Orthodox Preterist Overview

Introduction to Orthodox Preterist Playlist.
1) Apology for Eschatology 2) Topics in the Series 3) Terminology
4) Keeping it Simple

RESOURCES

Resources are designed to give you a deep enough understanding without drowning you in minutiae, speculations, and intra-mural conflicts. Written by accomplished scholars for lay audiences. Please note: just because I (basically) agree with the authors on orthodox preterism, doesn’t mean I agree with them on any other subject.

OLIVET DISCOURSE

DEE DEE WARREN
IT’S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD

The best commentary on the Olivet Discourse that you can find. I relied on it heavily in order to do the Olivet Discourse videos.

GARY DEMAR
LAST DAYS MADNESS

Interpretations of the Olivet Discourse interspersed with attacks on the fantasies of dispensationalism.

DAVID CHILTON
THE GREAT TRIBULATION

You can buy this on Amazon, or download it for free at this link. He discusses the “great tribulation” as revealed in the book of Revelation as well as the Olivet Discourse. It’s short – only about 150 pages. A good introduction.

REVELATION

DAVID CHILTON
DAYS OF VENGEANCE

This book convinced me that the Apocalypse was preterist. It is basically a commentary on Revelation, verse by verse. He only failed me at a couple of places. I relied heavily on his commentary to do my “Apocalypse is Preterist” videos. It is long, and Chilton goes off on some scholarly excursions which I found not only questionable, but distracting. However, if you have the patience, the book is very much worth it.

KENNETH L. GENTRY, JR.
THE BOOK OF REVELATION MADE EASY

KENNETH L. GENTRY, JR.
NAVIGATING THE BOOK OF REVELATION

I haven’t read these two books by Gentry on Revelation yet, but you can’t go wrong with Ken Gentry on preterism. He’s a scholar’s scholar.

KENNETH L. GENTRY, JR.
THE BEAST OF REVELATION

DANIEL

PHILIP MAURO
SEVENTY WEEKS AND THE GREAT TRIBULATION

Free to download. Mauro was an accomplished patent lawyer, and friend of Thomas Edison and Alexander Graham Bell. He was on the Carpathian the night that ship rescued the survivors of the Titanic. He wrote the brief that enabled William Jennings Bryan to win the famous Scopes trial. A very clear and concise writer. I got the idea that Herod was referred to in the last verses of Daniel 11 from Mauro and Gary DeMar.

JAY ROGERS
IN THE DAYS OF THESE KINGS

740 page commentary on Daniel from an orthodox preterist viewpoint. Rogers has appeared on YouTube with Gary Demar. The book got great reviews on the website cited above.

[nickcosta]

On the Hyper Preterist point, the devil doesn’t get thrown into the lake of fire but rather the bottomless pit. Hyper or Full preterists speculate the devil was loosed from the bottomless pit, as per Revelations, after the millennium reign ended in 1800-1850

[drb]

Great video. I know a lot of reformed Calvinist hold to this view. I myself a bible believer who attends a Wesleyan Church also believes in orthodox preterism. I also know of anabaptist and independent fundamentalist baptist who hold to this. Point I’m making is people of all denominations are starting to connect the dots. Use scripture to prove scripture that’s the best way. Great video

[kylec]

I've been a partial preterist or "orthodox preterist" for about 4 years now. I was also a pretribber and then I stumbled by the grace of God on a book by David Chilton called "Paradise Restored". Its totally opened up so many "problem" passages that I used to stumble on, some of which you touched out. It's even strengthened my faith to see the prophecies of Christ fulfilled on "this generation" (1st century Israel), just like He said! I pray for the day of the death of the premillenial deception that has consumed the Church into weakness and retreatism.

[PastorJ-qbts]

Hello brother. I used to listen to your Preterist Primer and Potpourri tapes religiously thanks to "Dee Dee Warren's" old website. Question if you don't mind: you mention three views of Revelation, but what about Idealism and all its offshoots? Most Reformed and/or Calvinistic scholars and pastors hold this position nowadays, such as G.K. Beale, Sam Waldron, Sam Storms, the late William Hendricksen, and Dennis Johnson. Over the years, I have been swayed away from Preterism to this position myself. But aside from that, it would be beneficial to hear a refutation of it from your perspective. Grace and peace to you!

[EaZiE]

Anyone have thoughts on 1 Tim. 2:14 "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression." This is Paul taking quite a literal stance on the Genesis story, whereas a preterist would normally take the story as allegorical. How is Paul taking this literal and how can you explain the outcome of such an interpretation in the face of scientific findings? If evolution is true there was no creation of man/woman distiction (this came millions of years prior) and when exactly did this so called deceiving of woman take place?

[Ben-qblj]

Thank you, brother Dan! It's almost impossible to avoid zealous full preterism. I'm fascinated by how much more the bible's perfection is including the Jewish war!

[michaelgenova]

Can a person stay balanced ? Where is the cross in preterism?

[newcovenantgrace]

This is a great series! I'm NCT as well. But you are the first NCT that I know of who is also a partial preterist. Most NCT adherents are not. I use to be a partial preterist. However, I find that it suffers the same difficulties as disp. Anyway. I would love to talk to you if you would like. I really like talking about NCT and associated topics. If you are intersted PM me on my channel. Please! I would really like to talk with you.

[Ben-qblj]

Historicism isn't perfect. But Christendom in Europe isn't debate, Dan. We've spread GOSPEL to the ends of the earth. The date-setting is such a turn off, though.

[Ben-qblj]

They HAVE HIJACKED THE WORD, DAN! It's why we get called so many names! It's so ridiculous for someone new.. Just wanting Scripture explaining Scripture!

[JohnnyDoe]

To claim a pre-70 A.D. dating for Revelation flies in the face of the general scholarly consensus that it was written after 70 A.D., well into the 80's or 90's A.D. towards the end of John's life. There are so many reasons why it's ludicrous to give the pre-70 A.D. dating for this book.

Preterism in any form also doesn't work if Revelation was written after the fall of Jerusalem. John was exiled to Patmos under Emperor Domitian who reigned from 81 to 96 A.D., and to say John was exiled under the psychotic Emperor Nero is highly improbable because Nero had no interest in exiling Christians and every interest in setting them on fire. The Laodicean church in Revelation 3 was depicted as wealthy in worldly riches, which would have been around the 90's A.D. as most scholars agree upon since a devastating earthquake in Laodicea took place in 60 A.D. and would have left them in abject poverty during that decade instead of decadent wealth.

If Revelation was written in the 60's A.D., then this was roughly around the same time Paul's letter to the Ephesians was written. If this is the case, then Paul and John contradicted each other regarding the state of the church at Ephesus: "Therefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, do not cease to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers" Ephesians 1:15-16 and " And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience"-- Ephesians 2:1-2

"Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love. Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place—unless you repent" Revelation 2:4-5. So which was it? Was the early church in Ephesus loving Jesus, or leaving their first love? It could not have been both.

1 John was written in the 90's A.D., which places it at odds with the Revelation pre-70 A.D. alleged timestamp. When he says 'it is the last hour', this could not have been referring to a pre-70 A.D. time frame. And if the end of the age had already taken place then this makes no sense. And there is no evidence for 1, 2, and 3 John being written before the fall of Jerusalem.

There is also no evidence of an established church in Smyrna in the 60's A.D. when preterism says Revelation was written. Polycarp (69 A.D.-155 A.D.) was a major leader in the church at Smyrna, as well as a disciple of John, and in his letter to the Philippians he writes in chapter 11 that while Paul boasted about them in his epistle to them, Smyrna had not yet known Christ. Philippians was written around 62-63 A.D., so this throws a major wrench into a pre-70 A.D. date for the book of Revelation.


The Christian chronicler Hegesippus wrote around 150 A.D. that John was exiled to Patmos under the reign of Domitian (who reigned between 81 and 96 A.D.), and this was common knowledge among the early and later church. Also for this and more see 'A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs' put together by David Bercot, which compiles a collection of ante-Nicene church fathers and what they believed on over 700 topics. Missing from early church history is the belief that Jesus returned in 70 A.D. invisibly or any significance to the pre-70 A.D. dating of Revelation.

Also, a fallacious argument that is often used by the preterist position is that if John wrote Revelation in the mid-90's A.D. then he most certainly would have mentioned the destruction of Jerusalem some two and a half decades prior. But why would he? Revelation is a prophetic book about the future, not a history book. In the very first verse of chapter one it says Revelation is to show God's servants what WILL take place, not what has ALREADY taken place. And the Greek word from which 'shortly' is translated means quickly, speedily. In other words, when it happens it won't take a long time to finish. But how long is long? Are we looking at this from man's perspective or God's? Preterism takes man's perspective, by arguing that the Greek word τάχος, tachos, can only mean a short time after John received the vision on Patmos. But what does Scripture say? A day with the Lord is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day. God is not bound by man's expectations. See 2 Peter 3 and Psalm 90. Jesus WILL return again, but unfortunately thanks to preterism there are people in the church (partial-preterists, that is, and not full preterists who serve a completely different Jesus) who will not be looking for Him.