Contact David Nikao Wilcoxson

If you have a comment about a particular study, please use the comment section on that page to aide the discussion about that topic.

You can comment on the bottom of this page for general questions or comments.

If you want to send me a personal message but don’t want it published, just let me know. Then I will be able to reply to your comment using your email address.

Here’s a link to the About Page that shares my story.

Here’s a link to the End Times Deceptions Facebook group.

Here’s a link to the Buzzsprout podcast  audio page.

Here’s a link to the End Times Deceptions YouTube channel.

Here’s a link to the Rumble video channel.

You can sign up for the email list to be notified about new posts and videos.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

149 thoughts on “Contact David Nikao Wilcoxson”

  1. Dear David,
    I just found your YouTube and websites. Tremendously a blessing for me. Do you have videos or pdfs about the a thousand years reign of Christ on earth. I searched and couldn’t find one. Can you point me to that?

    Regards and Shalom,
    Arie

    Reply
    • Dear Arie, that is great that you’re seeing the truth of the historicist explanations. I’m still studying Revelation 19-20 and praying for truth, so I don’t have a study available on that topic. I don’t think that the thousand years is literal, as none of the previous times in Revelation were literal. I think that it may be a much shorter time.
      Keep learning and growing in The Way of Messiah! David

      Reply
  2. Good stuff David. So much cranky exposition out there, it drives me nuts as well. The core problem is all these pedestal teachers. They are all cookie-cutter seminary acolytes, and then they just regurgitate the same nonsensical hallucinations, and the audiences swallow it like shoals of fish.
    People need to get in the thinking zone. Eschatology is not neutral; the goodman of the house turns into a violent oppressor because he does not understand eschatology….

    My personal pet peeve is the trendy pre-AD70 date for Revelation. Totally nonsensical and unbiblical. I only really scratch the surface in this video

    https://youtu.be/71GIntJqgzQ

    Reply
    • Thank you for your comment Marcus. Yeah, people who go to Bible college get indoctrinated with the false, futuristic explanations, which then misled many people. And now the enemy is pushing the preterist view for people to believe when they learn the truth about the false futuristic explanations. It’s hard to witness.

      All we can do is share truth and pray that the Spirit moves on people’s lives.

      Keep pressing on for the glory of our King!
      David

      Reply
      • Hey David. Jesus made people think. He used the Socratic method, (as it were).
        He even said: “Don’t call me good teacher!!” Hint, hint.
        We could say so much more about these things.

        But yes, futurism is a pox. Preterism is not much better.
        Both Daniel & Revelation are extremely complex.

        All I am seeing right now is people who are trying to reverse engineer Revelation
        to fit the Preterist/Historicist position. (I would call myself a historicist, insofar as
        there are first century fulfilled prophecies). But these people are putting the cart before
        the horse. They’ve decided on a specific interpretation of Revelation, and then they have to
        insist that Revelation was written in AD65 to justify their slant. This is absurd. Revelation was written post the annulation of the Church in Jerusalem. This was well-understood for centuries. Everything in the scriptures makes this abundantly clear. e.g. Jesus telling Peter to manage the Church in Jerusalem, (“feed my sheep”), whilst telling John that he would live to see his coming. (“If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?”). The particular coming in view being AD67-73, the victory march over Judea & Jerusalem. Peter got the hump, but Jesus told him to concentrate on his calling. John clearly then lived through the events of AD 67-73. And he was then the special apostle through whom God addressed the Church in the aftermath…..

        Reply
  3. Yes David. I just watched some of the videos. They are excellent. You really are laying all this stuff out very well, and it is doing a great service to the Church. I am laughing listening to your content because it is exactly what I have experienced. I spent weeks once arguing with a gang of people that I was not a Preterist, but a Historicist. “You are a Preterist because we say that you are a Preterist” I was told. I defined Preterism, then I defined Historicism, then defined my beliefs, mapping them to the Historical paradigm, to clarify the issue for them, I even stated that I viewed the label of Preterist as both deeply insulting and calumnious, but they just doubled down on their insults. It really was a defining moment for me, where I realized that something was very broken, and that there was a problem much deeper than mere interpretative variance. [Unlike you, I decided at that point not to deal with these people anymore, as they are intransigent and a waste of my energy. Their problems require special therapy.]

    You cover the historical backdrop to Revelation, and you also treat the dating from an exegetical viewpoint. I am not in dispute with either approach. The problem with the former is that it is not a proof as such. Like all historical analysis, it is an interpretation of events. If someone can find some secondary source that claims that Irenaeus was an alcoholic or something, it can undermine the argument. It is not conclusive, however reasonable and compelling. Regarding exegesis, if one counters exegesis with exegesis, it really just plays into the Preterist’s delusions. One just enters the tiresome loop of exegesis and counter exegesis.

    That is why I prefer just to take the book itself as prima facie evidence, and short circuit all those tangents. There are various statements within the Book of Revelation that demonstrate that the book was written circa AD95. It is a much simpler and direct rebuttal, and takes Preterists out of their safe zone (read: self-reinforcing delusions). I put a few arguments in the video, and there are others.

    Reply
    • Marcus, That’s great that you see the truth of historicism and the deception of preterism. People who have been misled by futurism double down on preterism as they can’t comprehend that they’ve been deceived again.

      As you noted, you can explain that you’re a historicist, but they keep tagging you as a preterist in order to dismiss your explanation.

      As for my approach, there’s a collective witness of validating when Revelation was written which invalidates the preterist narrative; proving how Nero could not have been the antichrist; and showing how the prophecies in Revelation have been in the process of being fulfilled during the last 1,900 years.

      Reply
      • I agree totally with what you are saying, but you are preaching to the choir. There are still a mass of people, along with the postnominals who indoctrinate them, who are impervious to the arguments you cite. They dismiss people like us because we’ve never been to a seminary, they tar us with inappropriate labels, they find workarounds to avoid the historical evidence, and they will just engage in eschatological ping pong when you try to debunk their falsification of the date. In fact engaging in an eschatological attempt to debunk the incorrect dating just makes them double down on and retrench in their eschatological stronghold.

        The historical arguments are persuasive to a sane person, but they are not conclusive, by the rules of historiography. So it all begs the question of why would God have left this kind of question hanging? Everywhere else in scripture there is a logical solution, provided you look hard enough. My argument is that firstly we should apply the same logic to Revelation as to every other book in the Bible. Who is God addressing? What is the purpose of the book? Now those two questions de facto require a proper date for the book. So if that is the case, God would not leave us in any doubt; the evidence must be there somewhere. Indeed, God is very clear that the book must not be abridged or bastardized. So we should be able to prove textually and contextually that Revelation is written circa AD95, post the desolation. I think we should focus on those proofs. They are there in the text. I gave a contextual proof referencing John 21. A textual one I gave in the video is the use of the term “priest” for a believer. This is only possible post the destruction of the Levitical order.

        It is feasible to convince a sensible person of our (historicists) rectitude with your arguments. However to debunk those marinated in theological walnut juice, one needs stronger weapons I think.

        Reply
        • I believe that body of work that I’ve published is enough for Spirit-led, teachable people to see the fulfillment. I learned a long time ago that my role is to teach the set-apart ones, those who pray for truth and search it out, not to try to convince unteachable people against their will.

          I look forward to seeing you approach the topic in a manner you suggested. Do you have a teaching platform website or YouTube channel?

          Reply
          • I agree totally David. You have produced a Magnus Opus, full of great stuff, and I totally concur. Concentrate on the receptive.

            However you have also proactively debunked Futurism & Preterism. So you are in the business of debunking as well as illuminating. And I just want to debunk the Preterists also, because I think they are taking liberties, to put it mildly. And it gnaws away at me, because they are leading people astray, and it is wrong!!

            How about we look at it this way. Prophecy is generally explicit, (we can leave Daniel to one side). A prophecy is made, the meaning is obvious, and it is then fulfilled. And this “fulfilled prophecy” wherever we find is the Spirit of Christ, it witnesses to Christ. It s not meant to be confusing, it is meant to be clear and unequivocal, so we see Christ. And Peter spells this principle out for us. There is neither esoteric prophecy, nor esoteric interpretation. Prophecies are explicit, and then they are interpreted by events. “If you don’t do x,y,z, then next year the Assyrians will overrun you”. The prophecy is exoteric: its meaning is clear so that its fulfillment likewise is clear and unambiguous.

            Now we know that there is nothing hidden in Revelation: “Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book” John is told. Well now if we go back to Matthew 24, (and mirror texts), Jesus unambiguously prophesies the destruction of the Temple and of Judea & Jerusalem. “Not one stone will be left standing”. It’s a plain vanilla prophecy so there is not one scintilla of ambiguity. Prophecy fulfilled AD 70. Point barre. Clear as crystal unequivocal.

            But there is nothing whatsoever in the prophecy of Revelation that states anything about the destruction of the Temple! The Preterist claim that Revelation is a prophecy of the events of AD 70 is demonstrably fallacious. It simply does not pass Peter’s definition of prophecy.

  4. (addition)
    I know it seems pernickety, but this early date idea is metastasizing. Everywhere on Twitter and the forums people are embracing it.
    It is a complete dead end, and I know it sounds prideful David, but I watch
    these celeb gangster-pastors pushing it, and everyone needing the vapours, and it really grinds my gears!

    Reply
  5. Hi David,
    I was just curious about the Feasts of the Lord. Im in Australia so my spring starts in September which would make the fall feasts fall around March of the following year. I’ve been praying to God about if I should acknowledge the days from my timezone/seasons or should I acknowledge them from Israels timezone/seasons. I feel in my spirit to acknowledge them from Israels perspective as that would of been the time the apostles/ Yah would have been celebrating the Feats. let me know your thoughts. Thank you and may God bless you.

    Reply
    • Hi Nathan, yeah, you have a very different perspective. By following them according to Israel’s time zone you stay in sync with many people who are observing the Feast Days at the same time. Keep learning and growing in The Way of Messiah! David

      Reply

Leave a Comment