Response to Preston #4

Can I just say first how amazing it is that Preston has gone 2 whole articles off on a rabbit trail in an attempt to hide from facing his first topic Romans 11:25-27? I find this utterly fascinating how far someone will go to deny the truth even when they know it’s been laid out right there for them. The lengths some heretics like Preston will go to deny the truth is astounding. He didn’t even bother tagging me either. I suppose it was to try and claim I never responded or something? Who knows?

In this new article he continues to not answer Romans 11:25-27 as he didn’t last time but continues the same spiel that I need to do something about shame vs glory motifs in Romans 8… Should I bother doing this he’ll just claim I need to do an entire commentary on Romans which I will not be doing. You can go order Archbishop Dmitri Royster’s Commentary on Romans or read St. John Chrysostom’s commentary of Romans for one.

I already explained this in the last 3 articles why I didn’t go into the topic he wants to run to. This is because I was working on election which actually is tied to the argument and our debate over pleroma and hettema in Romans… more specifically Romans 11:25-27’s usages of plemora where the fullness of the Gentiles and all of Israel being saved is a concern. But I digress.

In Romans 8:19, the creature (ktisis) is a part of creation so it is connected. The creation is connected to the creature as the creature is a part of creation and thus, created. Who is the Creator of the creature that is tied to and part of creation? God. And will I discuss shame vs. glory motifs? No. It is irrelevant as I said before. Preston should quit beating his dead horse and shouldn’t have killed it in the face in the first place.

Preston seems to have never read Genesis when he claims that nowhere do we find anything taught about mankind as part of creation, post-Fall, the Fall making creation hostile to the creature Adam, aka, the man of soil. I’ll give Preston a hint and say go read Genesis 3 over again… or better yet reread the entirety of Genesis.

He claims I have “repeatedly accused preterists of being Gnostic”… This is false. I do accuse full preterists of being Gnostics though. Preston denies Christ of His humanity so yes Preston is both a heretic and a Gnostic. He can go read a Council or Creed of the Church on this topic to figure out why he is one.

Preston goes on to misrepresent me here in this article at least three or four times (I lost count).

Preston does think that the flesh is worthless. 
Preston thinks it needs to be discarded.
Preston would most assuredly be no help to a suicidal full preterist whatsoever.

Man is made in the image of God and humanity did not lose the image of God in the Fall entirely. 

The image was wounded and in Christ it is being and will be restored and made even better. It is currently being restored as of right now in this life. If someone damaged the Mona Lisa by putting a hole through her, Christ is the art restorationist who shall restore it and not just restore it but actually make it better than it was before.

Preston reveals an implication in this article. He says that “they were being created as a ‘new man’ (Ephesians 4:25f) in the image of God. Peter likewise said (2 Peter 1:3-4)”. Is he really going to say that we are new men now? This is the image of God now today since all is fulfilled? Something that as Romans 8 says was supposed to be conformed and transformed into the image of Christ?

We still die and sin… Christ is the eikon as it says in Colossians… He is the visible image we are to be made like. Christ never dies again and is sinless. We are made in that image today? We still die and sin… In recent videos I’ve done with Aaron Tyler we’ve shown quite clearly that Christ kept His physical visible body so Preston is coming at this with his heretical position again. We can therefore disregard it as lunacy, which it is.

“If Conley hopes to even come close to proving his case he must be able to prove definitively that the material, physical creation is: 1. Under a Curse, and 2. Therefore in need of redemption. But, once again, he did not try, with a single keystroke to prove that assumption.”
Preston needs to clearly re-read Genesis and read the whole bible over again since he doesn’t seem to grasp simple things anymore. Heresy does this sadly to people like Preston. He has books to sell. He’s invested 20+ years to this hogwash. If he gives up on it now he probably feels like a complete and total failure and like he’s wasted his life on something feeble and pathetic, which quite frankly, to be truthful, he has. He could have likely been much more popular and done a lot more for the Kingdom of God but instead squandered it for a heresy. He could still repent though. All is not lost for Preston.

“Where in the Bible was the Gospel of Redemption ever preached to material creation. Where was the Gospel of Redemption ever proclaimed to “bugs, slugs and mosquitoes”?”
I answered this before. There’s no need to rehash it. Yes, even the bugs, slugs, and mosquitos shall be made into the way God wanted them to be because He loves all of His Creation. I also never promised that the birds and the bees will be sons of God. I just claimed all Creation will be restored and redeemed along with the rest of Creation. It will not be destroyed like dispensationalist and many more claim. It will be redeemed and restored. If Adam, the soil man will be transformed and conformed to the Image (Eikon) of the Son of God and He has not lost His physical body in the Ascension like Preston claims then the physical body will be transformed and conformed to the visible eikon of the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ.

Preston is wrong. Material creation can and does obey Christ. It obeys the will of the Creator. When Christ tells the sea storm to cease it does as the Creator commands it to. Preston needs to re-read the bible and get a clue.

I could very much be a real prick though here and quote the Acts of Paul or some other outside text and claim it as inspired and Scripture just for laughs and giggles as Preston would then have to tell us how come we shouldn’t accept the Acts of Paul as inspired scripture since he doesn’t believe in the councils and creeds of the Church and says and claims constantly they are all uninspired and even belittles and demeans them while he claims himself as superior (how is that the case? I’ll let the reader figure that out). Preston is nothing more than his own authority on everything he states and says. He can’t even tell someone what is canonical scripture or not if he would be honest but he refuses to do this.

He says he is going to another installment… and promotes one of his books, as obviously we all needed to know he is still gonna try to make a book sale cause he wants more cash off of all the people he’s managed to swindle. Stay tuned. I’m sure I’ll have another article to go…


Popular posts from this blog

Response to Don K Preston's The Fullness of The Gentiles: Response to IO #1

Preston's "Formal Response(?)" to My 1st Article on The Fullness of The Gentiles

Thoughts On Bethel & All Associated With Them