Reviews on 2 Guys

Spirit and Life Lectures on the Book of RevelationDuring this past weekend, thirteen preachers in the church of Christ gathered at the Lake Shore Church of Christ in South Haven Michigan to discuss and present lectures on the Book of Revelation. The lectures were also live-streamed and recorded to YouTube.com. This was a historical event in that it is the first conference where every man held a consistent view on the dating of the book of Revelation as having been written before A.D. 70. We'll discuss some highlights of the event.

Most today deny the process of the resurrection because of their desire for their bodies to rise from the ground. Some do not believe that bodies will rise from the ground, nevertheless, they interpret the resurrection texts as all being references to individual events. Does the Bible teach a corporate concept of the resurrection? In this broadcast we will demonstrate the bodily concept of resurrection from the progressive, corporate paradigm.

This is part 5 of the review of Drew Leonard's teaching on the resurrection. Join us for an exciting study where we critique the misleading statements and errors in the attempt to refute the 70AD resurrection.

Drew Leonard's Power 2017 Lecture demonstrated his attempt to dissect the fulfilled view of the resurrection of the dead. He argued that the age to come was yet future and was not in contrast to the end of the age of Moses. He also argued that since Paul was a member of the firstfruits community as a Jew, he should already have been resurrection per Philippians 3:10-11. These and other statements by Leonard demonstrate he does not yet have the grasp of resurrection or of our presentation of the arguments that he claims to have. He rejects plain teachings of Scripture to maintain his futurist theories.

Today we complete our review of Drew Leonard's presentation on the A.D. 70 Doctrine. In the past we have exposed is unscholarly use of at hand in 2 Thessaonials  and mello to refer to a non-imminent cong

This is part 2 of our review of Drew Leonard's attempted rebuttal of Chirst's return in A.D. 70.

Drew Leonard, author several books including,  A.D. 70 Taking a Look at Hyper-Preterism, Daniel, Zechariah and Revelation, offer his attempted refutation of the coming of Christ in the first century. He spoke on the Southaven, MS, Power 2017 "End of Time" Lectures. Like every speaker before and after him, Leonard never offered a logical argument from which to draw a Bible-based conclusion that time would end. Yet every speaker assumed or asserted it.Leonard made several arguments in his attempt to dismantle the Preterist view of Christ's return in A.D. 70. Among which was Curtis Cate's argument on Mello, while at the same time granting that Matthew 16:27-28 has an A.D. 70 application, contrary to many of his brethren. He claimed as a few others that Jesus and Paul contradicted themselves on 2 Thessalonians 2:2 "if" the text means "close" or "at hand". He asserted an "end to time" termination of the reign of Christ and argued Daniel 7:13-14 and Acts 1:9-11 refer to the establishment of the kingdom on Pentecost.Drew along with other Amillennial futurists seek attempt to circumvent the A.D. 70 comings in Scripture by arguing for multiple interim comings of Christ, which they claim were neither personal, visible nor bodily. They borrow comings from other generations to argue the coming in 70AD was figurative and not applicable to the second appearance to the nation and age in which Jesus died.Leonard cites other arguments on the Lord's Supper, the firstfruits resurrection motifs, the dating of Revelation, etc. Recently, he engaged in a live public debate with Steve Baisden, in Ludington, Michigan. 

Mike Benson's Southaven POWER 2017 Lecture on the Parable of the Virgins in Matthew 25:1-13 speaks of delay of the coming of the Bridegroom. He gives the impressions that Jesus' coming is far removed from the first century settting in which it is found. However, the marriage theme is rooted in the Law and the Prophets in books such as Hosea and Isaiah and Jeremiah. These all, along with all the New Testament writings supply all the information needed to identify the subjects, time and nature of the wedding. 

Today,. we continue our discussion of the Parable of the Virgins presented by Mike Benson in the POWER 2017 Southaven Church of Christ lectures. For the beginning of this study see last week's broadcast. Don gave an excellent survey of the marriage theme from Hosea and we coupled that with the Feast of Trumpets (HaKiddushin) or the Wedding of the Messiah theme associated with that event. Stay tune for more insights in addressing this futurist paradigm.

Mike Benson presented an informative lesson on the "Parable of the Virgins" at the POWER 2017 Lectures presented by the Southaven Church of Christ, Southaven, MS, 38671. He said some things with which Preterists agree. However, the after stating his former professor's advice about viewing Scripture from a first century viewpoint, he made all 21st centuiry applications of the text with no application of the events to those to whom the parable was spoken. We find this problematic and a violation of that "first century" audience relevance principle.  In today's lesson, we examine, critique and exegete the text of Matthew 25:1-12 with the hope that some of these brothers will begin to open their eyes to the flaws in their hermeneutic and appications of these end times texts. Needless to day, Benson made some major contradictions and admissions in his lesson that we will demonstrate. Join us for this lively review at 6pm Century, 7pm eastern.

On the week of July 23-27 the Southaven Church of Christ held a series of lectures on the "End of Time". About 25 to 30 speakers lectured on what allegedly was the end of time. However, not one of them attempted to explain where the Bible actually taught the end of time. Keith Ritchie delivered a lesson on that day and hour. It was the usual attempt to separate the chapter of Matthew into two subjects. His basic line of argumentation was the following:Matthew 24:3 described the destruction of JerusalemIt is divided at verse 36 to speak of the alleged future coming of the LordGod had appointed a day in which he would judge the world, Acts 17:30-31He would come as a thief in the night, visible, audible, when the earth would burn upJesus speaks of 70AD by using "those days" but of the final return by "that day" 37-43Daniel Rogers (filling in for Don Preston) will join me today in continuing our review of Keith Ritchie's lecture to see if the things he said are so according to the Scritpures.

Today we will dicuss the PPW (Presterist Pilgrim Weekend) 2017. We had a great time and some excllent lessons. Join us for a recap and discussion of the events.

You can also watch the video on YouTube and Facebook on All Things Fulfilled. Here are the propositions:Resolved: The Bible teaches that at the Coming of Christ, as foretold in Romans 11:25-27 - God will will place His emphasis back on ethnic Israel.Affirm: Himie PickettDeny: Don K. Preston Resolved: The Bible teaches that the salvation of Israel at the coming of the Lord - as foretold in Romans 11:25-27 was fulfilled at the time of the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70.Don K. Preston AffirmsHimie Pickett Denies

On April 20-23rd, Holger Neubauer of Michigan, debated Howard Denham on the Resurrection of the Body associated with the coming of the Lord. The debate covered many topics that have plagued brethren in the churches of Christ and others for years. Holger demonstrated the fallacies of splitting the eschaton between Antiochus Epiphanes, Pentecost, 70AD, 476 AD and the future, all positions held by Denham on end time passages. 

Tonight's broadcast will be an overview recap of the Holger-Neubauer Debate on the Resurrection of the Body. This was a great debate and tremendous opportunity for people to hear the truth. Already, it has had more views than many of the videos of Bellview's Lectures on the topic. It also show how cowardly and disinterested the speakers of the Bellview Lecturers on Eschatology were. Maybe one or two of them showed up for the debate, yet all of them taught against it. They were unwilling to support it with their presence.We are looking forward to more reviews of this debate and much good that will come from it. We're also looking forward to the upcoming debates with Don Preston. I am currently trying to contact Dr. Jack Evans, Sr. of Southwestern Christian College to see if he would be interested in a live public debate.

Each person who embraces Covenant Eschatology has a unique but interesting story to tell. These experiences are always enlightening and spiritual uplifting. They do not contain all happy beginnings or endings but they are rich in value lessons for one's convictions in the word of God and in the stand for truth. Courageous men are breaking free of the shackles of traditionalism and bringing refreshing light to the understanding of othes. More and more are being encouraged to accept the truth without fear. This is a broadcast you'll definitely want to hear.

During the past Preterist Pilgrim Weekend, Don K Preston of the Preterist Research Institute and David Hester of Faulkner University engaged in a public oral debate. Don will share highlights from the debate and his experience in live public exchange with a representative from the Amillennial churches of Christ.The debate was well attended marking one of the largest crowds yet for a Preterist Pilgrim Weekend. 

On July 14-15, at this years Preterist Pilgrim Weekend, a live public oral debate was conducted between Don K Preston, of the Preterist Research Institute of Ardmore, Oklahoma and David Hester, adjunct professor of Faulkner University in Montgomery, Alabama. The two met on the polemic platform for two nights to affirm the proposition that Christ's return was future (Hester) and Past (Preston).Today, we will discuss some of the highlights of the debate and the various positions, arguments and assertions made. Join us at 6pm Central.

Are we living in the Christian age or the age to come? Heb. 2 and 6?Can we find different kinds of comings, judgments the O.T. Scriptures in the O.T. When was the prophecy of Joel chapter 2 fulfilled? Is the great and terrible day of the Lord yet future?We're told by Gary Summers that in the Book of Revelation, Rome is the great city, also called the harlot. Is there any proof of that statement?Mr. Summers says the use of language alone is not valid, i.e. is not sufficient to determine whether a text pertains to the fall of Jerusalem or not. We agree, but is that reason to apply the text speaking of Mystery Babylon to Rome?How many builders or sailors were walking the streets of Jerusalem? This  is a common objection when we speak of the merchants and ships that had commercial interests in Jerusalem. Historically Rome, not Israel, Mr. Summers says, was the persecutor of Jerusalem. He does of course state that Jesus referred to his own followers, Rev. 3 and admits that the coming of the Lord in Sardis is not a future coming, while yet logically being driven to the conclusion that this was a coming as a thief in the night. On final judgment, he admits similar language with national judgments, Isa 19 is not the coming of the Lord saying sometimes they were literal and sometimes they were figurative. We'll discuss  his application of Matt. 3:7-12 to the end of time coming, because the Lord would gather the wheat and chaff and cast into the unquenchable fire, per Matt. 8:11, 13:49-ff, He asks, "How in the world would you get Ad 70 out of these verses and the judgment of Tyre and Sidon. Other passages cited for a future end are 2 Thess 1:10 and Acts 24:25 and Rev. 1:7, every eye shall see him. Even Matt. 26:64, by Summers has a future fulfillment. 

On last week we examined John 14-16 in discussing the Messianic temple of the Lord. We pointed out the Old Covenant background of the Temple typology in John 14. It is the house of God of Isaiah and the kingdom of Zechariah 6:12-13, and Daniel 2:44-45. Isaiah 28 and 1 Peter spoke of the foundation stone. We also pointed out some word studies on Coming again, prepared, the living quarters of the priests in the temple of God expressed as the abiding places and the use of mello in John 14:22 which states Christ was about to manifest himself to the apostles after his going away,These and the little while, great tribulaton motif of John 14 were overlooked by Gary Summers in his Bellview lectures. We also showed how the Messianic Temple of John was a house not made with hands and came down out of heaven per Revelaton 21:1-3.In tonights study we will continue the critique delving into comments made on the book of Revelation and of Matthew 3:7-11 and John, the Baptist. Tune in for an exciting broadcast. For more information visit DonKPreston.com and AllThingsFulfilled.com's YouTube Page. See also the website at www.AllThingsFulfilled.com

Gary Summers lectures on the Second "Coming" in the Book of Revelation and John 14. He totally evades the "little while" in the text and argues some coming verses apply only to the coming of the Holy Spirit.He argues that the use of language is not sufficient to determine the meaning of the message in Revelation such as Mystery Babylon and others. In previous lessons they argued that we claim reading was not sufficient to understand the Revelation. They agreed, but now here is their own lecturer who claims that reading is not sufficient to understand.He argues Jerusalem was not the great city, and that Matthew 3:7-11 refers to the end of time. He stated that the N.T. uses the age to come in totally different ways, sometimes referring to the age of Moses, the Christian age and at others to heaven. He claims we are in the age to come of Hebrews 2:5 and 6:5.For more information on the study of eschatology, visit, DonKPreston.com and AllThingsfulfilled.com. See also our channels on YouTube for video studies. 

Today we critique the presentation of David Brown at the Bellview Lectures and his attempt to refute covenant eschatology by discussing the figurative language of the Bible and our treatment of it. The Lord used figurative language when speaking to the Apostles on the subject of eschatology in the 16th chapter of John and throughout the book. Anyone who reads the gospel of John and does not recognize the figurative language therein is in for a rude awakening. Join as we critique the writings David Brown. Visit AllThingsFulfilled.com and DonKPreston.com for more information. 

Tonight's broadcast continues our critique of David Brown's "Old Testament Texts Misused By Covenant Eschatology" Bellview Presentation. He claims that we teach error on the Old Covenant, the End of Miracles, the Last Days and more. Our approach will be to examine the comments made by David in the light of the Scriptures.We'll also be comparing David's teaching with the other men who spoke at Bellview to show the difference between his views, theirs and ours. 

David Brown, in a presentation delivered at the most recent Bellview Lectures, attempted to respond to Realized Eschatology. He has claimed those who espouse and advocate Covenant Eschatology do not answer questions, are misguided on the last days, the end of miracles and much more. Tonight, we examine the claims and establish the truth of the Preterist view of Scripture.This is scheduled to be a very enlightening show with lots of action so don't miss it. For more information, check out our websites at DonKPreston.com and AllThingsFulfilled.com.

Don and William will finish our critique of Kenneth Gentry's recent article entitled Are Preterists Really Futurists? Gentry's article is another example of "mis-direction" and misrepresentation by the opponents of Covenant Eschatology, and it demonstrates how weak the futurist position is. Don K. Preston will also share Gentry's response to yet another debate challenge that he presented to Gentry following the publication of Gentry's article. So, be sure to join us tonight, 6 PM central time, for Two Guys and A Bible!

Are Preterists Futurists? This is a topic we began on last week and will continue tonight. It addresses the real issues between partial and full preterists. Kennth L. Gentry, Jr., uses the word preterist in a misleading way. He is not a full preterist. He uses preterist but really means partial preterist. He refers to full preterists, those who truly are preterists as "hyper-preterist" which is a pejorative term that is not our choosing or preference.Nevertheless, we will show what the differences are between the views in the study tonight so there is no question as to who is a preterist and who is a partial preterist. We'll also demonstrate that preterists are futurists.Gentry doesn't like the term futurists (a term they have historically and approvingly used to refer to themselves), when it comes to their eschatology, yet that is precisely what it is. He will tell ou he does not believe all Bible prophecy has been fulfilled. He believes in a yet future return of Christ and the resurrection. That makes him a futurist.We will offer more clarity and discussions from the Bible to support our claims. Turne in at 6pm. Visit DonKPreston.com or BibleProphecy.com and visit AllThingsFulfilled.comDial in to the show to ask a question. We will screen your question so make sure you are ready to ask it as succinctly as possible.Dial:  347-838-8252. The chat room will also be open. Join in the discussion.

Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., ThD, and author of Before Jerusalem Fell, The Beast of Revelation and Navigating the Book of Revelation, to name a few of his works, has launched an attack against Full Preterism, also known as Realized Eschatology or Covenant Eschatology. Gentry wrote in his blog via question, "Are Preterists Really Futurists? The Title is quite misleading and attempts to skew the issues ever so slightly. Gentry is a PARTIAL Preterist. That means not Full or Consistent. Why is that the case? It's because he yet believers in a FUTURE return of Christ. That make's him a FUTURIST. Thus, the reason for our modification of his title above: Are PARTIAL PRETERISTS Really FUTURISTS? We answer a resounding yes as we discuss the reasons on tonight's broadcast.This is very important because in Gentry's latest blog, PostmillennialismToday.com, he acknowledges the growth and influence of the Consistent Preterist view. First, he refutes a charge of wishful thinking by Sam Frost who argued that Full Preterism was not growing. Gentry's concern is that it is getting out of hand for futurists. They tried to control it by shutting down communication within the walls of the church buildings and on their limited platforms, but he acknowledged that the internet has been the main source of our growth. Add to that a host of publications, seminars, and events.He calls the imminent time statements, "this generation", "coming soon" "at hand", "shortly to come to pass" leaping off points for the fulfillment of all Bible prophecy. Yet, Gentry leaps off from the Creeds, in arguing for the same terms to support his view of the Book of Revelation. He makes other unfounded charges. We will address them in tonight's broadcast. You don't want to miss it.

In tonight's review of Doug Post's lecture at the Bellview Church of Christ's attempts to refute Covenant Eschatology, we have more trouble for these troubled lectures. Doug Post gives up the farm on the Dating of Revelation and the imminent at hand, shortly to come to pass, soon, about to happen in their generation time statements. He also acknowledges with a reasonable amount of documentation that all books of the N.T. were written prior to the destruction of the Jerusalem, citing Clement of Rome.Post says as early as the 2nd and 3rd centuries, documentation for the pre-dating of the New Testament was fairly common. He cites Geisler in saying that if Revelation has been written after A.D. 70 surely they would have mentioned the most important national and prophetic event in their history especially since it involved corroborration of the deity of Christ.After making such self-incriminating doctrinal statements, Post then begins to hedge in an attempt to take back the impact of what he should profoundly and boldly states in the beginning of his lecture.For more information visit: donkpreston.com, bibleprophecy.com and allthingsfulfilled.com 

Tonight we continue the critique of Johnny Oxendine's lecture on the resurrection of the dead from 1 Thessalonians chapter 4. We address the chapter in its historical setting. We provide a comparative exegesis (interpretation) of the text by comparing it with the Matthew 24 text. Matthew 24 has all the textual keys for an interpretation of the resurrection. Yet, this divinely inspired text is discredited and disregarded as a valid source of information for the chapter. The ramifications of admitting that Matthew 24 and its AD70 emphasis is too much for the Amillennial Churches of Christ to swallow. As a result, they abandon Scripture and formulate a new eschatological paradigm of futurism.Today's broadcast is one you don't want to miss. Be sure to share it with family and friends. For more information check out DonKPreston.com or visit AllThingsFulfilled.com.Have you studied the eschatological emphasis of Psalm 23. Check it out here. 

We continue the study of the resurrection in 1 Thessalonians 4, critiquing Johnny Oxendine's presentation at the Bellview Lectures. Our study includes a comparison of the text and language of Matthew 24. The time statements and symbolism used in both texts support the first century fulfillment of Christ's return. Resurrection, erroneously believed to refer to biological bodies rising from literal graves is shown to be salvation consummated from Pentecost untl 70AD.Join Don Preston and William Bell for this exciting study. 

Join us for the continuation of our review of Johnny Oxendine's Bellview Church of Christ Lecture on the resurrection of the dead. We'll examine the context and the correlations between Matthew 24 and 1 Thessalonians 4. Both text contain the same constituent elements of the parousia, the trumpet, clouds, with temporal parameters of "this generation" and "we who are alive and remain". We'll also examine additional contextual evidence from both epistles as time permits. This is a great opportunity to study the difference between the Amillennial biological focus of the resurrection versus Covenant Eschatology. For more information visit DonKPreston.com and AllThingsFulfilled.com. In addition, our youtube channels contain hundreds of videos on the subject.  

Johnny Oxidene of California approaches the text of 1 Thessalonians from a contemporary time frame. He claims the same type of error perpetrated then is perpetrated today. He speaks of those who remain alive in Paul's day as though they are alive today. The following are the claims made for the futurist view of eschatology. He reads texts but does little if any exegesis.The world is over.The text applies to everyone.Has anyone made an improper application of the Scripture.Argues "those who sleep' refers to physical deathIf there is no hope the Bible is uselessClaims preterists are splintering, hyperpreterist, consistent preterist, redirectionalistSecond coming happens at unexpected time as a thief in the nightSays Chist would not come soon, per 2 Thess. 2:3What would people do if they knew exactly when that day was. All kind of sin till a day before.By the word of the Lord, prophetic word spoken by the Lord to PaulWe who are alive and remain (that seems to be us, i.e. 21st century ChristiansActs 1:11, No hermeneutic could allow for a figurative interpretation of these versesWe know not the day or the hourCalls it blasphemous indignance2 Thess. 1:7-102 Pet 3:10-12 reserved unto fire and judgment (can't reconcile with destruction of Jerusalem) 

Two weeks ago we began a study on Charle's Pogue's Bellview Lecture on Eschatology, namely, his treatement of John 5:28-29. He believes tthatt  two resurrections separated in time by almost 2000 years and counting. He dismisses a first century return of Christ and associated resurrection per 2 Tim. 4:1, by citing the term, "the hour is coming and now is" to refer to what he deems as the first resurrection in John 5 which is our redemption. He then reasons that the resurrection of verses 28-29 are ascribed to bodies raised from literal graves.This approach sounds plausible on the surface, especially with the use of "graves" to the Western mind. However, a closer application of the text along with the context from which it is quoted, i.e. Daniel 12, creates problems for the literal view. We will address this and other problems with a futurist view of the resurrection. 

It is little wonder that brethren at the Bellview Lectures have difficulty with the resurrection. They have challenges with the establishment of the kingdom, believing it was all consummated in 30AD. Charles Pogue seems to have no understanding of a transition or the progressive establishment of the church. He argues the hour was imminent for the "spiritual resurrection" but separates it from the latter part of the text creating two resurrections, a spiritual one firt and a physical one later. He again argues the kingdom was at hand, fully established on Pentecost, never even citing Lk. 21:31. He also does not call attention to the same use of at hand to refer to the parousia or coming of the Lord in such texts as Jas. 5:7-8, 1 Pet. 4:7 and many others. He asked about Acts 2:38 and the remission of sins, but would not read through to Acts 3:19 which states that sins would be "blotted out" at the restoration of all things when times of refreshing would come from the "presence" of the Lord, i.e. when God would send Christ to them.John 5:28-29 is a quote from Daniel 12:2. But so is Rom. 13:1-12, which says the resurrection was at hand and that they were in the "last hour". That is after Pentecost, thus after the "spiritual resurrection" which he affirmed was already in progress. So, now he has three resurrections and three hours unless he begins to do some consolidation.

Was the law fulfilled at the cross? This is the belief of many in the churches of Christ. In this study we will examine one of the key passages that address the concept of two laws in existence at one time. It is the view of Whitlock and others that two laws cannot co-exist.The message of two covenants, two sons, two cities, two lands reverbates throughout the Scriptures yet many choose not to acknowledge the siginificance or even the persence of it. For more information visit www.AllThingsFulfilled.com and www.DonKPreston.com

Welcome to another episode of Two Guys and A Bible presented by Fulfilled Radio, A Voice You Can Trust. Tonight we examine the teachings of Jess Whitlock on the Allegory of Galatians 4, which is the study of Abraham's two sons, Ishmael and Isaac and what they mean in the larger picture of redemption. This allegory is definitely eschatological in nature. It addresses the question of two covenants, the time of the establishment of hte kingdom and who is actually and truthfully perverted the word. As most Amillennialists in the churches of Christ cite Jn. 19:30 for the proof of the end of hte law, we examine it as well, along with Matthew 5:5 till all is fulfilled and Romans 6:14. Do these scriptures actually teach the law had already passed?

This week's broadcast continues the critique began last week for Doug Post and his concept of the resurrection from Judaism. The reasoning which some Ammillennialists use follows the same line of reasoning by Post. Mostly, it represents a repeat of arguments from men such as Wayne Jackson, Curtis Cates and Terry Varner. The views presented by these men do not represent any significant changes since they were first advanced. We have thoroughly responded to them in our writings, audio and video recordings and in our public speeches. Join us today for a thorough and comprehnn

Tonight we engage in some of the most controversial points which involve the resurrection of the dead ones. The arguments center around the alleged dead body of Judaism. This discussion will address the time and nature fo the resurrection. We also examine the firstfruits and the harvest concept found in the feast days. We are more than wiling to engage with Doug Post and respond to his concerns about the resurrection and most importantly the Biblical text. For more information see our websites at DonKPreston.com and AllThingsFulfilled.com

Tonight we continue to review Gene Hill's Daniel 9 Presentation. We look at the 6 blessings and the 70 Weeks. The role of the temple and desolation of the sanctuary as the focal point of the prophecy fulfillment.Does Daniel see the end of time in this prophecy or the time of the end? The confusion of Amillennialism is apparent and our purpose is to bring clarity and consistency to the chaos.Join Don K Preston, D.Div, and William Bell for an hour of Bible exegesis on the prophecies of Daniel.

Today we will fill in the gap left by most commentators on Daniel 9. Our study to will provide a clear analysis and breakdown of the weakness in Hill's exegesis showing why the a futurist view of Daniel 9 does not and cannot work.We'll cover the text and provide Bible support for the reasons a future paradigm will not work and why the only logical conclusion is to interpret the text from the Preterist point of view. Even Amillennialists in Hill's Camp disagree with his analysis of Daniel 9, demonstrating that perhaps they do not have a clear consensus view on the subject of eschatology and are in need of help to understand the text in order to create unity in their ranks.We don't have all the answers but we do have enough answers that unify not only the prophecies of Daniel, but also harmonize with all the other texts in the New Testament regarding the time of the end. For more information visit: DonKPreston.com and AllThingsFulfilled.com

Last week we began a review of Gene Hill's position on Daniel 9, showing where he divided the prophecy of Daniel into two separate time frames, one in 30AD and another in 70AD. Wouldn't that make Daniel's calculation be incorrect. If it's 70 weeks, how can it be both times. This is the problem of Amillennialism that they refuse to face, i.e. the contradictions.We' demonstrated from Hebrews 9, Luke 17 and the Jewish Festal calendar on the harmony of Daniel being fulfilled in 70AD. Tonight we examine more of the message from Hill's lecture. 

Tonight we critique Gene Hill's Bellview Lecture on Daniel 9 and his claim that all of the elements fulfilled in Jesus' ministry and Passion and how this harmonizes with his claim that  Daniel was fulfilled in the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70.  Was the Abomination of Desolation fulfilled in Daniel's 70 Weeks?We'll take a look at Matthew 16:27-28 and examine whether the versus are or can be divided into two or more events. The tradition of the Spirit came in power on Pentecost and the establishment of the kingdom of Christ, throne of Christ, without end -- Isaiah 9.We'll check this out in light of the statement that Christ will surrender the throne at his coming and "This plane of existence will no longer exist" and the earthly domain of the kingdom will cease to exist.When was Matthew 25:31 fulfilled and who are all the nations. John 5 "all that are in the graves" all means all and its' relation to the 70 Weeks of Daniel and chaper 12. We'll examine why funerals are yet being preached.Lastly, time permitting, we'll examine 2 Thessalonians 1-- to you who are being troubled... you come over here and rest while I take care of those who do not obey the gospel! That's a lot on the table, but we look forward to you joining us.

Tonight we continue our review and critique of Michael Hatcher's presentation on the Law of Moses, When Did It End?. We will focus on Romans 7, and whether two covernants can co-exist? Hatcher inconsistently and incorrectly argue they cannot. However, as demonstrated in last week's program, this fallacy was exposed.Hatcher acknowledges that the kingdom would be established during the days of the Roman Empire. He also acknowledges it would be crushed during the same time. What Hather does not understand is that the time the latter occurs is the judgment! It is the equivalent of 2 Tim. 4;1 and many other such judgment or second coming texts. Hatcher makes this Pentecost. He knows those kingdoms were not destoyed at Pentecost.He claims Rome was not destroyed until the 5th century, thus by his logic, judgment occurred in the 5th century.He also makes comments on  Col. 2:14-16, Heb. 7:11-12 and 2 Cor. 3:11 and Heb. 8. We will do our best to address all texts in today's broadcast.Tune in today to hear the continuation of this discussion.

This week, our review continues with Michael Hatcher, minister of the church of Christ on the topic of the Law of Moses, and when it ceased and whether two laws could co-exist. Last week we pointed out that God called Abraham under a different law separating him from those outside of the Abrahamic call and covenant. They had their own law of circumcision and those who did not conform would be cut off from the people. Yet Abraham interacted with the Pharaoh of Egypt who was amenable to God, and acknowledged the same, yet did not practice circumcision. These Scriptures need an explanation, a truthful, honest explanation by the men who claim two laws cannot co-exist. The same was true under Moses who had a covenant God did not give to those outside of Israel. Were the Gentiles not amenable to God? According the Hatcher, the answer would be no. If not, then why did Christ die to make of the "two" one new man? More questions which need to be answered. Join us on the broadcast for more insights. Visit our websites at BibleProphecy.com and AllThingsFulfilled.com

Tonight we examine the Law of Moses presented by Michael Hatcher who takes the standard view of the churches of Christ, which basically states the law was nailed to the cross per Colossian 2 and completely done away in 30 AD. This position has manifest probnlems with it and those have been exposed in our public oral debates. These presentations amount to a bit of sophistry and exegetical gymnastics to place some events at the cross, others during the transition and the remaining ones at an alleged future end of time. 

Daniel Denham makes several observations on various words used in the New Testament related to eschatology. Some of which are the terms such as mello, cosmos, aion, oikoumene and others which he misapplies in his attempt to respond to Covenant Eschatology. For example, he argues that if cosmos refers to the Jewish order then "lust" ceased in 70. This is an example of the trivial approach he has taken on such terms. We will examine whether his assumptions about cosmos, aion and others are correct in such passages to expose how he misunderstands and miscontrues the meaning of these terms in their respective contexts. For more information visit BibleProphecy.com and AllThingsFulfilled.com

Jess Whitlock made an attempt to respond to Covenant Eschatology by offering an exegesis of Galatians 4:21-31. He cited Max King's chart, made several quotes from the Spirit of prophecy and used the usual arguments we have heard for over 30 years. One of his main proof texts was John 19:34, along with Col. 2, and Rom. 6:14.He also offered a rsponse to Matthew 5:17-18.His presentation is a classic example of those who do not understand covenant eschatology, nor do they properly establish the context of the Old or New Testament. Gaps existed everyone in his attempt at making a logical presentation. 

On  last week wwe began  a review of Jerry Brewer's presentation on the nature of prophecy. Mr. Brewer began his lesson charging that Max King and Don K. Preston were the he equivalent of Hymenaeus and Philetus. He saw no problem with his abuse of the text in that application.It is obvious that Jerry Brewer is ill-informed on the teachings of King, Preston and the Scripture as it relates to eschatology. He cites his views as having been taught him years ago, and it doesn't appear that he has added much to his repetoire on these texts since.Today we will discuss more of his comments from Matt. 24-25, the destruction of the literal cosmos from Psa. 102, and the alleged division of Matt. 24, which he divides in verse 36.He claims because all things are fulfilled per King, nothing remains for us today.  See DonkPreston.com and AllThingsFulfilled.com 

Two Guys And A Bible

Tonight is a review of Johnny Oxendine, at the recent Bellview church of Christ lectureship. Oxendine taught on 2 Thessalonians 2, claiming that the Man of Sin was / is the Roman Catholic pope and that Satan is behind the teaching of preterism because proponents have no love of the Truth (Covenant Eschatology). Join us as we critique this key text in the study of the end times. Visit our websites: http://BibleProphecy.com and http://AllThingsFulfilled.com