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

I was reading an article by Todd Dennis opposing hyperpreterism and came across this words:

In my honest opinion, this is gross heresy which is worthy to be vigorously opposed. It is certainly as bad - if not much worse - than the Dispensationalist teaching that animal sacrifices will be re-instituted in a salvific sense in a rebuilt temple! My only regret is that I actually supported this overthrow of this Christian message for over ten years. (The Lord is Sovereign and has His purposes with which I do not dispute; However, from my perspective, it is a regrettable decade of promoting heresy.)

Wow, I’m a poet and didn’t know it. Thank you, thank you, I’ll be here all week.

Okay I had to start with a bit of levity because the dirty business of exposing slimy tactics is dead serious, and if that is all I did; well life would be dark.

Now onto the latest shenanigans. The Domain Game. In Episode 20 of The Preterist Podcast, I mentioned how a certain hyperpreterist unethically kept the domain name of preterism.com when he should have returned it to its rightful owner. During that show, I don’t remember if I mentioned the address of the hate site against me. It was the exact same name as my former site, just with a different extension—.org instead of .com. That is just low-down-dirty tactics. Let me tell you, when I started that site, I considered doing something like that. My flesh said yes, yes, yes, yes! But my conscience said no. No matter how much you disagree with a person, it is wrong to capitalize off of their branding and work. It is wrong to try to trick their audience into coming to your site by accident. It is wrong to pervert their work; even if you think their work is perverse to begin with. That is why I didn’t start anything like therealpreteristarchive.com or planetpreterism.com or something like that. IT WOULD BE WRONG. It is the tactic of a punk. It isn’t “legally” theft, but I consider it ethically theft. Some of the men who have done this (I will detail more below) are associates of “pastor” Samuel Frost. He needs to do something about it, at the very least speak out publicly. You see, I keep mentioning Sam and “pastor” because the qualifications for a pastor, if I considered him a Christian, are terrifying. Too many men take it way too lightly. I am glad I am not a man and therefore automatically not qualified to be an elder or a pastor. A pastor is to be above reproach.

Read the rest of this entry »

As was introduced in a previous article (see here), Todd Dennis was instrumental in the online promotion of hyperpreterism.  It was Dennis’ archivist work that gave material to the hordes of hyperpreterist websites that have come & gone since.  But even as Dennis renounced hyperpreterism, he was purposely slow & discerning about speaking out against it.

Like many former-hyperpreterists, perhaps Dennis wanted to wait & see if there was anything of value he could keep from the “movement”.  He probably held out hope (as I did during the last 5 years of being a hyperpreterist) that maybe if the movement could be made more “evangelical”, more “conservative” that it could be legitimate.  Even now, there is a faction of hyperpreterists led by hyperpreterist Sam Frost that is holed-up in one corner of the Internet, trying their best to hold out against the “logical conclusions” of their movement.  As more & more of their fellow hyperpreterists take up positions such as first-century raptures, universalism, or “Covenant Creationism” (non-cosmological/material creation) this little band of wanna-be “evangelical/biblical” hyperpreterists hang on to the last shred of Christian resemblance…by blocking membership to their fellow hyperpreterists & by purposely not mentioning their critics by name.

As Dennis has patiently waited, giving the hyperpreterist movement the benefit of the doubt as if maybe they were just going through growing pangs, the movement has been increasingly moving further & further away from anything that we would recognize as historically Christian.  But it now seems Dennis is ready to speak out completely & clearly on hyperpreterism.  In an article published on 01/09/09 Dennis said:

As with currency, the best way to spot the counterfeit is to know the genuine article very well. And so, perhaps the easiest way to show just how different HyP error is from the entire scope of historical Christianity is to point out the view’s vastly different storyline. (source)

Dennis identifies that hyperpreterism places more importance on the year AD70 than on the Cross.  As hyperpreterists are always trying to claim that it was “finished” in AD70 whereas Jesus said, for all intents & purposes, it was “finished” at the Cross. (John 19:30)

Dennis states more emphatically:

The HyP teaching that the New Covenant wasn’t in its full establishment until long after the cross event shows how Hyper Preterism is fundamentally different from Christianity as it has always been known. This “AD70 storyline” is foreign to the Bible, and to Christianity as a whole throughout all of its centuries and denominations. (source)

Dennis seems to now be saying that hyperpreterism ISN’T just a theological difference of opinion, but is in fact a radical alteration & departure from the Gospel.

To diminish the cross event is not just a small matter of end times disagreement; Rather, it is an attack on the very foundations of Christianity. (source)

The most pointed comments from Dennis come when he actually calls hyperpreterism a “gross heresy” and goes on to relate regret for ever promoting it.

In my honest opinion, this is gross heresy which is worthy to be vigorously opposed. My only regret is that I actually supported this overthrow of the Christian message for over ten years. (The Lord is Sovereign and has His purposes with which I do not dispute; However, from my perspective, it is a regrettable decade of promoting heresy.) (source)

Dennis goes on to cite several hyperpreterist “teachers/leaders” who clearly & inextricably connect their hyperpreterist beliefs with an abnormal AD70 focus.

The powerful visual that Dennis gives is that after the veil in the temple was ripped in two (Matt 27:51, Mark 15:38, Luke 23:45), the priests frantically must have stitched it back together & so too the hyperpreterists do also try to stitch the veil back together so that they can propagate their AD70 focus over the Cross focus.

I thank Todd for this powerful article & his ever increasing boldness to address hyperpreterism.  The full article is located here: http://www.preteristarchive.com/HyperPreteristArchive/blog1.php/2009/01/09/ad70-focal-point-fundamentally-different

Todd Dennis was perhaps the main progenitor of hyperpreterism on the Internet.  Starting in 1996, he had amassed the largest “archive” of preterist & hyperpreterist materials anywhere.  Many of the now popular hyperpreterist websites had to directly lift material from his website to jump start their own.

In 2006 Todd was one if not the first modern hyperpreterist to renounce that false teaching & instead of going away quietly like hyperpreterists tell us to do, Todd seeks to undo some of the damage he directly & indirectly caused in the lives of others.

I want to here, publicly apologize & ask Todd forgiveness for so rudely opposing him while I was STILL a hyperpreterist.  To use the vernacular of the 20-30 something crowd associated with the hyperpreterist movement, I want to say, “Todd is one brave dude!” He has had to endure (sometimes alone, except for Christ), the barbs of former hyperpreterist friends who have done everything from claim he is suffering from emotional problems to saying the only reason he left hyperpreterism is due to a personal issue.  They don’t seem to want to realize that people can & do leave the cult because they realize it is a cult.

Todd has recently issued a challenge to hyperpreterists (he calls them “full preterists” so that they may receive his words a bit more readily):

“If you are of a full preterist mindset, and are hiding your views from your pastor, what good are you doing for your church or for the body of Christ? Don’t put yourself above the church. If it is the truth, then so be it: come clean and be willing to take a stand. If you are in a position of leadership, then you have all the more reason to be up front and honest. Otherwise, how long do you intend to wait? Until you have secretly converted the entire church to full preterism (as if), or until you can secure enough people to split the church over your hobby horse end times position? Now is the time to be honorable and to come clean.”

Todd seems to realize that hyperpreterism operates more like Romans 16:17-18 & Jude 1:4).  But what Todd has embarked upon lately is to chronicle as he says, “the many shocking & unbiblical statements coming from the full preterists”. And let it not be compared that non-hyperpreterists do often make such statements as well — we’re talking about ratios here.  For every 1 out 100 non-hyperpreterists making such statements, there is probably 8 out of 10 hyperpreterists making such statements & behaving with a corrupt character.

Todd started a page to examine the “regressive doctrine of hyperpreterism”.

Todd says:

It is a sad but common tendency of full preterists to treat the view as the gospel.  In fact, Don Preston often refers to “the gospel truth of Covenant Eschatology”.   Now, it is one thing to be confident that your personal theology is correct, but there seems to be a point where such statements cross a line.

For instance, it is commonly declared in articles and discussions that full preterism is based upon the Word of God ; therefore, if you don’t agree with that view then you don’t agree with the Word of God.   Likewise, it is commonly stated that Jesus taught full preterism ; therefore, if that view is incorrect then Jesus is a liar.  There are many such comments - so many in fact that those who leave full preterism often go to atheism, no doubt have been convinced of the truth of those statements.

But perhaps the most serious question Todd asks is:

IS FULL PRETERISM JUST A THEOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVE… OR IS IT SOME FORM OF CULT?

He follows that question with the comments:

This may seem like an incendiary question, but it is a legitimate one.  After all, there are such things as dangerous cults, aren’t there?

To most hyperpreterists they are in denial that what they are espousing is a radical depature from historic Christianity let alone hyperpreterism being a cult.  To most hyperpreterists, Christians who question them  & their conclusions are merely “heretic hunters”, but beliefs have consequences whether those beliefs cause a person to smash planes into sides of buildings or if those beliefs cause a person to lead people away as if they were leading away “silly women”. (2 Tim 3:6)

Todd concludes with these very revealing comments:

I must admit, it took me two years of being out of the group before such thoughts even crossed my mind.   But the cruel barrage against those who left the view and - heaven forbid - had anything critical to say about it after leaving has been relentless.   I have honestly never seen anything like it in my life… how quickly people can be seen as bitter enemies for simply talking about how the Holy Spirit has led them in a different direction.   The smears and insults against very sincere people - and the methods employed to silence them - has forced me to rethink the level of danger in joining up with this full preterist splinter group.

How true & again, let’s keep ratio in mind.  Why is it that this kind of behavior affects & infects hyperpreterism more than probably any other group?  Because hyperpreterism has as its main premise an arrogant hubris that MUST believe that there has been a 2000 year conspiracy.

I hope people thinking about or just entering the hyperpreterist movement consider what Todd is saying — afterall many of the current hyperpreterists cut their heretical teeth on the material Todd put together & now he is one of the most vocal ones sounding the alarm against it.  Unless a person is operating completely from Proverbs 26:12, they should consider what they are doing.

The link to Todd’s chronicle is: http://preteristarchive.com/Hyper/regressive.html

*image is an inside joke.

These are great times indeed. The pernicious heresy of hyper-preterism appears to be devouring itself as its adherents scatter and divide and some noteable proponents renounce their former beliefs. Of particular note is Todd Dennis, the owner of PreteristArchive which used to be a vociferously pro-hyperpreterist site. Todd has publicly renounced his hyperpreterism of ten years declaring himself to be an “idealist preterist.” Quite honestly, at this point, I don’t even know precisely what that means, and have inquired of Todd for further clarification if he feels comfortable doing so at this point. But I am greatly encouraged by this warning that Todd saw fit to put on an article hosted at the PreteristArchive by hyperpreterist David Green:

Warning: This “full preterist” related material is being archived as part of the balanced representation of all pret views, but its premise is deemed by the curator to be “toxic theology” which subtly draws people away from the things of the spirit due to the fleshly “letter-based” appeal (core components being extra-biblical history and logic — there being not one single verse which looks back to fulfillment in ad70, the system is based entirely upon deductive reasoning). Therefore, this warning is being attached. If you have already adopted this viewpoint, please consider — has your attention been drawn toward or away from Jesus Christ and him crucified? (i.e. what is the focal point of your Christian life.. AD70 or AD30?) Please note that the earliest known adherents of full preterism later abandoned it, as have many contemporary former full peterists, including the curator of this archive (full pret for over a decade). The “past spiritual resurrection” view is the theology that Paul condemns in II Timothy 2:17-18, so please proceed with extreme caution. - TD

Amen. Despite this, I would not recommend PreteristArchive since it still hosts outright heresy and presents it as “the Internet’s Only Balanced Look at Preterism” – as if “balanced” meaning “anything goes” is a good thing. I would not recommend a Christological site if it insistented upon hosting Arian arguments for the sake of “balance,” but until I learn otherwise (i.e. that Todd still denies the future Second Coming and bodily resurrection – which I am presuming at this point, he does not deny these things but I do not know for sure), I will no longer refer to the PreteristArchive as a “hyperpreterist site” but one that hosts hyperpreterist material. If Todd would put a bold disclaimer like that on all pages containing the rank heresy, I would commend him highly.

But in either event, praise God that Todd has renounced the hymenaean heresy. And unlike Chilton, the darling “convert” of the hyperpreterists, Todd is not post-brain-injury but of sound mind and health.

Hyper-preterism is dying – the old guard desparately tries to keep afloat while former adherents tender their renouncements and others drift off into postmodern goobledegook. It couldn’t happen to a fouler heresy.