Jonathan's Blog


Sid and Perry are up to it again. Perry’s interview was aired on November 24th, 2014 and you can read the full transcript (Here). Since Sid will never have me back on his show because of my differing endtime views, I have added my thoughts into the transcript below. I have written how I would answer if they included me in their interview, enjoy!



SID: But why is it that many churches today are not interested in hearing prophecy? Look, when I became a believer in the Messiah I couldn't get enough prophecy, prophecy about why Jesus was the Messiah, prophecy about End Times. But it seems as though the pendulum is swinging.

PERRY: I think there's a couple of reasons. Reason number one is people think it's too difficult to understand. Number two, it does contain symbolism, which has to be interpreted from the scripture itself. And if you don't know the Old Testament, some of that symbolism isn't going to make sense in the Book of Revelation.

JONATHAN: Sid, I would actually agree 100% with Perry’s answers, those are exactly right! And I would add that you are correct Sid, the pendulum is swinging, after 40+ years of false predictions, Christians, especially the young ones that can do research on the internet, have had enough of the end-time speculations.



SID: Could that be the reason that many Christians are saying, well we're no longer under the Law, so we won't even look at the Old Testament.

PERRY: Let me give you an example. In the Book of Genesis, Joseph has this dream of sun and stars bowing before him. In Revelation Chapter 12, there's a woman in travail and it talks about the sun and the stars, and the moon, and it all refers back to Joseph's dream. Joseph's dream was about Israel and that is a picture of the Nation of Israel. So if you don't understand Joseph's dream, which is in the Torah, how are you going to understand what's written in the Book of Revelation?....

JONATHAN: In answer to your question Sid, I have never heard or seen anyone anywhere say that we no longer need to study the Old Testament! That would be absurd! (Although there is truth in not applying the Old Testament personally while living in the New Covenant, i.e. how many Canaanites are we supposed to kill?). Again, I can agree with Perry’s statement above. Yet it is clear Sid that you are targeting some undefined group of people by speaking in nuanced and misleading statements.



SID: When it says, "No longer under the law" and it states that in the New Testament, Paul says it. What does he really mean?

PERRY: Let me just say this real quick, and those in — again understanding the Book of Revelation, understanding where we're living. The Five Books of Moses, part of that contains is what is called The Law of God. It's not the Law of Moses, the Law of God. But there was ceremonial, sacrificial and moral law….

JONATHAN: Let me stop you right there Perry. I understand where you are coming from as a Covenant Theologian and believing that Jesus only removed animal sacrifice, but not the Ceremonial or Moral law, but surely in your “80,000” hours of study, you must know that dividing the Law into three separate categories like that would be an abomination to any ancient Hebrew or even a New Testament writer. In fact the theory of dividing the Law into three parts didn’t exist until Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica was written in the 1200s AD. The idea of dividing the Law is fraught with problems because which Laws do we throw out and which ones do we keep? Can I wear a cotton-poly blend? Should I kill Canaanites? Can I own slaves?



SID: Sid Roth here with Perry Stone. And there is a teaching, it's an old teaching, that's resurfacing right now. It's called Preterism, and it basically states that the Book of Revelation is already completed. You don't even need that book any more. Now you throw out the Book of Revelation, you throw out the Old Testament and you throw out the Word of God. Now Perry Stone, what would you say to someone that walked up to you and said, "Look Perry, 70 A.D., you know what happened in Israel? Everything took place in the Book of Revelation."

JONATHAN: I am going to have to interject here Sid. Nobody is saying that we should throw out the Old Testament or the Book of Revelation, could you stop exaggerating with your attempt to assassinate the character of preterists? You are on the narrow border of straight up lying. The truth becomes obvious by comparison, if Jesus fulfilled everything on the cross, is that to say that we “throw out the book of Matthew!” No of course not! It actually makes Matthew that much more spectacular and beautiful. Your turn Perry.

PERRY: First of all, let's talk about who they are. These are individuals that believe that Matthew 24, the Book of Revelation, most of it was fulfilled in 70 A.D. Why do they say that? Well you had the destruction of the temple, destruction of Jerusalem, the Jews being scattered and then Josephus talks about these cosmic signs, stars shaped like a sword, the voice that came in the temple saying, "Let us depart hence," a comet that was seen over the city. So what they do is they take the cosmic signs that Josephus wrote about, they take the fact the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed and the Jews were scattered and they basically say all of Matthew 24 was fulfilled.

(JONATHAN: That’s a massive oversimplification, but I’ll allow it)

PERRY: But the problem you have with that, there's a couple of problems. Problem number one is the Bible says, "There will be a generation that will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of glory and the tribes of the earth will morn." Show me where that happened in 70 A.D. It did not happen.

(JONATHAN: That’s a simple one to answer Perry, maybe I could respectfully suggest that you put a 100 hours, which would be like two weeks in your system, into reading Preterist answers to that verse. You could start here.)

PERRY: Number two, anybody who's a Preterist watching, they know this because the people who have revived this doctrine, this is their biggest weakness. They believe the Book of Revelation was written 68 A.D., just about two years before the destruction. Therefore, when John, for example is told to measure the Temple of God in Revelation 11, they say, well that was the temple in Jerusalem. It had to be written by 68 A.D. because the temple was destroyed two years later. Here's the problem you have. The early church followers, three of them, talk about the Emperor Domitian, who was the emperor in 81 A.D., when he came to power. Now the temple is destroyed in 70 and the emperor, that was the emperor when John wrote the Book of Revelation comes in 81 A.D. and he dies about 94, 95, it blows the theory away. There's nothing a Preterist can stand on when they understand that history reveals the Book of Revelation was written in 95 A.D., 25 years after the destruction of the Temple. And Sid, the scripture they use in Revelation 11 about measuring the Temple of God is a temple in the tribulation period, not one that existed in 70 A.D.

JONATHAN: Yes, the date of authorship for the Book of Revelation is a foundation that Preterism rests upon, yet it is not a shaky foundation. In fact Dr. Kenneth Gentry (Before Jerusalem Fell) and John AT Robinson (Redating the New Testament) are both renowned world-class scholars, which have written unrefuted books showing the early writing of Revelation to be the truth. (See also)



SID: So if it's so blown out in the water, why does anyone believe in this Preterist thing?

PERRY: Because they don't know the Bible or they don't know how to properly interpret, you know, the Book of Revelation.

JONATHAN: Um Sid, it’s not blown out of the water, that’s why people still believe it and believe it more in rapidly growing numbers.

And really Perry?! Preterist’s are Preterist’s because they don’t know the Bible? Have you ever considered taking a debate class because it may help you understand what an ad hominem argument is (Ad Hominem means responding to arguments by attacking a person's character, rather than to the content of their arguments. When used inappropriately, it is a fallacy in which a claim or argument is dismissed on the basis of some irrelevant fact or supposition about the author or the person being criticized). Your disrespectful and dishonoring answer is appalling, I would expect it from a televangelist, but not someone with a teaching gift, I expect better from you.



SID: Who gains by someone tossing out the Book of Revelation and tossing out the Old Testament?

PERRY: Well no one gains.

SID: Yeah. And there is someone that gains: the devil.

PERRY: The enemy gains.

SID: The devil gains.

JONATHAN: Wow guys, you are really angry at some Preterists. I know that I will never be back on your show Sid because I am a Preterist and not a Zionist, but I would never have thought you would be so mean and nasty toward a brother in the Lord that believes differently about Revelation. This is shocking.

The interview continues on into bashing “Kingdom Now,” but I would walk out at this point anyway, so I will end here.

Overall, this is not simply about theological debates, this is about people’s hearts and minds and the perspective toward the future.

I will not raise my sweet two year old daughter with the idea that she is the terminal generation and everything is always getting worse. No. She is a world-changer and will bring more of heaven to earth, she already has in my life. Also this approach toward brothers in the Lord that says that if you are a preterist, it is because you don’t know the Bible, and you are benefiting THE DEVIL!

Well, that is a truly dark perspective.


Sid and Perry, I love you guys, I wish you were willing to keep your hearts open to learning. Perry, I know I have gleaned from your insights in Israel, and Sid you are so excellent at encouraging the supernatural in our lives, please keep doing what you do best.


Jonathan Welton