Preterism and Christian Expectations: Why End-Times Beliefs Shape Real Life - Part 2

by: Alan Smith and Jeff Rowland

What you believe about preterism and end-times prophecy doesn’t stay in a study Bible. It shapes what you expect from Christian living today, what you think God is doing in history, and even how you view Israel and the nations.

On The Smith and Rowland Show, Alan Smith and Jeff Rowland press a simple point: biblical expectations are meant to build believers up, not drag them down. They also argue that certain end-times views, especially full preterism and many forms of partial preterism, don’t just shift timelines. They can weaken hope, lower Christian urgency, and push bad theology into public policy.

A new-year reset: stay close to people who build your faith

The episode opens with the kind of banter regular listeners expect. Alan calls it "thrilling like Michael Jackson thriller", Jeff jokes back, and they toss in a fake sponsor shoutout to Dairies of America (with a quick detour into pintos). Light humor, but the conversation turns serious fast.

Alan frames the start of the year with a clear declaration: your growth depends on who you allow close to you. Some people stretch you and strengthen you. Others keep trying to shut you down. He says the goal is to stay around people who will:

• Build you up
• Stretch you
• Call you into the fullness of who you are in Christ
• Refuse to treat your calling like a problem to manage

Jeff agrees and adds something he’s learned through experience. He doesn’t call it a rule for everyone, but it has guided him: the things people most want you to quit may be the very things you’re supposed to be doing.

That observation leads into a bigger issue they’ve both seen in church life. Sometimes the strongest negativity doesn’t come from enemies of the faith. It comes from the people closest to you, including people inside the church, who say, “You’re doing too much.”

Jeff’s response is blunt: in the season we live in, “doing too much” for God doesn’t exist in the way people mean it. Yes, time matters. Yes, priorities matter. Rest matters. But the larger pattern is often backwards. People carve out minutes for serving God, then structure the rest of life around work, comfort, and recovery, as if spiritual service should always be the smallest slice.

He shares that he took a short sabbatical, not to quit serving, but to restart and refresh. He mentions Charlie Kirk’s book on the Sabbath and the need to rest mind and body so you can stay engaged in service. Alan echoes the point with a prayerful goal for the year, using Paul’s language about being poured out as a sacrifice, asking God to use him for His glory.

Both men connect this to something every believer recognizes: God can supply strength that wasn’t there five minutes earlier. Jeff describes showing up worn out to preach, then finding energy once he begins. He calls it supernatural. It doesn’t come from willpower, it comes from the Lord.

Expectations: encouragement that raises the bar

Why “expectations” isn’t a dirty word

Alan and Jeff spend a lot of time on one word that gets criticized in modern Christian culture: expectations.

Some hear “expectations” and think control, manipulation, or pressure. Alan flips that idea. In preaching and teaching, expectations are often the exact form encouragement takes. If a preacher teaches the Word, he’s preaching what the Word expects of God’s people. It’s not about dominance. It’s about raising the standard so people can aim at something real.

Alan uses everyday examples to make the point:

A basketball coach is supposed to expect more from a player than the player expects from himself. The coach raises the bar, and the player may protest, “We can’t do that.” The coach’s job is to say, “Yes, you can. You might not, but you can.”

He ties that to Scripture. God repeatedly speaks in covenant language that includes expectation: “You do this, and I’ll do this.” That is not cruel. It’s clarity.

For Christians, the ultimate bar is Jesus Christ. Nobody pretends we’ve fully reached that mark. But the goal is still set. Alan even uses a vivid image to describe the hope of final transformation, saying it’s like a “Holy Ghost car wash” at the gates of heaven. In Christ, believers will be made like Him, and at the rapture (for those alive at that moment) the change happens “in a twinkling of an eye.”

Then he adds a thought many people avoid: when believers are with the Lord, God’s expectations don’t shrink. They increase, because we will finally be fit to carry them in fullness.

Jeff sums up the spirit of the conversation in one line worth holding onto: “Expectations is an encouragement to be more than what you’re being.”

How expectations work in leadership and in church life

Jeff says expectations show up most clearly in leadership. He distinguishes between two very different kinds of expectations, and the difference matters in church life.

He points to Romans 11 and the language of provoking, saying “provoke” includes the idea of stimulation, calling people forward. The New Testament also speaks of provoking one another to good works. In Jeff’s view, the congregation isn’t designed to be an audience. It’s designed to edify each other into service and labor for God.

That’s why discouraging someone’s service leaves a bad taste in his mouth. It doesn’t sound like God. He’s careful to acknowledge the need for Sabbath and rest, but he rejects the mindset that treats spiritual service as an optional hobby. He critiques a common rhythm people settle into: a few minutes for God, eight hours for work, eight hours for rest, then the rest for self. He calls that out of balance.

In short, expectations should lift a believer’s eyes. When they are used rightly, they don’t crush. They clarify what faithfulness looks like.

Why preterism changes what Christians expect today

After establishing expectations, Alan names the day’s main subject: preterism. They’re not discussing it as an abstract debate. Their claim is direct: what you believe about prophecy shapes what you expect from Christian living.

Alan argues that if someone believes most biblical prophecy was fulfilled around AD 70, including the judgments described in Revelation, then the present can start to feel like the settled end. That lowers urgency. It can also lower a believer’s expectation of Christ’s return, and with it the motivating power of Christian hope.

Jeff adds another layer. Timeline matters because it affects how you preach and how you apply Scripture. He gives a concrete example: if you believe you’re in the tribulation period right now, you’ll end up shaping the gospel message around endurance to the end. If you believe you’re not in that period, then the message is the straightforward call of Acts: believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, the death, burial, and resurrection, and you’re saved.

They also defend dispensational thinking as a way to keep biblical time markers clear. Jeff references Paul’s language, “in times past,” “but now,” and “in the ages to come.” For them, that structure helps believers know where they are in God’s program, and keeps interpretation from turning key prophetic texts into dead history.

If prophecy is treated as “already done” when it isn’t, they argue it becomes functionally useless. People don’t read it as warning, promise, or anchor. They read it like a closed file.

Full preterism: why they call it heresy and why it drains hope

Jeff gives a clear definition of full preterism. In full preterism, all biblical prophecies are said to have been fulfilled around AD 70, tied to the war between Rome and the Jewish people, the destruction of Jerusalem, and the destruction of the second temple. In that view, Matthew 24 and Revelation describe those events, and even the “soon” language is used to claim fulfillment had to happen within the apostles’ lifetimes.

They argue that full preterism crosses a line because it denies major Christian doctrines: a future return of Christ and the bodily resurrection. Jeff calls it heresy for that reason. Alan presses the implication with a stark statement: if this world is basically Revelation 21 (new heavens and new earth), then hope collapses.

Alan’s biblical objection centers on Daniel 9:24-27. He says the passage gives six reasons for the tribulation, all tied to Israel, not the church. In their view, those aims have not been completed. He lists examples in plain language: sin hasn’t ended, transgression hasn’t been fully removed, and the Messiah is not reigning physically from Jerusalem.

They also connect full preterism to a broader skepticism about the supernatural, as if God cannot or will not act in history in visible ways. Jeff describes it as pushing everything into a mystical category, where Christ reigns only “in heaven” with no future, visible intervention in the physical world.

Alan warns that bad interpretation doesn’t stay contained. If you declare passages fulfilled when they have not been fulfilled, it’s like ripping those pages out of the Bible. The text remains printed, but the authority is muted.

They also stress the covenant issue. The New Covenant does not cancel the Old Covenant. It includes it. God called His covenant with Israel an everlasting covenant. That forces a choice: either “everlasting” means everlasting, or the Bible is treated as flexible whenever it becomes inconvenient.

Alan acknowledges that history includes “likenesses” of what is to come. Human sin keeps writing similar scripts again and again, and those patterns can foreshadow final judgment. He gives a sobering example: tell Jewish families in the Holocaust they weren’t in tribulation. Evil repeats. But they insist there is still a greater, global fulfillment ahead.

Alan also cites a comparison from Zephaniah, saying the Holocaust saw one in three Jews killed, but Zephaniah speaks of a time when two out of three will be killed. In their view, that has not happened yet, and it’s one more reason they reject the claim that all judgment texts are finished.

Partial preterism and replacement theology: the policy consequences they warn about

What partial preterism claims to preserve

Jeff then shifts to partial preterism (also called orthodox preterism). In this view, most prophecies were fulfilled in the past, but Revelation 20-22 remains future. He names several well-known proponents: R.C. Sproul (whom he says he loves listening to), Gary DeMar, and Kenneth Gentry.

Their main concern is the downstream effect. Jeff says partial preterism often lands in postmillennialism or amillennialism, and it frequently leads to replacement theology.

Why they say it shows up in US foreign policy

Jeff calls one paragraph of their discussion the most important they’ll read all year because he believes it connects theology to politics in a direct line. He argues that certain forms of partial preterism are influencing political leaders and shaping public policy.

He states their concern plainly: if replacement theology is true, then the church replaces Israel in God’s promises. From there, people begin to argue that the United States no longer has any responsibility to protect Israel, aid Israel, or care about Israel’s borders. Jeff says that logic ends with throwing Israel “to the wolves,” and if a nation does that, it invites the curse of God.

Alan adds another objection tied to Revelation 19 and 20: Satan has not been bound. That fact alone, in their view, creates major tension for postmillennial and amillennial frameworks, and it pushes them toward premillennialism. They state their own position directly: Christ will return visibly, rule and reign on earth for a literal 1,000 years, then there will be a new heaven and a new earth where He reigns forever.

They also name public voices they believe muddy the waters, including Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, and Candace Owens. Their concern is not just that these figures speak about Christianity, but that they may speak without sound doctrinal grounding. Alan’s point is simple: if faithful teachers don’t speak, someone else will speak for Christianity, and the result can be confusion at best, and falsehood at worst.

They also mention John Rich, who said dispensationalism has framed US foreign policy, especially regarding Israel. Alan admits the statement initially bothered him, then says he agrees it’s basically correct, at least in broad historical terms. They argue that for roughly 150 years the United States has prospered in many ways, and they connect that track record to a generally pro-Israel posture shaped by dispensational thinking.

They don’t pretend politics is optional for the church. Jeff says end-times teaching becomes political by nature because it deals with nations, rule, judgment, and the future of Israel. Alan points out that the world is already making it political, while many churches are afraid to engage.

They also touch the Johnson Amendment and the idea that pastors can’t promote candidates from the pulpit. Alan says he doesn’t see anything wrong with naming which candidates line up with the Word of God and which do not. Jeff agrees and says he has already done that, and if it means crossing a line, he has crossed it.

Alan then gives a separate example that bothered him: a Muslim member of Congress, he says, took an oath on the Quran. He adds that he will fight for the freedom for that to happen, but it should still bother Christians.

“If it was fulfilled in AD 70, why does it keep happening?” (earthquakes and recurring signs)

Alan closes by challenging a claim often made in preterist readings of Matthew 24. Jesus said there would be great earthquakes in diverse places. If those words are fully fulfilled and sealed in AD 70, why does the pattern keep repeating?

He reads a set of earthquake numbers to show the scale and frequency of what people are still seeing:

He also lists notable magnitudes he references: a 6.0 “today” at the Southeast Indian Ridge, a 6.6 in Taiwan, a 7.6 in Japan, and an 8.8 in Russia (with mention of two other places that year).

His conclusion is not that every quake is the tribulation. His point is that Revelation’s catastrophic patterns have shown up in what he calls an “infancy state” since the book was written, active in the world from the moment God’s Word was given, with a greater fulfillment still ahead. He ties that again to the premillennial framework, including the future appearance of the Antichrist.

Then he circles back to the danger they see: if you lose premillennial clarity, you drift toward replacement theology. If you drift toward replacement theology, you break the link of blessing tied to Israel. In their view, that harms the church’s doctrine and harms a nation’s future.

Covenants and salvation: why “new” doesn’t mean “cancelled”

Before they wrap, they return to a core theological claim: the New Covenant is better, but it doesn’t erase what God promised before. It includes it. God doesn’t discard what He started.

They connect this to Jesus’ words: He did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. Jeff makes a strong statement about salvation that’s meant to steady believers who feel the weight of failure. He argues that believers haven’t exhausted what’s included in the gift of salvation. He names terms many Christians rarely hear explained in depth, justification, sanctification, propitiation, separation, and more.

Because of what Christ has done, he says he can make this statement based on the Word of God: the law of God is fulfilled in him through Christ. He admits that anyone can look at their life and see times they violated God’s law. Yet in grace, with love covering a multitude of sins, the gift of salvation makes it as if those violations no longer define the believer’s standing.

He summarizes the result in three short lines:

• The past is settled.
• The present is secure.
• The future is glorious.

They also distinguish Israel’s national promises from the church’s mystery. Israel, they say, will be the place where Jesus Christ rules and reigns physically on earth. They contrast that with the preterist claim that Christ is already doing that from heaven in the final sense.

Conclusion: keep your hope intact, and keep your doctrine clear

Alan and Jeff end by noting they ran long and plan to continue the discussion in the next episode. Their theme stays consistent: expectations are meant to lift the church into faithful service, and end-times teaching should protect hope, not drain it.

For listeners who want to follow their work, they point to the Kingdom Prophetic Society website and the Smith and Rowland Show daily podcast feed. The challenge they leave on the table is simple: know what you believe, know why you believe it, and don’t accept interpretations that quietly remove whole sections of Scripture from your present life.