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

An issue has been coming up in recent discussions I have either been involved in or have read which is dealt with in my Is it a Duck? article on the issue of word games. I was in a recent short debate with a NeoHymenæan (aka “full preterist”) advocate in which this came up once again. Very often it is claimed it is claimed by NeoHymenæans that they do not deny the resurrection - knowing full well that they in fact do. When Group A believes Concept A by the name of Name A and Person B seeks inclusion in Group A but holds Concept B (which is opposed to Concept A) by calling it Name A, and claiming that they do not deny Concept A because they use the same name, but pour Concept B into it - well that is not honest to the real issues. On a superficial level it is corret in the sense that Person B has a doctrine by the same name and doesn’t deny that there needs to be a doctrine dealing with the issue, but on the real meaningful level it is utterly incorrect. This is the exact same word game that is played by some in Mormon circles who will say that they do not deny the Trinity. Of course they do! They are simply using the same name for an entirely differnent concept that is not possible to be harmoniously reconciled with the orthodox concept. These types of radical redefinitions and the unwillingness to be upfront with them is the mark of a cultic belief.