The Preterist Blog ~ 100% Hyperpreterist Free|we can haz rezurekshun?

I had an interesting message from a friend who is of the futurist camp coming to an understanding of the importance of the AD70 event, and while still embracing primarily a futuristic view point also holds a semi-preteristic view. I am finding that the old vanguard of futurism typified by LaHaye and McArthur is falling and falling past, and new nuances will arise. I find this tremendously encouraging and exciting.

However, it also brings somewhat niave (in that their exposure) has been limited potential victims to the perversity that is hyperpreterism which is only being opposed in dribs and drabs with this site being the only site singularly dedicated to its exposure and dozens of heretical sites. To me this is easily explained by the nature of the heresy which makes its adherents pathologically single-minded in their promotion. It is THE issue. Most opponents of hyperpreterism have thriving ministries in other areas and have limited time to dedicate to this small and obsessive group. However, I think this is a huge mistake. My heart echoes the sentiments of sister Sharon Beverly:

“How many shipwrecks does it take to get the full attention of the collective body?”

How many indeed. The time is critical friends. Sites such as this and many others are in sore need, and I will be devoting as much time as I can to this project.

I quote sister Sharon once again from here:

Saturday morning, May 14, 2005

I think alot of folks running around out there who have been deeply wounded by Pantelism, or who are seriously struggling with it, are afraid to speak out against it, which is quite understandable. Whether you’re a learned, intellectual Theologian, or the common fisherman who loves the Lord, all saints who have stood up to this poison have experienced the dogmatic, arrogant, and rabid fervor that drives it at the highest echelons. It can appear outwardly intimidating, but please, do not let this keep you from speaking out. Whether we stand or fall, we stand or fall to Him, and no one else.

You can expect to be slandered. [Editorial note by DDW: you may even expect to be the subject of behaviour that many people would consider seriously threatening harassment and borderline cyberstalking by a certain contingent that have their base of support in one particular hyperpreterist site]You can expect to have a slew of fancy-shmancy terminology thrown at you, along with the charge that because you don’t write or speak according to their intellectual standards, you are a sub-standard idiot not worthy of any credibility. Do not worry. The Lord is simple, and a Man of few words. In the midst of His enemies, He often never spoke at all, even when falsely accused.

The fool is known by his many words, and condemneth his own self with his constantly wagging tongue. Do not contend with the fool. Speak the truth with an honest heart, and leave the results in His hands. Spiritual quickening is the Lord’s work-not ours. Those who have ears to hear and eyes to see, will hear and see. Those who do not-will not-and no amount of intellectual arguing will change this. The wise man who allows himself to be drawn back into the fool’s ring again and again, is engaging his own pride.

Pr 29:9 ¶ If a wise man contendeth with a foolish man, whether he rage or laugh, there is no rest. .

Do not allow him to intimidate you, dear one in Christ. If your heart is pricked with compassion for those who are falling into this pit-do not hold your peace. If your heart burns with the Lord’s wise counsel-proclaim it loud and clear. Be encouraged, and be of good cheer, for He has overcome the world.

Jesus made himself of no reputation. Can we do anything less? Our reputation died with Him when we were born-again with Him. Is it easy to bite your tongue when you know you’re being falsely accused and misrepresented? No, it’s not, but the more we do bite our tongues, and leave it in His hands, the easier it becomes, and the more peace settles into our hearts. He is, afterall, our one, true Advocate. I pray we can leave it there in His capable hands.

The Lord is faithful to them that trust Him, and today He has spoken two things to me. The first word is to revisit Ecclesiastes. All that we need to understand all poisonous doctrines and stand against them can be found in that book.

The second word is the memory of my past encounter with two very young (18-21 years old I would guess) Mormon “Elders” who came to my front door last year. These two young men were handsome, smartly dressed, articulate, kind, and by all accounts, outwardly righteous. Our exchange ended with me telling them that Joseph Smith was a false prophet, and that they needed to repent and believe the gospel. I said good day, and I closed the door, while these previously polite and outwardly friendly young men ranted and raved at me through my closed door. Pride is the greatest deceiver of mankind, and our worst enemy. May the Lord clothe those who love Him in His own cloak of humility.

Well my absence was not the two months I projected unless God has another curveball to throw me. As usual, if so, I don’t pray “remove this difficulty” but rather “please let me learn what You would desire me to from this difficulty.” This year has seen more than it’s share which was harder to bear since before God allowed online harassment and threats I remember clear as a bell, looking outside my back window thinking, “I am content. My spirit is still.” Then wham! But praise to Jesus, I now look at my back window and think, “I am content. I am a much stronger woman than I thought, thank You for training my hands for war, and my fingers (literally!) for battle (Psalm 144:1) and focusing my gifts.” My trials are not over (the Internet is not all there is) but I get stronger and bolder for the truth of Christ and His resurrection (and ours) with each day.

What [fill in the blank] meant for evil, God meant for good. Praise be to the Eternal Risen and Returning Lord!

I recently received an email that I agreed to post without much commentary as my position vis a vis “full preterism” is very clear on this site and is not necessary to be restated here. The background in my case is two-fold. A few years back, as a result of asking to be pulled from a certain mailing list because of their promotion of that doctrine, I received an email informing me that I had better stop using the words “preterism” and “preterist” because said person had a trademark on the words and would take legal action to prevent me from using them because I was such a big meanie, which is, well, idiotic. Later that same person or an associate threatened to sue Wikipedia because they were letting me use the words “preterism” and “preterist” in a way that this person did not care for.

So here is the letter in its entirety from well-known “full preterist” Roderick Edwards (a person I have commented on before positively for his stand against universalism springing up among his associates):

I just wanted to say how ashamed I am that anyone in the preterist “camp” would be so stupid & unchristian as to threaten to sue another Christian, simply over the use of the terms — “preterist” & “preterism”. Some preterists have gotten it into their heads that they are somehow the “leaders” of this thing — but this “thing” has no leaders. It is merely a collection of people who are reading their Bibles and coming to the same conclusion. Preterism is not a new denomination as much as some preterists seem to behave as if it is.

So anyhow, as much as I may disagree with you, I want to offer my apologies for the actions of this individual & let you know he rarely speaks for the majority.

In Christ,
Roderick

I had a pleasant exchange with Roderick that he incredibly survived without any biting or hair-pulling or heinous nefariousity….. and…… without the Xena ululation. Let us please remember that an Admin at a forum which supports “full preterism” came pretty close to calling me a liar about that “I’ll sue you if you don’t say nice things about preterism and preterists because I own the trademark” email. Yes I realize that Roderick has his own agenda, but I am willing to post such comments as intimidation/harassment tactics of any kind (and I know them all too well) should be condemned, and I do give thank you’s to those who do so irregardless of our volatile opposition on matters of doctrine. Trying to intimidate by fear and posting websites that give out personal information is also the tactic of a fringe radical group within Islam.

Well first I had some planned time off in which I was going to be away for a week or so, but right before that time, my laptop just pooped out. I dropped it off at the repair facility I use and pretty fully thought that I would walk out a couple hundred poorer but with a functional laptop.

Wrong. The motherboard was fried, it would take weeks to get a replacement at a cost of $800. I weighed my options and decided to get a new one, which I am enjoying. I still have the other one and will perhaps be able to work out a way to salvage at least some of it.

Now I am going through the frustrating task of restoration etc…. and it will be a while before I am back in full swing in all my words famous nefarious heinousity.

A poster I do not know who goes by the handle of “slippery” made the following comment in a thread on a heretical preterist site where I was dubbed “Dee Dee the Heinous” regarding my phone call with Gary DeMar:

I find in no way that Dee Dee Warren was heinous. She made a point, and Gary Demar could have answered it quickly, he chickened out hiding behind the smoke screen, as to “what the topic is”, even though there are many times where a topic on a radio show gets diverted to other relevant aspects before getting back on course.

Even though Dee Dee the Heinous has such a fantasy-genre swords and dragons cool kind of ring to it, the above poster is absolutely correct. And not only do radio shows get off track, it was Samuel Frost who took the conversation in that direction contrary to the already stated desires of the host. Gary did not tell Samuel he would not answer because it was off-topic, he answered Samuel’s question, made a controversial statement, and then refused to define or defend it when I inquired. If Gary did not wish to discuss the issue, that should have been true for Samuel as well as myself; furthermore, Gary went on for a good deal of the rest of the show going way off-topic (meaning subjects other than Matthew 24), so that hound don’t hunt.

Now to conclude the topic of what Gary did or did not answer - the hyperpreterists were later claiming that he dodged on the issue of Daniel 12, when I had the contrary opinion, I thought Gary answered well. Notice, however, that this is a question that Gary answered AFTER my call, and wow, look at that, it wasn’t about Matthew 24 (it seems that it was only my question that was off-topic). However, I am glad he did answer that one and answered it well.

The fact is that there is a certain faction of hyperpreterists that like automatons just have to say something bad because someone opposes them doctrinally. I don’t have that mentality. I spoke favourably here of a person named Parker, he does not do so of me. I don’t care. Parker was still right when he was right, and boy was he right. I speak favourably of David Green, a hyperpreterist, as well as Todd Dennis and a few others.

The type of behaviour where an opponent must be criticized at all costs is characteristic of a cult-like mentality. Let me give a prime example:

While I was on the phone with Gary I figured that silly heckling would be going on, and I didn’t wish to be distracted, so I lowered my laptop screen. And by the time I got back to the text, certain comments were moved up beyond the viewable screen. Most of it was juvenile belly-bopping and burping, but here is one comment that shows the depravity to which some in this faction will dive:

brad_religion: dee dee is a rude whore

This person is not some infrequent stranger to the Paltalk hyperpreterist scene, he is one of the main players. What I been saying for years is proven true each day: everyone who strongly condemns this doctrine is attacked visciously. And now we see that misogyny is not out of bounds (since said person apparently also supports a site in which I am also called a b*tch and a frequent reference to bust size is made).

The fact is that there are somefactions in the hyperpreterist camp that will apparently stoop to any depth - this has been proven many times over. I am curious if Gary DeMar will still post at a site that promotes a harassment site giving out personal details and threatening to do more such as post home addresses and phone numbers, once already posting my work address, phone number, and boss - especially in light of the not-so-distant Paltalk murders, and even this same night Matt Slick saying he gets death threats, and you can’t be too careful. Oh and not to mention mocking people who are upfront about their own weaknesses for the purpose of ministering to others about psychological diseases that one has (and so ignorantly stating that OCD is a dissociative disorder - clue: it isn’t please get an education - the correct order of communication is to think before speaking otherwise your voice will be garbled by a foot-shaped obstacle that just happens to be in your mouth. Here is a good page for getting some understanding and to stop spreading ignorant bigotry about a significant portion (2-3% of the population) of persons who have certain disorders. I also have a slight lisp - maybe some of this faction can get some yucks out of that too. Too bad I’m not morbidly obese or have a club foot - that would be sheer hilarity. Thankfully my OCD is relatively mild these days once I became educated about the disorder. Depression is another matter, which comes and goes with varying levels of severity. The last severe episode was over five years ago, and I credit a miraculous recovery (within three months) to God (and yep that means that the “potent antidepressant” I mentioned (referring to FIVE years ago for a period of three months) that I am supposedly under the influence of now and that being bad, bad, bad was over more than five years ago - folks come on, at least learn to READ). I have since learned in doing research that it wasn’t particularly potent as anti-depressants go, I am just unusually sensitive to many medicines.

If any of you reading have any type of psychological disorder or think you may have - TALK to your doctor. Don’t be ashamed or kowed by opportunistic predators such as those who have targeted my transparency. I am open about my struggles because it has helped so many people who thought they were alone, or thought maybe they weren’t really Christian because Christians should never be depressed or have other disorders. Been there done that, ” If only you had enough faith…..” bunk. Sometimes God gives us faith through our afflictions.

Some comments have been made about my use of Xena avatars etc. For instance since some of them depict Xena battling men, the “I am not a psychologist, but I play one on the Internet” says that this is done in order to show that I believe I have dominance over men and hate men. Yes, I know. I will give you a second to wipe off your screen.

This is akin to saying Luke Skywalker battled Darth Vader and the Storm Troopers because he detested monocrome apparel, and therefore hates all who dare to wear it.

There is no accounting for decontextualized impairment I suppose. I mean after all, the BIBLE itself proves that God is a Worm.

Now let’s play “Get A Clue” -

Who are these prime example of manhood that we should all love that Xena is battling? Hmmm - they are all villians. Xena is a fictional story about good versus evil and turning one’s life from darkness to light. She also battles evil women, perhaps she also hates being a woman. Perhaps she is a doberman pincher trapped in a human female body, I mean think about it. Have you EVER seen Xena attack a doberman? Ha! My case is proven.

Now for those who are not the type to threaten people with publishing phone numbers and directions to their homes and workplaces, exactly why do I like Xena besides the obvious that it was a fun series, it was funny, and that Lucy Lawless played the part well?

Here is why. Xena was formerly a villian with some ethics - she justified herself by stating she only killed men when pillaging villages, never women and children. One of her warriors wanted to take over this army so he barged in without her knowledge and killed all, men, women, and children. Xena confronts him, and then the cry of a baby was heard. Xena grabbed the baby and saved its life, and her life went on a different path. Her army turned against her and tried to beat her to death. Making a long introduction short, she met Hercules and through him learned to see the value of good, the value of selflessness, and thus begins her journey to redemption. That all happened during the Hercules series.

The Xena series focuses on the rest of her life - her road to redemption. She spends it combatting evil and fighting always for good selflessly and fearlessly. Along the way she becomes even more human continuing on the path in which she said that Hercules “unchained her heart.” A lot happens in between but the motiff is redemption up until the very end when Xena chooses to go into what she knows is a suicide battle to redeem 40,000 souls who were trapped by a demon (remember this is Greek-mythology fantasy genre) and for whom she bore at least some responsibility for their death. She dies in a horribly brutal way, being riddled with arrows. She then is beheaded, and her headless body hoisted for all to see.

However….. there is a way that she can be restored to life if her ashes are poured into a specific place within a specific time. Gabrielle makes it just in time only to be stopped by the spirit of Xena who tells her no, if the 40,000 are to be released, she must stay dead, she gave her life for them….. and all along the road to that finale she made up for all her evil and helped make the world a better place.

That is why I totally now love the Xena series and stories. How many of us were born Christians? How many of us have done things we wish to redeem, not killing villages, but whatever it may be? We are all along the redemptive road, and Xena gave herself to good much more than any of us do. The theme resonates with me. I was a really tough and aggressive gal for the devil, I can do no less for Christ.

So to those ignoramuses who claim that pics of Xena beating up on some “man” are prima facie proof of misanthropy - remember you are defending the murderers, pillagers, and all other manners of evil that Xena was stopping. Get a clue.

Or… ohhhh….. ohhhh…. it’s my turn to play Internet Psychologist - those particular persons are upset with Xena killing villians and say it is just men is because they are male villians and well, its just professional courtesy, you know… the same reason a shark won’t eat a lawyer Legal humour, you gotta love it.

Despite our very aggressive stand in opposition to the views of one another, a hyperpreterist site owner (the one whom I had always considered head and shoulders above the others I knew - which I have learned is the general consensus of this person from supporters and opponents alike) has removed from his site personal information about me that had been obtained by another through means that most people would consider borderline if not actual cyberstalking (despite whether or not it was “legal” - so is abortion) and would go absolutely bonkers if such was done to their daughter or wife. The name is not mentioned because I agreed with this person that I likely would mention rarely any hyperpreterist site or person by name (and removed one mention of this person’s particular site when requested) especially not in my blog where it is not necessary. I have no problem with giving them the credit due, so if an email is sent my way I will do so. I think most of you can guess by my description the person that I am extending a genuine and heartfelt thanks to.

Now in stark contrast another hyperpreterist site owner, despite given me written assurances that he would never allow such things on his forum and expressed general distaste for people hunting down the private information of another and posting it because of a theologically disagreement, has shown that his yes does not mean yes, and his word is worthless. No matter what I think of anyone’s doctrine or lack thereof - if I give my word, you can take it to the bank. I doubt any of you would guess who this is as the site is not one of the prominent ones.

Some of you have heard or were in attendance during last week’s The Narrow Mind radio show by Pastor Gene Cook. If you have not heard of it, stop in Paltalk on Tuesday night, 9:00pm EST, for live simulcast with chat in the room. This particular night, Pastor Gene had Gary DeMar on as a guest. Gary by far is the most prolific preterist¹ writer out there and has written what is almost universally held to be the best primer on preterism Last Days Madness. Thus this is certainly a man that I have learned a lot from and in practically every other issue I think has it nailed except for this. He refuses to condemn hyperpreterism as heresy and theologically buddies up to them. Many have speculated why. I will not do so here. The hyperpreterists in conversation frequently allege that DeMar is a “closet hyperpreterist.” He has spoken at hyperpreterist conferences (he has said he no longer does that, thank God) and posts at hyperpreterist websites. Hyperpreterists use this as a lure that their view is just a bit more than his (well the chasm IS just one step off the cliff). Gary and I have had several email conversations on this issue, and I find him evasive and incoherent when confronted on this point. By his silence, as a teacher, I do believe he is culpable for some of the spread of this gangrenous teaching.

So what happened on the show goes somewhat as follows (meaning paraphrased as I am having difficulty downloading the audio file right now - and it is not needful for this to be word for word). Pastor Gene stated that at the end of the program that they would talk a bit about hyperpreterism but that they would stick to Matthew 24 in general at the beginning. I had emailed Pastor Gene before the show predicting that one of the first things that would happen would be that a hyperpreterist would call to get Gary to say that they were not heretical to give the impression of credibility to their mythology. And lo and behold what happened? One of the first callers was Samuel Frost whom Gary let lead him by the nose right to Gary’s foolhardy declaration:

I DON’T THINK FULL PRETERISM IS HERETICAL BECAUSE THEY DO NOT DENY THE RESURRECTION.

Which is sheer BUNK. Such a statement is so way below Gary’s obvious intellect and logical skills it is mind-boggling.

Samuel’s call was not cut short. Although Gary did say that he was hoping to leave that subject until the end of the program, since it came up, he might as well address it. Well okay, since he said such an incoherent statement that is doctrinally dangerous, I called to, well, basically confront him to substantiate that statement. I asked Gary if he thought that a radical redefinition of a word or doctrine is not in fact a denial of the original meaning of the word or doctrine…. and I followed quickly by asking if he thought Mormons denied the Trinity.

What happened? Gary dodged the question and “shouted” me down declaring that he was only there to discuss Matthew 24, and if I wanted to talk about hyperpreterism I could do so on my own site, which I am now doing. I pointed out to Gary that he seemed okay talking about it with Samuel Frost, and if one makes a shocking assertion, one should be willing to defend it or not say it at all. Gary absolutely refused. And went on for a great part of the show to talk about things other than Matthew 24. So much for that excuse to not answer. He says that he is not really interested in those skirmishes but in the wider issue of worldview and how the dispensational worldview impoverishes Christianity. Does he actually think that believing that we are in the CONSUMMATION NOW is not a worldview issue? Let me just rattle off a few…. there is no satan any longer, so spiritual warfare is no longer needed. We no longer see in a glass darkly but have come to the perfect man. Death is destroyed and Christ has no enemies. This sounds more and more like Christian Science than Christianity. If that is really his goal, to deal with worldviews, then he has some seriously dealing with it to do with the theologically hollow position of NeoHymenaean preterism.

Well then, though I absolutely respect Gary in many other areas, he is absolutely and recklessly wrong - first in making that statement, and second for refusing to answer the challenge. That really saddens me to say, though I have in the past told Gary this in email so it is no surprise to him.

This ambiguity about Gary and hyperpreterism doesn’t originate with me, but in fact goes back in history to the fall-out with the Tyler crowd at the time of Chilton’s apostasy, and I believe only those persons who were actually involved can really know the issues with that.

I will have more to say about this show, more specifically about some of the odd behaviour in text, as the weeks go on. As far as this issue, I cannot say it better than Dan Trotter:

“I am now directing my argument to all orthodox folks of whatever eschatological persuasion, who believe that there will be a physical, resurrection of the wicked and the just at the end of time, but who unfortunately also believe that there is some kind of distinction between the original hymenaeans and the neo-hymenaeans of today, and that therefore we can coexist with the hyperpreterists in love, peace, and harmony, and can just accept their doctrinal deviancy as harmless error. In the following paragraph, I will restate the hyperpreterist argument concerning Hymenaeus and Philetus. All the things all we orthodox know to be true will be printed in normal case. But anything all we orthodox know to be false will be printed in red, in all caps. Please notice how the hyperpreterist argument relies on the red capitalized text.

This is how the hyperpreterist typically argues: “Paul condemned Hymenaeus and Philetus for stating erroneously that the resurrection had already taken place (2 Tim 2:18). Paul was writing just before A.D. 70. THE RESURRECTION TOOK PLACE IN A.D. 70. Therefore, Hymenaeus and Philetus were wrong when they claimed, in the sixties, that the resurrection had already taken place. However, we current day full preterists are not wrong when we say in the twenty-first century that the resurrection has already taken place, because IT HAS, IN FACT, ALREADY TAKEN PLACE. IT TOOK PLACE IN A.D. 70. ”

Now, all you orthodox Christians who think that heretical preterism is just harmless error, and should not be identified with the blasphemous doctrine taught by Hymenaeus and Philetus, look at the above paragraph. Look at what the heretical preterists have done. They have assumed to be true a false premise, namely that THE RESURRECTION TOOK PLACE IN A.D. 70. Their entire argument falls to the ground if the big red text isn’t true, and you and I know it isn’t true. The heretical preterists have begged the question. This is classic petitio principii. It is bogus logic. And we are going to let them use this sort of “reasoning” to insinuate themselves into our eschatological discussions?

I am still addressing all orthodox Christians who believe the resurrection to be at the end of time. If it is true that the resurrection is at the end of time, then Hymenaeus and Philetus were wrong when they said the resurrection had already taken place. But, then, so are the neo-hymenaeans wrong when they say the resurrection has already taken place, because the resurrection hasn’t taken place. And the neo-hymenaeans are wrong IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY THAT THE ORIGINAL HYMENAEANS ARE WRONG!!!!! So, my question is this. Why in the world do you insist on giving the hyperpreterists a free pass? Why don’t you consider their doctrine in the same light that Paul considered the teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus? Paul certainly contended for the truth. Will you? Are you listening, Gary DeMar?”

source [last emphasis mine though Dan made it stand out in a quote box]

[1] - Preterist means here what it has historically meant, not the “newer than dispensationalism” perversion that flatters itself with the historic label.

As my close friends say, I am a walking train wreck. Let’s see what has happened in the past few years or so. I was hooked in the lip with a fish hook on my anniversary. I was bit in the wrist by one of our birds and had nerve injury (which has healed completely). I have been through three gum surgeries, and it’s not over. I fell face first into a door. And now… I appear to have injured my lower back and am in some serious pain. I am too busy for pain. Go away.

At a certain heretical site, a hyperpreterist noted this with regards to a forum that (praise be to God) doesn’t allow the spread of this heresy in the eschatology section (just as TheologyWeb does not) and as NO Christian forum should.

I find that more people can easlierly read Preterist view in the eschatology section but God’s word is chained there by the bondage of creedalism which is nothing more then what Jesus warned about when He spoke of endtimes about people coming in His name and deceiving other. Only thing different though is that we are on this side of the age that was to come to the first century Christians.

It’s just one of those things in which you shake your head at the cognitive dissonance. Soooooo is this hyperpreterist actually saying we are still in the end times? Is this hyperpreterist claiming that we are false witnesses (and in that context - not Christian)? Now mind you, I could give a stick of butter whether this person is - I absolutely believe that if hyperpreterism is true, then those of use who believe in a future physical return of Christ, judgment, and physical resurrection of all are blathering heretics. No problem. Despite the pain in my lower back, I have more backbone to admit the logical conclusions of my position. Yet this is from the same site that shrieks like a peeved parrot when I or any other ole meanies calls them out for the heretics they are.

I have no problem doing so. Hyperpreterism denies the physical resurrection at all which is to deny that Christ was physically resurrected according to Paul and to deny the current enfleshment of Christ (as I have heard multiple hyperpreterists say - I believe one commented that I must believe Christ is “a meatball with a spook in it” if I believe in the current enfleshment of Christ. Such profane babbling is antichrist and should be cast out of any claim to Christian belief.