Are there valid distinctions between the “first section” of Matthew 24 and the so-called “second section” that demand that the Discourse is about two radically different subjects, i.e. the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the world?
View More Objections to a United Olivet Discourse– Answers!
RESPONDING TO SIMON KISTEMAKER’S REVEALING CHAPTER ON REVELATION #6 Don K. Preston (D. Div.) This article will be very brief, but in the next installment…
View More Responding to Simon Kistemaker on the Dating of Revelation -#6
It should be obvious that Edwards actually disparages reliance on Sola Scriptura. He castigates “private interpretation” based on a distorted application of 2 Peter 1:20. Scripture no where- EVER – devalues private study, individual interpretation as Roderick Edwards does.
View More Responding to the Critics: A Look at Roderick Edwards’ Book: About Preterism – Article #1Responding to the Critics: A Response to Jason Bradfield on Luke 21:22 – #5 More Desperation from the Partial Preterist Camp As I reported…
View More Responding to the Critics on Luke 21.22 – #5Responding to the Critics – A Response to Lance Conley – #2 Some Thoughts Hermeneutics, Context and Romans 8 Before continuing my response to Lance…
View More Responding to the Critics: A Response to Lance Conley – #2
Responding to the Critics – Keith Mathison, Resurrection and Revelation 20 Be sure to read the previous installment in this series of Responding to the…
View More Dispelling Postmillennialism:
Responding to the Critics: Response to Keith Mathison #3 Well, I actually began this response all the way back in 2016, but, got side tracked…
View More Dispelling Postmillennialism – Response to Keith Mathison #3
Responding to the Critics – Exposing the Error of Howard Denham #2 This is the second installment in our Responding to the Critics series. We…
View More Responding to the Critics – Exposing the Error of Howard Denham #2