Mike I sincerely hope you are correct, with one exception.
Following is a conversation that I had with an individual that cold-called me via email. This is a technique that is widely used by hyperpreterists. However, I say “sort of” because this guy is out there on numerous issues that I wouldn’t want to appear to be saying that all hyperpreterists would agree with.
Enjoy! (or not)
I don’t want to abuse my posting rights at the Preterist Blog and announce every episode of my podcast here, but the episode I published today, Episode 25, “Flesh and Bone,” is relevant to the mission of the Preterist Blog. In it, I look closely at 1 Corinthians 15 and the claim made by theological liberals, Jehovah’s Witnesses and some hyperpreterists that Jesus did not rise physically from the dead.
I hope I’ve handled the Scriptures properly, and please do let me know what you think–even if it’s critical. Thanks!
It has been amusing to read the claims of RINO’s (reformed in name only) Mike Sullivan and Dave Green that their arguments are based on sound exegesis of Scripture. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth!
Clearly still looking for a way to downplay his concession last week that hyperpreterism advocates a goal of God’s plan of redemption similar to that of the Gnostics in the second century RINO (Reformed In Name Only) extraordinaire Dave Green showed up at CARM today postulating this ill formed argument. Read the rest of this entry »
Norm Voss is back at it, misrepresenting the views of others…. Read the rest of this entry »
Dave the argument is here given correctly with the “right context.”
I released this quite some time ago. My opinion remains the same. Whatever would heresycosmos do without us to keep conversation going? Rub each other’s hairy bellies? (except for Dorothy, I am quite positive that her belly is smooth and beautiful)
While Roderick is trying desperately to stay at the one place that hasn’t thrown him off yet (warning to Cherry Pickers USA-that is called hyperbole), perhaps he might want to explain this LIE:?
She [Dorothy Anderson] has since returned to hyperpreterism and has told me it was due in large part to the fact that people like you [Phil Naessens] and Ken Talbot simply tried to make a trophy out of her and use her like a pawn.
Perhaps the cosmonauts, in between revising the basic contours of the Christian faith, might want to ask Roderick why he lied. Dorothy is one of their friends (and my friend), and I would hope they wouldn’t let Roderick get away with that. Dorothy is much too nice of a lady to press him on that point.
Affirming a critique of the hyperpreterist point of view that I’ve maintained after soon coming to grips with their claims vis a vie Biblical theology Jason Bradfield has written a wonderful summary of the issue. Below is an excerpt…