promise is that Jesus went home to prepare a place for us. His Father will send Him for us as His Bride before the Tribulation and we will spend the seven years of the Tribulation with our Husband, in seclusion, exactly as in the seven day Jewish Marriage Feast. Lord, in trouble have they visited thee, they poured out a prayer when thy chastening was upon them. Like as a woman with child, that draweth near the time of her delivery, is in pain, and crieth out in her pangs; so have we been in thy sight, O Lord. We have been with child, we have been in pain, we have as it were brought forth wind; we have not wrought any deliverance in the earth; neither have the inhabitants of the world fallen. Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain. In that day the Lord with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea. Isaiah 26:16-27:1 - KJV Also; Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. John 14:1-3 - KJV I definitely believe in a Pre-Tribulation Rapture. For those who believe the Pre Tribulation Rapture is an invention of Darby, please see: truthandtidings.com/2020/07/the-rapture-a-pre-darby-rapture/

[@OvercomingtheTribulation]

I don’t believe in a Pre-Trib Rapture. I used to, but searching the Scripture, I found contradictions to it and left it behind. I’m not a partial preterist, Amillennialist, Postmillennialist or Historicist either. I believe our catching up is at His coming, after the entire Tribulation, including God’s wrath on the wicked. I explain some reasons I think this way from various passages on my channel and on my website by the same name. I invite you to check it out if you are willing to hear-especially the Answers section on my website, because I answer most of the Pre-Trib arguments you make there. God bless.

[@beowulf.reborn]

Premillennialism can be just as optimistic as Postmillennialism, the only difference need be, that Satan, seeing his time is short, launches the tribulation as one last ditch effort against the Church. For a short period of time, the tides seem to be turning, and the Christ returns to thwart the serpent's efforts, and usher in the fullness of His Kingdom.

[@justinjones2160]

Rc became postmill before he passed. In case anyone wants to know.

[@SlavicUA]

Hi Gavin! I would recommend a book to you on this particular subject. I know there are many, but I think you will enjoy this one. It's titled When Jesus Returns by David Pawson. Sidenote: he's not giving a date for when Jesus returns.

[@jesusandliberty]

You only covered 1 viewpoint and barely mentioned the other stuff?

[@michaelbabbitt3837]

I became a Christian 12 years ago from a background of secular Judaism, atheism, New Ageism, lay Buddhism, and even some Saivism (Hindu), and one thing that struck me about the Christian world after entering it are the secondary and tertiary doctrines that, for me, often lead people to spend a lot of time on issues that not only cause division within the Church but also impact the behaviors of Christians in a negative way. The End Times obsession (from writings that no one agrees on because they are apocalyptic) often makes Christians passive and defeatist. There is evil to be fought against today that many Christians don't stand up to and mutter that it's just the End Times. And then people hunker down in their churches and wait... If the German Church had stood up against Hitler in large numbers, Hitler might have been defeated much earlier.

[@CryoftheProphet]

What is a problem text for the premillennial position? I cant find one

[@jussman8861]

Does anyone know the reference made at 34:33 about Ken Gentry’s writing on this? I see he has a few books about Revelation but I would be interested to know which of his writings has the comparison referenced.

[@TJMcCarty]

Could you make another video explaining in detail your end times views? Like how do you deal with Jesus saying in Matthew "immediately" after the tribulation of that time, you will see Jesus coming in the clouds and sending out His angels to gather His elect? If the great tribulation happened in 70 A.D., why didn't Jesus return? I'm honestly wondering. It does seem like the clearest interpretation of the generation would be the one alive at the time of Christ. But Jesus hasn't physically returned yet, so I don't know how that couldn't mean that Jesus was talking about the generation that would be here at the end of the age.

[@joshuamitchell5481]

Look up Chuck Missler"s teachings. The American church is so lost. You make good points without malice

[@jfitz6517]

Another great video Gavin! I imagine those who would say, “We’re living in the New Heavens & New Earth right now,” are probably living in a comfortable Western democracy. I certainly wouldn’t feel excited to teach that view in the slums of India or to survivors of the Rwandan genocide.

[@pb48711]

Thanks Gavin, I enjoy watching a disciple in Christ seeking to "rightly divide The Word of Truth" by searching the Scriptures. Preaching to the choir of course, one must never be myopic in their examination of The Word of God, lest he fall into believing a different gospel (which -as you know - is why we should always pray prior to reading The Word, asking for The Holy Spirit to provide insight, guidance, wisdom, and discernment that the fleshly aspect of our nature lacks). Thanks and appreciation aside, I am examining your claims starting at 37:41 where you make claim that the Scripture quoted is addressed only to the the people that Christ is presently speaking to. You invoke the pronoun "you" in the most literal of senses (the direct reference to the person(s) in immediacy to Christ), but I understand this differently. We know that Scripture is for all generations and every Word of God has meaning even in the present age as there is wisdom even behind even what many would conclude are purely historical events depicted in the more ancient times of the OT. That said, I see the word "you" in these verses as the Generic "you", and not the Specific "you" as you imply in your exposition on this slide. In other words, it infers a broader audience than the immediate audience of that specific time. Would you care to comment/clarify your position here, if you would be so kind. I just do not see compelling evidence that this pronoun is spoken in the Specific context. I see the pronoun "you" in most of these phrases as a generalization of His witness pool, which is all of humanity, time present and time future. Again, thanks for the wonderful videos. They always make me search even deeper into Scripture to rightly divide The Word of Truth.

[@filipkegel7839]

Are there any preterist commentaries on Revelation that you would recommend?

[@fellow_servant_jamesk8303]

Pan-mil. Yeah. I’ll grab that. Thanks again Gavin

[@OvercomingtheTribulation]

Why do you think the foolish virgins don’t bring enough oil to last all night?

[@emilesturt3377]

Amill, Partial Preterist here 👌🔥💥😂

[@bairfreedom]

I used to take a default view (pre trib rapture etc) . Then I came to Christ in a authentic personal way when I was 23 and started digging into the Bible really hard. It was interesting to see the complete absence of a pre trib escape etc. that I was taught my whole childhood. So I stepped back from it in belief for a while then ended up landing on a theory called "Pre wrath" . It makes the most sense to me and is more logical. It follows the premise that the seals are not the wrath of God, in fact you can see this by seal 5 when the Martyrs cry out and ask God when he WILl pour out his wrath. Then we see something like a rapture take place when after that a multitude just appear in the throne room of God. Jesus appears and the world freaks out, THEN the trumpets of wrath start to blow. I find it all interesting and am looking forward to it all when it happens, but I'm not going to condemn or seperate from brothers over such a trivial matter. Me and by closer brother vary on views and like to have friendly debates. It is fun! Lol These types of matters should not be split over at all.