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

Scripture not only teaches us by the things that did happen but also by the things that did not. One important lesson can be learned from the situation with the apostle Paul & his ministry partner, Barnabas.

In Acts 15:36-42 we see the subject of this article:

This is no small matter. Not only was Barnabas the one who convinced the disciples to accept into the Church, Paul the persecutor turned convert (Acts 9:26-28) but Paul & Barnabas then went on to perform a whirlwind evangelism of the Gentiles (Acts 9-15), with Barnabas apparently having had a head start in the ministry (Acts 4:36-37).

Now, by modern standards of what Christians assume is properly “Christ-like” behavior it seems Paul was insulting Barnabas. I mean, after all Barnabas had done for Paul, after all they had been through Paul was going to divide over a “personal” matter??? It doesn’t even appear to be doctrinal in nature, Paul just seemed upset because Barnabas wanted to take John Mark with them – apparently John Mark skipped out on Paul & Barnabas during a trip to Pamphylia & Paul hadn’t “forgiven” John Mark over it. According to the thinking of some modern Christians, Paul should be condemned for his unwillingness to reconcile with John Mark & for his parting from Barnabas. There should be a dark cloud over the rest of Paul’s ministry until he reconciled with his brothers. How dare Paul spend any time writing to the Corinthians, the Ephesians, & the others until he settled this matter! – At least that is how some modern Christians would play this out.

Further, Barnabas & John Mark apparently went about their way witnessing of Christ but they could have turned on Paul. They could have sided with the Judaizers in an attempt to stick it to Paul. I mean, Barnabas could have claimed he was pushed into siding with the Judaizers or even the Pharisees because of Paul’s casting him away like some used cloth. Barnabas could have felt justified in siding with not only enemies of Paul but enemies of the Church. Barnabas could have sat with the Judaizers & the Pharisees, not in an attempt to convert them, but in an egotistical & spiteful attempt to disparage a fellow historical Christian by using enemies of the Church against him. That would have truly been dishonorable & unchristian.

Fortunately, it appears Barnabas was wiser than that. He understood that there were no hard feelings & that it was simply time for he & Paul to part ways BUT still be on the same side. Barnabas didn’t spend his time trying to tear down Paul & we don’t see Paul spending his time trying to “reconcile” with Barnabas over something that appears to have not impeded the ministry of either men.

So, when a time comes when your ministry path takes you to some other place than perhaps the one you were on with fellows, do not seek to harm fellow historic Christians by siding up with those who oppose historic Christianity – be honorable, be humble & see that the Sovereign God may have other plans for you. If you become bitter & take the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” approach, then you destroy your testimony & make a debacle of your witness & give cause for the enemies of Christ to mock the faith.

UNITE AND CONQUER!

Despite my opposition to their particular eschatologies, any non-preterists who affirm orthodox eschatology are my brethren. Sometimes in our fallen state other things get in the way of showing this unity, but no matter our own failings, we are ineffably bound together in Christ. To attempt to partner with heretics to attack secondary doctrines of other brethren can obscure, but cannot sever, that bond. However it is disobedience. What fellowship hath darkness with light? If we are so zealous with our particular point of view that we would rather a brother or sister embrace heresy or abandon the faith because they have different eschatological positions than us, there is something out of whack. If you are a futurist, and anything I am saying is disturbing to you in a way that is causing doubt or heresy to arise in your heart - don’t read this blog. Ignore me entirely. There is a time and season for everything. Now is not your season for this issue. I would rather all of Christendom become non-preterist than for one of the brethren to embrace hyperpreterism or abandon the faith altogether. Zeal can be a four-letter word.

A lot of readers do not read the “About” sections in blogs, so I am going to post our purpose here with a short preamble. Christians who hold to basic orthodoxy divide and devour each other over secondary issues. Debates are fine, but debates do not have to lead to division. I know preterists who do this, and I know futurists who do this. I distance myself from both. We are the Body of Christ, and the hand cannot say to the foot, “I have no need of thee.” And to cop a song phrase, “They will know we are Christians by our love.”

We are one in the Spirit, we are one in the Lord
We are one in the Spirit, we are one in the Lord
And we pray that all unity may one day be restored
And they’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love
They will know we are Christians by our love

And they’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love
They will know we are Christians by our love

Notice it is never claimed that they will know we are Christians by our preterism or they will know we are Christians by our premillennialism. They will know we are Christians by our desire to be one in the Spirit, one in the Lord, and to love each other as part of the Body. And what is the biggest obstacle to this? Pride. We MUST be right. We MUST have our say. The unholy trinity in each of us (me, myself, and I). None of us are 100% right and will not be until the day that we see Him face to face. There is one verse that comes to mind when division among the orthodox occurs.

Jesus wept.

When there are issues that arise, the question must be asked, “Is this being handled in the most constructive way possible?” For instance, there has been a lot of talk about Gary DeMar’s series taking Ray Comfort to task, but note what Gary says first:

Ray Comfort has put himself on the front lines defending the Christian faith by confronting the spirit of the age and those who promote it. So Ray, if you ever read this, don’t take it as an attack on you or your ministry. It’s just my attempt to get you to take a fresh look at prophecy. After reading your short article, it seems to me that you have repeated the arguments of others without actually studying the issue for yourself. If I’m wrong about this, I apologize in advance.

I have multiple criticisms of Gary DeMar, and Roderick and I did a two-part series on the issues, and I am working on a follow-up. However we made it clear that our purpose was constructive, and we never attacked the man, and I made it clear that I cannot know anyone’s motives. Gary DeMar is an outstanding spokesperson for a Christian worldview, but I believe he errs in some important issue. But if my criticism is done in a malicious or destructive manner, it is sin, for Gary is my brother in the Lord, despite my strong differences with him.

Hyperpreterists love this and use this to their advantage. Well this blog will never be used for that purpose. If there are any non-preterists out there who agree with this ideal and the goal of the blog, get in touch with me. You can and should hold us to this ideal. Disagreement yet remaining in unity to conquer foundational heresy.

That song is very dear to me as is the starfish story which I will post sometime. On TheologyWeb we deal with problem posters who are truly Christian but just have some issues, and my staff always hears me say, “What way can we handle this brother to guard his dignity and pride?” It takes humility and grace to care about the dignity and pride of others before our own (in this context, it does not mean sinful pride, but self-worth and confidence in the Lord).

There is an inherent destructive tendency straight from satan in all of us. But we as brethren must always think of others as better than ourselves to tame the beast.

Here is the mission statement:

This blog is set up by a preterist to partner with other preterists and persons of various other eschatological points of view to defend the Gospel basics of Christian eschatology: The future bodily Second Coming of Christ; the future bodily resurrection of the dead; and the future final consummation of all things.

Additionally, as it is “The Preterist Blog” there will be pieces promoting orthodox preterism as against other points of view. Obviously, considering the diversity of the positions of the authors, specifically preterist arguments should not be imputed to the other participants. Please take a look at the “About the Authors” page for information on the position of each contributor and links where you might find information and articles defending their particular eschatological position.

We have agreed to join together in fellowship to defend basic Christian orthodoxy, and the non-preterist participants have graciously agreed to participate despite the fact that there will be arguments in favour of a point of view that they do not agree with but is within the pale of orthodoxy.

Futurists, preterists and all those who hold to the basic orthodox Christian eschatology do not have to hopelessly divide. We may debate the questionable issues and yet show unity in the essentials. That is the purpose of our partnership. The non-preterist contributors or those who disagree with the predominantly postmill/amill preterist position defended by this blog and its sister sites are to be commended for their willingness to participate to defend orthodoxy.