Roderick Edwards: Are You "Afraid" Of Hyper-Preterists?

[MillennialSaint]

Here we go again. Hyperpreterism seems to be the master of false premises. Recently on an up & coming hyperpreterist website one of their members posted the question “Why are Christian [discussion boards] Afraid of Preterism?” First off, this question has several false premises built into it. One, the issue ISN’T Preterism — it is HYPERPRETERISM. These hyperpreterists need to start getting their terminology & definitions correct. Even one of their own used to go around claiming that the first step in discussing theology was to first define your terms. Instead, these guys play loose with terms, making it look like their HYPERpreterism is the same as traditional preterism. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, they have been doing this for some time now. Even the Wikipedia on Preterism is a collection of erroneous history & poor definition.
The second erroneous premise of the question is the notion that these Christians are “afraid” of hyperpreterism. Christians that know anything about this blip of a movement, aren’t “afraid” of it anymore than Christians opposing homosexuality are “afaid” (phobic) of that distortion of humanity. It is funny that these hyperpreterists are once again using tactics like those used by liberals & even homosexuals. We aren’t “afraid” of hyperpreterism, we are DISGUSTED by it, just as we are disgusted by homosexuality.
Hyperpreterism is a distoration of Christianity as much as homosexuality is a distoration of human sexuality. Oh sure, both groups speak of “love”, “tolerance”, “acceptance”. Both groups whine about being rejected & persecuted & that they just want “equality” when in fact over & over you will see both of these groups have an agenda to force & supplant. Both groups want to revise what has been the “traditional” with their “new paradigms” — be it homosexuality or hyperpreterism, both are disgusting distortions of the NATURAL & INTENDED. (Romans 1:26-27)
Homosexuals behave the same way as hyperpreterists — both groups complain about being “banned” from participation in “normal” activities, be it marriage, or serving openly in a congregation, or being allowed to influence young hearts & minds. Both groups act like people are “afraid” of them & are just being “hateful bigots”. Rather, we Christians are called to oppose error even if it puts us at odds with “friends” & family.

He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. (Mt 10:37)

Since I left hyperpreterism, I have had former friends say some of the most hateful things about me but I will not stop loving them by trying to call them out of this disease. They think that for me to be loving I must gush & mush & pretend that what they are saying is valid. I have to believe that some of them are understanding that I don’t care if they ever even tell me they have escaped hyperpreterism. I’m not looking for a following & is one reason why you won’t see me writing a “systematic” alternative to hyperpreterism — it would immediately be seen as “Roderick’s view”. I don’t want to have a view associated with my name. I just want to be part of Christianity — the same Christianity that has existed since the day Jesus hand-picked His apostles to be the foundation of the Church. I’m not here to make up something new. I’m not here to offer anyone a “paradigm shift”. Am I am DEFINITELY NOT AFRAID OF HYPERPRETERISTS — I pity them, I feel sorry for them, but never afraid — not even when they have threatened to physically harm me & my family.
So, please be in prayer for those ensnared by this cult of the movement, whose leader is not some dynamic individual but is each individual as they privately interpret Scripture & come to conclusions unlike anything that has ever been considered Christianity. And when they complain about not being accepted or claim people are “afraid” of them, think of the homosexual movement that employs the same mindset & tactics.

http://www.preteristblog.com/?p=1084

And yet they look for the preterist, to dialog with, on every corner. Thread after thread is started concerning preterism and so full of fear it runs over the top and onto the floor. They ooze with fear. Why? - because preterism makes the best sense and it scares the dickins out of them.

[Hitch]

, please be in prayer for those ensnared by this cult of the movement, whose leader is not some dynamic individual but is each individual as they privately interpret Scripture & come to conclusions unlike anything that has ever been considered Christianity. And when they complain about not being accepted or claim people are “afraid” of them, think of the homosexual movement that employs the same mindset & tactics



<Edit by Mod>

[psychohmike]

Wow...comparing H.P's to homosexuals! Amazing!!!

[mtymousie]

Originally Posted by MillennialSaint

*****preterism is a distoration of Christianity as much as homosexuality is a distoration of human sexuality. ... Since I left *****preterism, I have had former friends say some of the most hateful things about me ...

Wow. Do YOU ever stop to look in the mirror at the hateful things that YOU say about those who sincerely believe our Savior spoke the truth?

preteristmouse

[JohnStevenson]

Originally Posted by mtymousie

Do YOU ever stop to look in the mirror at the hateful things that YOU say about those...

It seems to me that Paul said some things about preterists in his day that might be considered rather strong. In 2 Timothy 2:17-18, he describes their teaching in terms of spiritual gangrene and how they had gone astray from the truth and upset the faith of some.

[psychohmike]

Character assassination and personal attacks. What a shame...How about scripture???

I guess that would take too much effort...8(

[MillennialSaint]

Originally Posted by mtymousie

Wow. Do YOU ever stop to look in the mirror at the hateful things that YOU say about those who sincerely believe our Savior spoke the truth?

preteristmouse

Mousie,

Christ never taught your doctrines, did He??

MillennialSaint

Originally Posted by MillennialSaint

Mousie,

Christ never taught your doctrines, did He??

MillennialSaint

Yes, of course. On the otherhand, for example, you say there is an end to the age to come but God says there is no end. We therefore in this example say Jesus did teach our doctrine. That is just one example.

[MillennialSaint]

Originally Posted by JohnStevenson

It seems to me that Paul said some things about preterists in his day that might be considered rather strong. In 2 Timothy 2:17-18, he describes their teaching in terms of spiritual gangrene and how they had gone astray from the truth and upset the faith of some.

That's the problem. Hyper-Prets don't want us to use any refutatory language. But Peter and Jude spoke of heretical false teachers in the strongest possible terms. Were they being "hateful?" Of course not. They were merely protecting the flock from ravenous wolves.

MillennialSaint

Originally Posted by MillennialSaint

That's the problem. Hyper-Prets don't want us to use any refutatory language. But Peter and Jude spoke of heretical false teachers in the strongest possible terms. Were they being "hateful?" Of course not. They were merely protecting the flock from ravenous wolves.

MillennialSaint

You can use the language all you want. We just say you are of no authority to lay it on the preterists. We are quite able to show you, by use of Scripture, that your futurist views are wrong. On the otherhand you can only speculate that preterists are wrong because of the very nature of futurism.

[MillennialSaint]

Originally Posted by EndTimesMan

Yes, of course. On the otherhand, for example, you say there is an end to the age to come but God says there is no end. We therefore in this example say Jesus did teach our doctrine. That is just one example.

Yes, that's one example of your false assumptions. If the age to come is now, "salvation" is no longer possible (or necessary), for the eternal state of all men is already fixed & final. The fact that men's souls are still changeable proves that Hyper-Preterism is false.

MillennialSaint

Originally Posted by MillennialSaint

Yes, that's one example of your false assumptions. If the age to come is now, "salvation" is no longer possible (or necessary), for the eternal state of all men is already fixed. The fact that men's souls are still changeable proves that Hyper-Preterism is false.

MillennialSaint

Wrong! Read Isaiah 9:7

[MillennialSaint]

Originally Posted by EndTimesMan

Wrong! Read Isaiah 9:7

Yes, the kingdom will continue forever, ONCE the eternal state of all men is fixed at the general judgment. After the judgment there is no possibility of altering our spiritual states. If there is, we cannot say we're in the eternal age. For that which is changeable cannot be eternal.

Sounds like the logical error is on your side, Bo.

MillennialSaint

Originally Posted by MillennialSaint

Yes, the kingdom will continue forever, ONCE the eternal state of all men is fixed at the general judgment. After the judgment there is no possibility of altering our spiritual states. If there is, we cannot say we're in the eternal age. For that which is changeable cannot be eternal.

Sounds like the logical error is on your side, Bo.

MillennialSaint

After the judgement, during the 1st century, which is exactly what Jesus taught, the eternal state for those judged was set but every generation after still must choose who they will serve. When death comes to each individual the judgement for the individual takes place with regards to Christ and with regards to works (1Cor 3). Your error is that you do not believe Jesus was speaking of the generation He said He was speaking of. Therefore you speculate, which is the hallmark of futurism.

[MillennialSaint]

Originally Posted by EndTimesMan

After the judgement, during the 1st century, which is exactly what Jesus taught, the eternal state for those judged was set but every generation after still must choose who they will serve. When death comes to each individual the judgement for the individual takes place with regards to Christ and with regards to works (1Cor 3). Your error is that you do not believe Jesus was speaking of the generation He said He was speaking of. Therefore you speculate, which is the hallmark of futurism.

You're being inconsistent, and I can prove it. If each person who comes into this world is free to accept or reject Christ, then we are still in "this age." Why? Because his/her salvific state is subject to change. But there can be no change/flux in eternity. If we're in the eternal age, then the state of our souls is fixed and final. But, good men often become bad, and bad men often become good. Since all men are still in a state of change/flux, it's obvious that we are not in the "age to come."

MillennialSaint

Originally Posted by MillennialSaint

You're being inconsistent, and I can prove it. If each person who comes into this world is free to accept or reject Christ, then we are still in "this age." Why? Because his/her salvific state is subject to change. But there can be no change/flux in eternity. If we're in the eternal age, then the state of our souls is fixed and final. But, good men often become bad, and bad men often become good. Since all men are still in a state of change/flux, it's obvious that we are not in the "age to come."

MillennialSaint

We are not talking about the eternal life in heaven only but the eternal age to come which is partly this life we are in and the rest our heavenly life with Christ. Offer scripture to prove yourself.

[MillennialSaint]

Originally Posted by EndTimesMan

We are not talking about the eternal life in heaven only but the eternal age to come which is partly this life we are in and the rest our heavenly life with Christ. Offer scripture to prove yourself.

Ah! So you're saying that the eternal state is entered after DEATH? Then "this age" couldn't have ended in A.D. 70. Otherwise, we'd all be in heaven now. But if we're not in heaven now, we're still in "this age." So you're being inconsistent.

As for Scriptures, here's one: "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy stll: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still" (Rev. 22: 11).

Notice the above verse was written BEFORE your alleged A.D. 70 general judgment. If the judgment already occurred, then the state of all men is unchangeable, as shown by the above verse. The time was "at hand" when John wrote, remember? Therefore, the space for repentance had just about ended. Wherefore John said, "Let good enough alone. He that is unjust, let him remain unjust. He that is holy, let him remain unholy. For pretty soon, the state of all men (both good and bad) will be fixed and final."

Obviously, though, John was "in the Spirit in the day of the Lord." (Rev. 1: 10). That is, he saw visions pertaining to "that day" (Great Tribulation) which were still future. The whole standpoint of his writings is not "A.D. 66-67" but the "Day of the Lord."

MillennialSaint

Originally Posted by MillennialSaint

Ah! So you're saying that the eternal state is entered after DEATH? Then "this age" couldn't have ended in A.D. 70. Otherwise, we'd all be in heaven now. But if we're not in heaven now, we're still in "this age." So you're being inconsistent.

Read it again, that is not what I said. Poor attempt on your part to say I said something I didn't. Readers will see how I said it.

As for Scriptures, here's one: "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy stll: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still" (Rev. 22: 11).

vain attempt at proof. This has nothing to do with our discussion.

Notice the above verse was written BEFORE your alleged A.D. 70 general judgment. If the judgment already occurred, then the state of all men is unchangeable, as shown by the above verse. The time was "at hand" when John wrote, remember? Therefore, the space for repentance had just about ended. Wherefore John said, "Let good enough alone. He that is unjust, let him remain unjust. He that is holy, let him remain unholy. For pretty soon, the state of all men (both good and bad) will be fixed and final."

Obviously, though, John was "in the Spirit in the day of the Lord." (Rev. 1: 10). That is, he saw visions pertaining to "that day" (Great Tribulation) which were still future. The whole standpoint of his writings is not "A.D. 66-67" but the "Day of the Lord."

MillennialSaint

You endevour to continue denying the timing Christ put things in. Once you come to the true timetables then the rest will fit. Your speculation is not impressive and actually speaks something else of you. You have no proof, do you?

[MillennialSaint]

Originally Posted by EndTimesMan

Read it again, that is not what I said. Poor attempt on your part to say I said something I didn't. Readers will see how I said it.



vain attempt at proof. This has nothing to do with our discussion.



You endevour to continue denying the timing Christ put things in. Once you come to the true timetables then the rest will fit. Your speculation is not impressive and actually speaks something else of you. You have no proof, do you?

Well, just like atheists, I give you proof and you refuse. This is nothing new. As for the timing, though, my last post proves my position. In the letters to the seven churches, Jesus tells them to "repent!" But in Rev. 22: 11, He says it's too late to repent. Why the difference? Because the standpoint of the Apocalypse is not "A.D. 66-67," but the "Day of the Lord." John visions relate to the time of which he wrote, not the time at which he wrote.

MillennialSaint