Search This Blog

Friday, May 8, 2020

Refuting Don K Preston's "Refutation of Lance Conley's Book #23-25 Our First Look at Romans 11:26-27" Video

By: Lazarus Conley

First off, let's get his lame 24 minute long video out of the way. He claims I have never taught or claimed that there are multiple days of the Lord. This is false. There are multiple days of the Lord and there is a Final Day or Judgment Day as most are apt to call it. It is also called the Final Judgment or the Final Day of the Lord by some. I completely affirm this. Preston should perhaps try reading and learning what people believe before he attempts 100 videos against them. It would help if he'd quote them and not take them out of context too but I digress as you won't find that to come out of Preston-world since he's nothing more than a bad pseudo-scholar, even by pseudo-scholarship standards.

As far as his lie about me on Isaiah 60-66, I still would affirm that it is not about AD 70. AD 70 was simply just a judgment on Jerusalem that Jesus does prophesy, in part, in Matthew 24 and elsewhere. It was not the end. It was not the 2nd Coming. It was not when the dead would be resurrected from the dead. None of my sources I gave in my notes on Isaiah 60-66 agree with Preston. None of them, especially not Thomas Aquinas are full preterists. All my sources in fact, if they were alive today, would probably laugh for a good 30 minutes at the absolute lunacy of Preston making the claim that they agree with him.

He makes a claim that Eusebius agrees with him in "Proof of the Gospel"... this isn't the case.

As a good friend Yiannis Chrysostomos pointed out, Eusebius says:

"We see in part, indeed, now with our own eyes the fulfilment of the holy oracles as to the first Epiphany of our Saviour to man. MAY IT BE SEEN COMPLETELY AS WELL IN HIS SECOND GLORIOUS ADVENT, when ALL NATIONS SHALL SEE HIS GLORY, and when HE COMES IN THE HEAVENS WITH POWER AND GREAT GLORY."

That passage refers to Christ's First Advent. The same series of books Preston misused already explain that the Second Coming has yet to occur.

"We see in part, indeed, now with our own eyes the fulfilment of the holy oracles as to the first Epiphany of our Saviour to man. MAY IT BE SEEN COMPLETELY AS WELL IN HIS SECOND GLORIOUS ADVENT, when ALL NATIONS SHALL SEE HIS GLORY, and when HE COMES IN THE HEAVENS WITH POWER AND GREAT GLORY."

This is straight from the Demonstratio Evangelica "Proof of the Gospel". The above quote destroys his misquotation of this:

“When, then, we see what was of old foretold for the nations fulfilled in our own day, and when the lamentation and wailing that was predicted for the Jews, and the burning of the Temple and its utter desolation, can also be seen even now to have occurred according to the prediction, surely we must also agree that the King who was prophesied, the Christ of God, HAS COME, since the signs of His coming have been shewn in each instance I have treated TO HAVE BEEN CLEARLY FULFILLED.” (Demonstratio Evangelica; Book VIII)

Eusebius used the destruction of Jerusalem as proof that Israel's Messiah had already come, and that the Jews should not wait for another. St. Justin the Martyr used the same argument concerning the sacking of the holy city, and then later, explained that the Second Coming will happen in the future.

Eusebius also signed the Creed of Nicea in 325 AD, which says, "And He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom shall have no end." Bishops in the 4th century declared that the Second Coming is in the future, not in the past, and Eusebius agreed with the Creed.

The conclusion can only be one thing: Eusebius was not a full preterist. Preston is a bold-faced liar and misquoted Eusebius to try and manipulate his followers into believing a lie. Don Preston has been corrected on this point and continues to display arrogance and pride and a hardened heart towards the Gospel and truth. May it be on his head at the Judgment should he continue to refuse to recant of his wicked misrepresentations and lies. Just for kicks Eusebius also said this which Preston would probably have a fit over...

"[St Polycarp] always taught the things which he had learned from the Apostles, which the Church also hands down; and which alone are true"
- Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History IV.14.4

Preston makes a lame claim about 2 Thessalonians 1 being the 2nd Coming. This is not the case. They did not find relief from persecution in the 1st Century. This is just a solid historical fact Preston wants to lie and distort and go nuts about. Preston also cherrypicked the quote I gave. Here is the full quotation which does account for the Jewish persecution continuing post AD 70 too. If you want more I will be glad to provide the accounts of Christians being persecuted in Asia Minor by Jews complaining to Emperor Trajan in a letter to Pliny but you can feel free to look that one up for yourself to know it was still going on. Judaism was undergoing big changes after 70 AD but it still existed and there are multiple wars to prove that is the case. Preston has multiple times claimed the Jews ethnically ceased and physically ceased to exist after 70 AD. Complete insanity but it is to be expected from a con artist and a lame pseudo-scholar who googles everything instead of actually reading books and not being a lazy eisegete that imposes his own private interpretations onto everything to such an extent that he will have Jesus burning up in the Ascension, something completely laughable.

If the Jews ceased to exist post 70 -
1) who is Josephus and why does he claim to be a Jew?
2) who fought Rome in the Kitos War for 115-117 AD?
3) who fought Rome in Bar Kochba in 132-136 AD?
4) who reformed the Great Sanhedrin in 80 AD?

Here's the quote he cherrypicked:

“The last Great Roman persecution occurred in 303 AD when Roman legions surrounded the town of Phrygia in modern Turkey to enforce an imperial edict requiring citizens to offer sacrifices to the pagan gods. When Christians in the city refused, Roman troops set the town on fire, killing all its inhabitants. Christians faced persecution from the Jewish community as well, as we know from Paul’s writings. Such persecutions increased notably after 70 AD, that is, after the Roman army destroyed the Jewish temple in Jerusalem: the persecution of Jews, unsurprisingly, bred Jewish intolerance toward Christians. After the 70s AD, Jewish leaders rarely allowed Christians to preach in synagogues... by 150 AD [Christian] churches could be found in almost all Roman provinces between Syria and Rome”. -p. 17 of EO Christianity by Bryn Geffert & Theofanis G. Stavrou/ Yale University Press. 2016-
Scholarship and all historians: They didn’t find relief from persecution until 300s.
Don K Preston: hur de derrr de doo! I like race cars!

Did I mention this is only within the first 5 minutes that he manages to pull this many lies and misrepresentations? I haven't even listed the silly ad hominems and weird claims that I was apparently "in panic mode"... more like an unstoppable laughing mode at how insane Preston is babbling on the internet and on his goofy bad car salesman ads on YouTube...

Another thing to note: The election ends at the 2nd Coming. Day of the Lord does not = the 2nd Coming. The 2nd Coming is the Final Parousia where Christ returns and His Presence invades all of Creation as Jude and 2nd Peter and Revelation attest to. When all is said and done, the dead will be raised and we will all be in a new, exalted reality that was prophesied to take place and be brought about by Christ and bring an end to the way we currenly live now in a fallen and detestable world that isn't how God wanted it to originally be.

All in 10 minutes Preston makes a complete fool and ass of himself. He rambles on for the next 5 minutes which can only be described as an absolute rambling. If anyone knows what the heck he was trying to say please let us know. He listed Isaiah and the thinking there with Paul is that the Jews are in exile and will come back at some point after the time of the Gentiles is up (Luke 21:24 and Romans 11:25-27).

Preston tries a rehash (I think) of his old argument against me that he never refuted me on... bringing up Romans 11:15 and other silly things. You have to love how nothing is EVERRRR literal and always metaphorical and non-literal with poor Preston. All a pathetic attempt at selling books. Money over God am I right? Choose God. It's not worth your soul.

You can read it here: if you wish. I will provide an edited version below as it goes with my response to Preston's lame video.

His last few minutes of this sad video are him saying Isaiah 27 is all spiritual which is bizarre since it's taking things from Genesis 1-3 but I digress. We will have to touch on that later at some other time otherwise this post will go on way too long. I'll just leave you with this to think on with that... In Genesis 3:14-15 the snake is cursed by God: The Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and DUST you shall EAT all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”

Remember that DUST and remember that this snake is the devil. Christ overcame Satan, sin, and death on the Cross.

Adam is cursed to begin to die in Genesis 3 and will ultimately die as a result. 3:17-19 it says"And to Adam he said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ CURSED IS THE GROUND because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are DUST, and to DUST you shall return.

Man is to become DUST and DIE physically, the devil is cursed to EAT the DUST.

If you will go read Isaiah 25-27 that is echoed all throughout it that this time will come to an end and death will be swallowed up, the man will no longer become dust, the Leviathan (Satan) will be overthrown from his domain, something only Christ can do... 

Isaiah 25:8-9
He will swallow up death forever,
And the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces;
The rebuke of His people
He will take away from all the earth;
For the Lord has spoken.
And it will be said in that day:
“Behold, this is our God;
We have waited for Him, and He will save us.
This is the Lord;
We have waited for Him;
We will be glad and rejoice in His salvation.”

Isaiah 26:19
Your dead shall live;
Together with my dead body they shall arise.
Awake and sing, you who dwell in dust;
For your dew is like the dew of herbs,
And the earth shall cast out the dead.

Isaiah 27:1
In that day the Lord with His severe sword, great and strong,
Will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent,
Leviathan that twisted serpent;
And He will slay the reptile that is in the sea.

Isaiah 25-27 aren't called the mini-Apocalypse for nothing. Consider this reader. Does this mean spiritual death? Does that even make sense that Yahweh, God of Life wants physical death to remain forever? I think if you search within yourself and read Scripture you will see this is not the case and that Preston's attempts to spiritualize everything about Genesis and Christ and the resurrection of the dead are in absolute vain and malarkey and are antichrist.

I notice he goes Romans 11:26-27 but doesn't do Romans 11:25-27... funny how that works right? There was a reason he did that and I will explain why.

If one holds to full preterism and its paradigm that all is fulfilled and are willing to be consistent, they will likely fall for something like Israel Only or a consistent belief that holds that Jew and Gentile are two seperate peoples. Being full preterist, they will have to accept that as one people in Christ, Christ did as He promised to do and gathered the elected or chosen Jew and Gentile from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven as Mark 13:47 and Matthew 24:31.

Eklektos as anyone who has studied Greek or Christian theology on a basic level is aware election is God’s free choice. It is a process where one chooses or elects someone for something. After an election ends, the chosen has been chosen, or elected. It is a one time event if it goes correctly, and with God there are no mistakes for He knows all and is omniscient and has foreknown whom He will elect from the beginning of creation. If full preterism is true, then one must accept that the election ended in AD70 and since eklektos cannot be redefined, then God must, according to the full preterist paradigm, have completed his process of election in or by AD70 when the 2nd Coming and the gathering happened.

I will cover Romans 11 so we can understand what the fullness is that is talked about and what it means.

Paul in Romans 11 is clear in v.1 that He will not forsake or “cut off” His people. Paul says God forbid to this for he is a Jew too, an Israelite by Abraham, natural-born of the tribe of Benjamin. Adds “whom He foreknew”… God knows who He will elect.

In v.2-3 this is continued that God is faithful and hasn’t forsaken His people. Paul cites Elias who denounced Israel before God for their apostasy (3/1 Kings 18:47-40; 19:10, 14)

Time after time, the Jews rebelled against God but He always had mercy on them and never forsook them.

In v.4 he continues citing Elias to continue showing God’s faithfulness.

In v.5-6, Paul gives us and has assurance of the existence of a “remnant” (Gk. Leimma. Only found here in the NT once).

The whole concept of “remnant” is common in the O.T., in view of the majority of Israel’s wickedness, from Noah (Gen 7.23), to Joseph (Gen 45.7) to the 7000 (3/1 Kings 19:18) to those of Micah’s prophecy in Micah 2.12; 4.7; 5:7). Every remnant was established by God, as will a promised future remnant.

Paul uses the Greek word ekloge, election in other words, in v.5 to establish that God has chosen to keep a remnant even at his very time. Those called or chosen or elected are initiated then into a whole new life, so they mustn’t lapse into inactivity. They must put to election to work (1 Peter 1:3-11).

V.7 It is obvious that not all Gentiles (just like Jews) have come to be part of the Christian faith. Paul in v.7 seems to have the Jews majority in mind here in his thinking but the reader must always understand that the election includes both Jew and Gentile in Christ, something an IO just can’t get a clue on for some reason. For the elect to obtain salvation, they must live in accordance with their election.

They were collectively called “the election” (Gk. Ekloge. Noun). Those not elect are called “the rest” (In Gk. Loipoi, plural of loipos).

V.8 Paul quotes/refers (though not a fully literal quotation) Isaiah 29:9, 10 LXX to explain the case of the “stupor” and “slumber” which we find in Isaiah 6:9, 10.

V.9-10 Paul quotes David from Psalm 68/69:22, 23 LXX.

V.11 “Haven’t they stumbled”? (eptaisan, aorist of ptaio). In James 2:10 and 3:2, the same verb is rendered “offend”, where it’s implied that the one who offends may repent and recover. The Jews’ fall and stumbling and offenses will result in more salvation for the Gentiles. Furthermore, Paul clearly shows us that the failure isn’t final nor is it permanent.

V.12 The riches of the world, of the Gentiles, is the salvation brought to them by and in Christ.
Origen says of this, “As long as Israel persists in unbelief, the fullness of the Lord’s portion will not be said to be completed. For the people of Israel are missing from the whole”. In another spot he claims “Indeed, there will be a conversion for them at the end of the age”.

St. John Chrysostom echoes the same sentiments when he says “When the fullness of the Gentiles shall have come in, all Israel shall be saved at the time of the 2nd Coming and the end of the world”.

V. 13-15 Paul was called to be Apostle to the Gentiles but he wasn’t limited to them only, for in Acts 9:20, he preaches Christ in synagogues. Paul cares about people groups as he has been called to one people but is also a natural born Israelite of the tribe of Benjamin as well (see 2 Cor 5:18, 19).

If the Jews’ rejection has resulted in the Gentile’s reconciliation how much more shall their reception of Christ one day be? Paul answers by a conjecture which is not purely hypothetical, (obvious to anyone not a full preterist anyways) “if not life from the dead?” Is Paul talking about the Resurrection of the Dead? Does Paul foresee the divine plan for salvation extending to the whole people of Israel and also to the entire human race? Obviously, since God’s will is that all men be saved (1 Tim 2:4).

Finally, is it in the 2nd Coming of Christ, at the end, in which the resurrection to life shall take place, that is, behind Paul’s conjecture?

“With God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26), “for He quickens the dead” (Rom 4.7) and He “raises the dead” (2 Cor 1:9).

V. 16 Paul begins making it even more obvious with the use of metaphors when showing the Divine Plan for man’s salvation with his mention of the firstfruits (aparche) of the dough or the lump (phyrama) from which bread was made, and the olive trees (elaia, see v.24); here only the root (rhiza) and the branches (kladoi) are mentioned.

We know the firstfruits is Christ (1 Cor 15:20, 23) and the lump is all mankind here in context here.

V.17 If the olive tree is a figure of the True Israel, Israel who accepts Christ as Messiah, then the broke branches are the Jews who didn’t believe in the True Israel, who is Christ. “Thou art my servant O Israel, and in thee I’ll be glorified” (Isa 49:3; Jer 11:16; Hosea 14:6).

“Wild branches” don’t normally get grafted to a good olive tree but here it is being done. By grafting, the Gentile is no longer a wild branch but has become a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree.

Paul warns in v. 18 that those grafted in are not to be boastful or prideful. The root, Christ sustains them, not the other way around. The Gentiles have not replaced the Jew in God’s plan for restoring mankind.

v. 19-22 He hasn’t forsaken His people. They’re not left out for the redemption of the human race. God foreknows this all and has chosen His people, however, everything is our choice, so you could be cut from the tree and its root if you do not follow and practice your faith, actively loving God and loving people.

v. 23-24 St. John Chrysostom explains further: It wasn’t God who cut them off, but they have broken themselves off, and fallen, and Paul did well to say they have broken themselves off. They can be re-grafted if they will repent.

v. 25 Paul wants them to know this “mystery”, which is that God is in control of all things and His purpose and will shall be revealed.

v.26-27 God remains in control of the whole history of salvation. He never abandons the Jew because He is faithful to the covenant He made with them. “All Israel shall be saved”. God’s covenant with Israel stands, but it is a renewed covenant and doesn’t call for doing the works of the Law, but for an inner conversion. The real fulfillment of the covenant on the Jews’ part is in becoming one of Christ’s followers.

“But this hardness hasn’t happened to the whole of Israel, rather just a part of it. For many believed, whom God foreknew, and again, in the future, they’ll believe. For the Israelites are hardened to all of the nations, foreknown of God, should be saved, and then all Israel shall be saved (those having believed)” –Blessed Theophylact-

Preston states in the article I cite above that: “My purpose in this brief study is to focus on the word translated as “fullness” (pleroma, πλήρωμα, Strong’s #4138) in Romans 11:25, as well as the antonym, hettema. If it can be shown that these words do not inherently mean and demand a numeric fullness, then one of the key pillars of the IO paradigm is negated and falsified. In reality, that entire house of cards comes crashing down. Let me begin by saying that pleroma and hettema are numeric “neutral” words. Both could be used to refer to number fullness or deficiency. However, neither word is used of numbers in the Bible! As we shall see, Paul never uses pleroma of numeric fullness. Pleroma is used 17x in the NT, and to reiterate, Paul never uses the word, in his epistles to refer to numeric fullness even though he uses the word in discussions of the Gentiles.”

Preston would be correct in that these words are neutral as far as the Greek language goes and is correct on the numbering as far as that goes. You can translate the words and interpret them in such a manner with the Greek language. It is very possible to do that in the Greek language. Mr. Preston even furthers his point by quoting a ton of occurrences in the bible where we are not given exact numbers and are just told they are filled up to the brim as far as they can go like in Mark 8:20 where “When Jesus fed the multitude, they took up twelve baskets “full” of the leftovers”. We don’t get the full amount of how many leftovers were in the 12 baskets. We can only guestimate the exact amount.

However, with context, we CAN know this about Romans 11:25… “When the fullness of the Gentiles comes in”… Here’s why, just like in Mark 8:20 we can’t know the exact amount of leftovers that are still in those 12 baskets. We just know the baskets are full and filled to the brim. In the same way, we know one day that the fullness of the Gentiles will come in and it will be completed in number, aka filled to the brim. The same I will note is true for Galatians 4.4 and Eph 1.10 in context that when time is filled to the brim we don’t know the number exactly, we just know because of pleroma that it is completely filled. We can also KNOW what the context is for pleroma with the Greek language as well.

How can I know that this number is exact in Romans 11:25 and that it will be filled to the brim? Because of the word pleroma and because I know there’s more to the letter to the Romans than just Chapter 11:25. There is also that pesky word eklektos and Romans 8:19-39 and Romans 9 where it discusses the election and predestination of God and talks about His plan for mankind’s redemption, which I will have to discuss in a bit because it is extremely important to understand. Especially for a full preterist because consistency is important!

In the article I prove definitively that there is a number and that pleroma is talking of a completion of a numerical value amount of people, in this case, the Gentile elect being filled to the brim. Paul does have a number in mind. The number is a mystery over what the exact number is obviously but we know it is a completed number to be filled to the brim like a basket that has reached the maximum amount of bread it can hold. Not exactly a non-numeric sense. More like a non-specific numeral sense because Paul doesn’t know the exact number of Gentiles it will take to be filled. Only God alone knows that in His Divine Plan when “the fullness of the Gentiles has come in” (Rom. 11.25).

Preston tries to dupe the reader in his blog with a false premise. By one having to admit that indeed, alone and by itself, the Greek words plemora and hettema can mean non-specific numbers and non-exact numbers, that it has to be the case that it is not going to be able whatsoever to be numeric. We’ve shown that’s not the case though and that while it can be that way in the Greek, depending on the context of the sentence, that there are exact numbers going on with further context clues like how we know about God’s predestination, His will, His foreknowledge, His omniscience, and His election. We aren’t the ones who know this exact number where the basket is full and filled to the brim, unable to carry any more of what it’s carrying.

There is no exact numbering going on. Paul is not going 1, 2, 3 Jews and 5 Gentiles. He is saying that the number of Jews because of their stumblings and offenses and fall will result in the salvation of the Gentiles. We also know there IS an exact number because of election and predestination again. God knows the exact number of the elect. Therefore, he knows the number because of foreknowledge and His prothesis. He knows the amount of plemora and he knows the amount of hettema, even if we don’t. Paul doesn’t know exact number of Jew or Gentiles… he is not God. Only God knows this exact number. We know there is one because God knows it. And when the exact number that God alone knows is filled to the brim of the basket, then, because the fall of the Jews is not final nor permanent, the natural born will be saved, and all who are True Israel will be saved, upon Christ’s return, aka His 2nd Coming.
Under the full preterist paradigm, the 2nd Coming happened. Therefore, one must conclude that Romans 11:25 happened and was completed. The exact number that God foreknew had to have been completed by AD70. Therefore, all of Israel must have been saved in AD70, with the number of Gentiles complete and full that God decided to choose or elect. This isn’t looking good for Don.

If all is fulfilled and Christ came back in AD70 did Matthew 24:31 and Romans 11:25 happen and get fulfilled? Because if so, there is a problem.

Matthew 24:31 And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

The elect would have to have been elected in AD70 during Christ’s 2nd Coming for all to be fulfilled. We would also have to say that no more Gentiles are being elected today for sure because that number in AD70 reached its fill or plemora.

Eklektos as many Greeks will point out ends. Once done, once chosen, there’s an end to that process. It becomes ended and complete. Eklektos has no possibility in any of its forms of being ongoing whatsoever. The whole word means to choose. To vote. To elect. The process has an ending. It cannot be ongoing. You can have a recount & a re-election but it has specifications in the Greek to clarify if a new election takes place or a recount or a re-election. There’s no way around this word. You’re either the chosen people or you aren’t. And if Christ came back in AD70 the choosing happened. The election happened. And there is no recount or new election taking place. No new choosing. No continuation as there is no mention whatsoever in the bible of a new election taking place.

This leaves some interesting and terrifying conclusions if the election process is over and is far reaching theologically speaking. What does it mean to us today on a practical level if the elect were elected in AD70?

Salvation would end in AD70 because Christ came for His Bride in AD70. The marriage consumnation would be over and Christ would have come for His Bride, the Church, who is the elect. Can you be saved if the elect were elected? Doesn't appear to be so or possible if full preterism is true and one is consistent as Christ already chose His Bride Israel (Jew and Gentile) in AD70. This is no laughing matter at all. It's clear from Romans 11:25 as we've shown, that if AD70 was the time Christ came back and finished election, then the fullness of the Gentiles ended before or in AD70. All Israel would have to have been saved in AD70. This all would have to have ended. This is no laughing matter. This is vastly far reaching.

A full preterist like Don K Preston could try and attempt to redefine eklektos much like he does with a lot of things and has tried to now do in these lame videos. However, as I wrote long ago, he will just look like the absolute fool he is and this would be nothing more than him redefining something much like the word "gay" used to be "happy" and now is considered by many to be a word for "homosexual".

It is extremely dishonest at the end of the day and betrays the true Greek meaning of the word since the Greek doesn’t really allow for a genuine redefinition of it. And in light of the Divine Plan having to have been fulfilled since Romans 11.25 would have to be complete, this leaves a lot of problems Don K Preston will have to deal with or choose to ignore at his own peril.

To continue with this...

In the New Testament, it is called eklektos and is used all twenty-three times there to designate those who have become one of God’s people. The elect are those who have and are acting as the special vehicle of God and His Divine purposes. This word can be used as both a noun and a verb and much of the time it denotes a human community but it has also been used in the New Testament individually like in Luke 23:35 where it says “Christ of God, his Chosen”. It can also be used as a verb such as picked, selected, voted, or elected. Election is both corporate and individual. This is clearly shown in the Old Testament usage and the New Testament usage and can be found used in the Early Church Fathers as well too where the term is used in the same manner. A prime example where it can be found is in 1 Clement where he mentions and discusses “the elect” as Christians describing them as a whole people of God’s elect/chosen people.

Eklektos is always definitive and temporal in both testaments of the bible. Once election ends, it ends. There is no more selection to be had since the process is complete (it is used in the same fashion all twenty-three times in the New Testament). For example, if the election took place in 70 AD there is no more to have happened post AD 70 because the election would be completed. For there to be a new election, one would have to be specified in Scripture and there is none. As will be shown throughout the refutations, Romans 11:25-27 shows us that once God completes His number of Gentiles and it is filled, all Gentiles who are of the elect will be saved. Then “all Israel will be saved”. All Jew and Gentile believers of the elect who chose Christ were chosen in 70 if full preterism were true and it would be over.

Can you lose election status? Yes. The Bible emphatically teaches free will and that the election is open to all people until Christ’s return. They have the free choice to choose God’s predestinated plan or not. This is still open today for the futurist but if Full Preterism was true, and consistent, those who chose God’s plan had to have chosen and followed through in the calling to salvation by AD70 when all the Old and New Testament saints would have had to have been elected and resurrected in the 2nd Coming upon Christ’s return (Mt. 24:31; 1 Cor. 15; 1 Thess. 4).

Can there be a possibility of another election? If full preterists go by Scripture alone and do not declare they have a message from God that election has begun again, or use some other source to declare it so, the answer is no, and that is because there are no declarations of a new election process that will be taking place after the 2nd Coming. The end of election can only mean that there is no more salvation available as Christ’s 2nd Coming is the fullness of salvation (Hebrews 9:28; 1 Cor. 15). The question must be raised as to why the full preterists are attempting to still make the Bible apply to them like they often claim that we believers in the future coming of Christ do. They cannot be saved if they are not part of the elect. The elect were elected in 70 AD if full preterism were true and there is no more election if that is the case.

Bachir and Bachar in the Old Testament work the same way. It can be a noun or a verb and is used corporately and individually like eklektos is. In all thirteen occurrences of Bachir, the noun in Hebrew for the word “the chosen one”, “the elect”, “the selected one” is used the same way. 2 Samuel 21:6, Ps. 89:3, 105:6, 105:43, 106:5, 106:23, Isa. 43:20, 45:4, 65:9, 65:15, and 65:22 all are “the chosen”, “His chosen ones”, “your chosen ones”, and “My chosen”[1]. With Bachar, it is used as a verb in the Old Testament as “to choose”, “elect”, “decide for”, “select”. It is used at least 172 times in 164 verses[2]. One has to question where one sees election continuing in Scripture and since, according to full preterism all is fulfilled, this should raise many questions for the legitimacy of full preterism, but alas many just choose to ignore it or spiritualize this problem and make absurdist claims about God perpetually electing people to salvation.

This is not possible however since Romans 11:25-27 clearly shows us that ALL of Israel is to be saved when the time of the Gentiles ends. If that time ended, and all is fulfilled in AD 70, then ALL of Israel had to have been saved in AD 70 and there can be no more salvation because salvation is for the people of God. It also is quite evidenced by the fact that the Greek word eklektos is temporal and has an ending[3].

One argument that may be raised is does this means that the New Covenant itself ends? No. The New Covenant itself never has to end. The call to be part of the New Covenant is for the elect however, and if the election ends, the loipoi, or the others (the antonym of eklektos) cannot be part of that covenant since it is for them. It is evident that the Kingdom of God and the New Covenant go on forever.

Luke 1:32-33 states that “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.”

This however, is a reign forever for the House of Jacob. In other words, Israel (Jew and Gentile in Christ). Remember the house of Jacob here.

Matthew 24:31 states that the call to salvation will end one day when He returns as on that day of His 2nd Coming “He shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his ELECT from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” He shall call His elect and salvation will come to them and not the loipoi. It’s that simple.

Romans 11:25-27 states: “For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. And so ALL Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness FROM JACOB: For this is MY COVENANT UNTO THEM, when I shall take away THEIR sins”.

v. 26 shall turn away ungodliness from JACOB referring to the House of Jacob that was mentioned in Luke 1:32-33.

v. 26... And so ALL Israel (Jew and Gentile being one in Christ as Paul tells us in Romans and Gal 3:28 LOL) will be SAVED.

v. 27... For this is MY COVENANT (the New) unto THEM (the house of Jacob) when I shall take away THEIR sins.

Pleroma in Romans 11:25 is numerical. Multiple scholars and bible translations point this out but there are some full preterists who might claim otherwise that this use of pleroma there is about something “relational” which is false as it is not about their acceptance to become one in Christ nor is it ever about their status being questioned which would be ludicrous since Paul already declares in Galatians 3:28 that they are one in Christ and that they already were equal in standing with one another[4].
  1. The word pleroma is used 17x in the Bible. It is used to mean “that which is (has been) filled
    1. a ship inasmuch as it is filled (i.e. manned) with sailors, rowers, and soldiers
    2. in the NT, the body of believers, as that which is filled with the presence, power, agency, riches of God and of Christ
  2. that which fills or with which a thing is filled
    1. of those things which a ship is filled, freight and merchandise, sailors, oarsmen, soldiers
    2. completeness or fullness of time
  3. fullness, abundance
  4. a fulfilling, keeping[5]
Nowhere is any of this about something relational. The words used for pleroma are fulfillment, full, fullness, and to patch something, you can also obviously use it for complete or completion. Pleroma is used in Matthew 9:16, Mark 2:21, Mark 6:43, Mark 8:20, John 1:16, Romans 11:12, Romans 11:25, Romans 13:10, Romans 15:29, 1 Corinthians 10:26, Galatians 4:4, Ephesians 1:10, Ephesians 1:23, Ephesians 3:19, Ephesians 4:13, Colossians 1:19, and Colossians 2:9.

Matthew 9:16 and Mark 2:21 are not about something relational in context. Both are clearly supposed to be the word “patch” used there with pleroma.

Mark 6:43 and Mark 8:20 uses it to talk about how the apostles “picked up twelve full baskets of the broken pieces, and also of the fish” (Mk 6:43) and “how many large baskets full of broken pieces did you pick up?” (Mk 8:20). This usage of pleroma is used in the same way that Romans 11:25 uses it to describe the basket of fish being “full” and filled to the brim.
John 1:16 uses it for what is obviously being “full” of the abundance of God’s grace.
Romans 11:12 is used with hettema when it says “failures” and this in the Greek is obviously a fullness with abundance, a completion. We can see here plain as day that it is numerical. The Jews’ failure is riches for the Gentiles… so how much more will their completion be is what is asked.

The same takes place when we bring up Romans 11:25. It is so obviously numerical in context when it says that “a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in”. The Greek for it is “pleroma ton ethnon eiselthe”. 

The best translation for this would be “completion of the Gentiles is reached” as eiselthe means to enter or come in. Clearly in the context of Romans 11:25 we have a number of Gentiles that must enter and be part of God’s Kingdom of Israel (the people of God; the faithful) so that the “partial hardness” that has happened to Israel ends and then ALL Israel is saved as Romans 11:25-27 states quite clearly. There is nothing relational about this. It is talking of the filling of something or the completion of something, that being those who will be of the Gentile elect will be completed at some point and once they are completed, all Israel will be saved (Jew and Gentile in Christ).

Romans 13:10 is clearly “love is the completion of the law” with pleroma.

Romans 15:29 is clearly talking about Paul coming to them with the full blessing of Christ.

1 Corinthians 10:26’s usage of pleroma seems most appropriate to use the word “contains” or “fills” in its context.

Galatians 4:4 is best used with completion saying “but when the completion of the time came, God sent forth His son…”

Ephesians 1:10 and 1:23’s usage of pleroma are talking about the completion of the times while 1:23 would be best used with “…completion of Him who contains or fills all in all”.

Ephesians 3:19 is used in the same way “that you may be filled up (filled to the brim) with all the abundance or fullness of God”.

Ephesians 4:13’s usage of fullness with “fullness of Christ” is just like all the rest but in this context it is Christ who is filled full with His power and presence and Grace.

Colossians 1:19 and 2:9 are simple as well showing that in Christ all of God’s Presence and power and abundance and Deity dwells in Him in bodily form… so much so that the Father is pleased for all the fullness to dwell in Christ.

As can be clearly shown pleroma is not about something relational. It is clearly numerical in the context of Romans 11:25-27. 

With that, I think this adequately refutes Don K Preston. I'm sure he will no doubt make 200 more videos against Mistah Connuhlee and make more used car salesman ads to try and sell his lame books but at the end of the day, Preston needs to give this up if he wants to ever have any chance at salvation and choose God over mammon.

Addition: Since writing this, Preston tries and fails with another response video, his 24th one... this article answers that video as well. ]

Addition: In his 25th video, Preston makes many dumb claims which I've refuted already...

Preston has failed to do anything here as usual.
Election does end after the FINAL DAY.
Read John 6.

John 12:48 - The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.

2 Peter 3:7 - But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

2 Peter 3:10-13 - But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed. Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn! But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

John 6:44 - No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

Election doesn't continue after the Final Day. Once you are elect you are elected. No recount. We don't vote forever. This is silly.

Isaiah 66 is not about 70 AD.

Thessolaniki Christians still were persecuted and worse so after 70 AD. Christ did not come in 70 AD.

Preston's claim that I've answered nothing is absolutely dishonest and complete nonsense. I've written enough about this. The Old Covenant was rendered obsolete and void at the CROSS. If one reads Hebrews 8 IN CONTEXT it will be adamantly clear that is the case.

John Hagee and Don Preston have a lot in common. They make stuff up and then try to sell their junk to gullible folks. Mammon won't save you Don.

Paul quotes from Isaiah 59 to show that the Jews will at last convert when the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled and the number is completed. The Jews were judged in 70 AD at Jerusalem. No one denies this and Preston claiming I deny this is completely asinine and to be quite frank I'm freaking sick of him constantly lying to people about what i do and don't believe.

I fully believe and accept that the Jews were judged in 70 AD. I fully believe and accept it was not the 2nd Coming and it was not the Resurrection of the Dead and it was not the Last Judgment and the Last Day of the Lord (separate from Days of the Lord because it is the FINAL DAY).

I think that covers it all but I'll drop this bomb question here... When did God and His Divine Council defeat and rid us of all the false gods and all the other deities trying to lay claim to His Kingdom? Why, if all is fulfilled, do people still worship false gods and godesses today? Some of you should think about this stuff. God is supposed to defeat all enemies and they are all supposed to not be worshipped anymore, yet today we see people abandon God even today still though you all claim He is with us right now... hilarious... Mohammad, Hindu, etc. worshippers of different gods and goddesses shouldn't even exist if God has taken care of all enemies of Him. Yet they persist. This more than enough refutes this con artist.



  1. Awesome refutation. I now want to read previous conversations. Brother Conley made good use Church history and notable Church apologists. However, think the best way to judge thse brothers views are to have them to have a live discussion.

    Three years ago I formally debated Don K. Preston and vaticinated that Full Preterism would be a thing of the past. Through Brother Conley's theological acumen, I am seeing it come to pass.

    1. Conley has no theological acumen. He has blow and bluster.

      I knew he would try to deny the Eusebian citation.
      First, note that Eusebius does speak of Christ coming in fire-- to set fire on the earth. But, notice the actual quote that I gave:
      Proof of the Gospel, Vol. II. Bk. VI, ch. 25. p. 47;
      "One might also literally in another way connect fire and chariots with His coming through the siege that attacked Jerusalem after our Savior's Advent for the Temple was burned with fire not long after and was reduced to extreme desolation, and the city was encircled by the chariots and camps of the enemy, after which too the promises to the Gentiles were fulfilled in harmony with the prophecy."

      So, in addition to positing Isaiah 66 as speaking of the Incarnation, he also applied it to Christ's coming in AD 70. That is undeniable-- and Conley's perversions cannot change that.

      Now, I clearly stated in the video that it is possible that Conley had stated that he believed in many comings of the Lord, but that I did not remember seeing them. But, instead of acknowledging that statement, he accuses me of lying. Typical slander.

      I have demonstrated that Isaiah 66:15f contains the following:
      The Day of the Lord in flaming fire.
      Survivors of that Day of the Lord.
      Those survivors go to the nations who had never known the Lord.
      That is in the New Creation!

      Thus, these simple and undeniable facts falsify every single word by Conley in his long hit piece. And Conley has vacillated, obfuscated, dodged and lied about the text-- all the while refusing to answer
      What was that Day of the Lord?
      When did it happen?

      He can talk about many days of the Lord if he wants. Does he believe in many New Heavens and Earths? Unless he can prove that Isaiah 66:15 speaks of a Day of the Lord that is NOT 2 Thessalonians 1-- where Paul cites Isaiah-- then he is lost.

      And notice that Conley calls Paul a failed and false prophet.
      Paul promised the suffering Thessalonians relief.
      That relief from their then on-going persecution-- at the hands of the Jews-- would be "when the Lord Jesus is revealed in flaming fire."
      but Conley says-- They did not get relief!
      So Paul promised relief at the parousia.
      But Conley says they did not get relief.
      Therefore, Conley calls Paul a false prophet.

      Conley can claim they did not get relief, but all that does is call Paul a liar.

    2. By the way, the fact that there were still pockets of Jewish persecution after AD 70 means nothing. The point of Paul in Thessalonians and the NT was that the centralized authority for Jewish persecution-- the authorities in Jerusalem-- were scattered. The High Priesthood-- the source of that authority, was dead. So, as usual, Conley tries to make a mountain out of an ant hill, claiming it is meaningful.

    3. I'm sorry not sorry that you can't fact-check like normal people but guess that's what happens when you don't actually read anything and just google a bunch of stuff to try to make yourself look like a "scholar" on FB/Youtube.

      Nope I do not call Paul a liar at all. That is a false statement. I just see because of study of history that there was NO relief from persecution by Jew nor Romans for the Early Church. Paul is also not teaching that in Thessalonians as you claim. Fact checking is your friend Don. Learn to do it sometime. You quote-mined Eusebius and took him out of context and now you are simply being exposed as usual for the liar and con artist you are. Tough. Don't lie next time okay?

      Also, yeah that whole being Jews there kinda throws a huge kink in your Jews don't exist anymore don't it? LOL fail.

  2. unfortunately, Don K Preston, probably out of absolute fear and desperation, refuses to do a live discussion with Aaron and myself.

  3. And as have stated: I don't do live debates with men of dishonesty, profanity, vileness, disrespect and ungodly behavior, and you fit the bill of each of these-- in spades.
    If I were afraid of you, I would never respond to a thing you say, but, I effectively counter and destroy what you say on virtually a daily basis, so you claim is just more hot air.

  4. I'm not scared of you Donald. You're just a con artist who can't stand up to scrutiny and has to resort to projecting all the things that are wrong with you onto other people. You're nothing but a loser in other words out to make money off of gullible people. You are dishonest. You are also profane. You are vile. You disrespect people all the time. You are an ungodly heathen as well. Time you faced that truth. You don't counter anything at all except in your own mind and to those weird followers of yours who want to kiss your butt all day cause they need something out of a narcissistic cult leader.

  5. Don K Preston. If you never repent of your disgusting lies and heresy, I guess enjoy the lake of fire where you're headed. Trash.


Gospel of Mark Notes - Inroduction - Chapters 1-4

 Introduction - The Gospel of Mark is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Who is Mark? He's not one of the 12 Apostles. He has a...