Don K. Preston's Salvationless Cross and Unamazing Grace

Caveat Lector: You may just want to give this article a hard pass.

I am a full preterist and this is an article written on my two preterist Facebook groups. It is a serious critique of a perversion of preterism that is now, unfortunately, the largest and most vocal proponents under the label of preterism.
---------------
The more I learn about Don K. Preston's doctrine the more concerned I get. For several reasons. Here is one. In an advertisement for one of his books Preston writes:

"Few Bible students seem to be aware of the absolute necessity for the total fulfillment of the Law of Moses before it could pass. Most claim that Torah ended at the Cross. Jesus said that until every jot and every tittle of Torah was fully accomplished, not one iota of the Law would pass. But, the Law of Moses foretold the second coming of Christ and the resurrection. What this means is that Torah would endure until the Telos (the time of the end)."


What does this continuation of Torah mean? Among other things it would mean that salvation would not have come, that the Old Covenant would still have been over Christians until Christ brought salvation. When? At the Cross? No. He maintains, it was when Christ as High Priest left the Holy of Holies in AD 70. Not until then. That is when Christians were first actually saved from sin.

With that in mind let's look at Colossians 2:13-15:

"And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; and having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it” - Col. 2:13-15.

All the commentary necessary for our purpose is to notice the tenses here that are past (the Cross and resurrection), not future (as if looking forward to AD 70).

Christians were quickened (made alive) with Christ.

They were forgiven.

Ordinances of the Law that were against them were blotted out, taken away, nailed to the Cross.

The resurrection was our Lord's triumph over His enemies.


These verses are all that is needed to destroy Don Preston's treacherous teaching that Christ did not save Christians from sin until AD 70, or that the grace of the New Covenant could not operate until the Law of the Old Covenant was taken away! A sort of feeble, opportunistic grace he imagines, unable to break in until the Law vacates the premises! Horrible. A far cry from the "Amazing grace" of Christian experience and hymnody.

Is the word "treacherous" too strong? Hardly. The definition fits. His teaching certainly can be described as "hazardous because of presenting hidden or unpredictable dangers". Many who have immersed themselves in the Don Preston/Max King faux variant of Preterism have ultimately moved away, not only from Preterism, but also Christianity altogether, and have become universalists and atheists.

They no longer are guided by the Holy Spirit (if ever they were). And this is not surprising, seeing that Preston himself teaches that the Holy Spirit is not needed for Christians today.

"The question was asked Don, "Do we today need the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit in order to understand the Bible?" To which Don answered, "NO, we do not. What we need is to understand the proper rules of hermeneutics.""

"Source: Spiritual Understanding - Acts 13:42-48: Berean Bible Church

Let me ask you, do you want to learn the Bible from someone who discounts the main method of understanding the Word of God? Of course, hermeneutics is also important, but only in concert with spiritual understanding. And for that we need the Holy Spirit to continually guide us, open His word for us, correct us. I don't even need to back up this assertion with Scripture since those I am writing to in this group already - I hope! - accept the Holy Spirit's importance in their lives.

I am going to be honest here. I do not see why more Full Preterists do not take Don K. Preston to task for all of this potientially damnable teaching. I understand that many Christians who support him just do not know his heterodox views on Christ and salvation. And he does not usually make them a major part of his message. But when pressed he does admit to them.

Other Preterists admit that there is something seriously wrong but are hesitant to publish their misgivings. Some assert an unwillingness to put doctrine over friends. Someone actually admitted this to me.

As if Christ is not our greatest Friend of all!

Not mentioning names but many of these have demonstrated that they are very capable writers, able to post articles of sustained biblical reasoning. But on this topic - silence.

Why? I don't know. We teachers have the greatest obligation to share what we have come to understand. Paul's admonition to Timothy is still pressing:

"I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables." - 1 Tim. 4:1-4

Even though we are now on the sunny side of the Parousia, the Kingdom being here, there is still false and spiritually-deadly doctrine to counter. We need to use the gifts that are graciously given to us.

As always, I welcome comment and criticism on this article. If you think I am wrong or overreacting then let me know with Scripture.

Edit: When I first read my article to my wife she thought the title was too harsh. I had changed it to "Don K. Preston's Delayed Salvation and Unamazing Grace". But I can't change the subject line here in Baptistboard so I will just leave it. At any rate I doubt that members here are as partial to Preston as some of the members of my group are, so I can be more direct.

 

Yes, indeed, most people still don't know the view even exists. Do you know why? When it shows up in a church or elsewhere it is almost always stifled. I was kicked out of a church for mentioning it. So, guess what? Of course it is hardly ever heard of. But that does not prove it wrong.

It is careful, prayerful study that has brought me to my conclusions. The number of people who believe or disbelieve it is irrelevant.

Well, it is to me. Apparently not to you.

 

OK. I realize that Preterism is a hard sell for the old guard here. My main purpose was to give the heads up to all those looking into Preterism that Preston and co. do not speak for true preterism. I have enough people joining my group to show me that preterism is not the rara avis that you think it is.

 

His soteriology and Christology is very much worse than his eschatology. But his eschatology is what perhaps at some time forced his views on those other two, I don't know. I have had several discussions with him and have never been able to get him to see the serious divide between his view and what the Bible actually teaches.

He is a cautionary example of what happens when you misuse part of Scripture - it necessarily leads to other passages falling over, like dominoes, to support the first abused scripture. That is the way with Preston. He is so entrenched in his covenantal salvation for Israel view that he ransacks and trashes other passages to support it. So we have his Christ dying twice, His spiritual death, His blood not what saves us, Preston's view of no one being saved until AD 70. etc. (Sic, sic, sic, and sic!)

Of course there is also this, he has by now published himself into a corner. It would be very hard for him to change his views publicly.