Damned if you do....
by Dee Dee Warren
Plain Text/Printer friendly Version
A long time ago, in a wiki far, far away, I was challenged in my statement that most Christians would consider hyperpreterism heretical, though my hyperpreterist colloborator in the article absolutely agreed with me. At that time, I presented ample proof, but I am writing this serial article to document the strong statements of others vis a vis the status of this doctrine as I find them so that I no longer have to rely upon my increasingly poor memory.[1] This will be updated periodically.
Currently, this is just the shell. I will post updates as I find them. If you have any to refer me to, please do so. I have tons in the various articles on my site, but it is just a matter of going through them, something which someone with my poor memory is extraordinarily inept at doing lately
For those who may not be aware, "full preterism"--sometimes also referred to as "pantelism" (by its critics)--is, so I understand, the position that all biblical prophecy has already been fulfilled, including the Second Coming and the resurrection of the dead. Obviously, these would have had to have been fulfilled in ways that differ markedly from the way Christians have historically understood them. This position, being contrary to the Creed's confession of both a future Second Coming and a future resurrection, is materially heretical. Jimmy Akin
First, hyper-preterism is heterodox. It is outside the creedal orthodoxy of Christianity. No creed allows any second Advent in A. D. 70. No creed allows any other type of resurrection than a bodily one. Historic creeds speak of the universal, personal judgment of all men, not of a representative judgment in A. D. 70. Kenneth Gentry
It [hyper-preterism] seems to work very much the same as other heresies have worked in the past to destroy unity among the brethren. It begins wtih "private home studies," and the secret circulation of tapes and literature. It is brought in piecemeal and is spread, in most cases before elders are even aware that such a thing is in the work A teacher can successfully sow the seeds of the A.D. 70 doctrine by becoming a closet-preacher and see to it that his views are heard in a cleverly veiled strategy. ~ Dennis Gulledge
At first exposure I did not see the AD 70 theory as anything having to do with fellowship and salvation. To me it seemed to be pretty much a harmless exercise in speculation about prophecies that men have speculated upon for centuries. But two factors are making it into much more than. First, it ends up in a type of Scriptural denial that the Bible speaks of as spiritually fatal, denial of a coming resurrection. Second, it has in recent years developed an aggressiveness that was not there originally and this has made it a troublesome "issue," capable of dividing churches. ~ Olan Hicks
In response to numerous inquiries regarding full or hyperpreterism, I´ve decided to layout arguments as to why it is a heresy. Hyperpreterism teaches that ALL bible prophecy was fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, including the Second Advent, the Resurrection, and the Final Judgment. The view is unorthodox to say the least. ~ Scott Kessler
There are some false beliefs which, like erring plants, we should be glad to prune and check, as we allow ourselves too, to be pruned. Those who hold them should be exposed to the sunlight of dialogue to be nourished and benefited. The weed that is heretical or "full" preterism however, is not such a thing. It must be utterly starved of the oxygen of our attention. If we treat it as an equal among Christian opinions, some might fall into the error of thinking it to be a Christian view. ~ Glenn Peoples
. . . full preterists teach that the resurrectionwhich, they say, is not bodily but spiritualhas already occurred. To teach, as full preterists do, that Christ has already returned and that the resurrection occurred in A.D. 70 at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem is heresy, according to the apostle Paul. Kim Riddlebarger (A Case For Amillennialism: Understanding The End Times)
A second reason why this question is important has to do with the rise of various forms of preterism (full-preterism, which is considered a heresy; and so-called “partial” preterism, which is not) which contend that Christ returned in A.D. 70 to execute judgment upon apostate Israel, the city of Jerusalem, and the Jewish temple and its sacrificial system. Kim Riddlebarger, Eschatology Q & A -- "What About the Great Tribulation?
Kenneth Gentry and R.C. Sproul's ministries consider hyperpreterism to be heretical.... I agree with these men and the men that have been trying to warn me for months now, that this [hyperpreterism] is heresy. It denies Christian orthodoxy no matter how you cut it or how you slice it. Pastor David Roth
What would you say about a professedly Biblical teaching that denies the physical second Advent of Christ, questions or omits the physical resurrection of Christ and the saints, and denies the physical Judgment of the just and the unjust at the conclusion of history? You would probably call it heterodox and heretical. And you would be right. Andrew Sandlin
Again, I want to make a distinction between Partial Preterism (Orthodox Preterism) and Full-Preterism (Hyper-Preterism). The first is an acceptable eschatological position to take. The second is heresy. ~ Sirrod
Too many people have leaned away from the briar patch of dispensationalism on their left only to fall from their horse into the pit of the damnable heresy of pantelism on their right. R.C Sproul Jr. (Foreword to "The End of All Things" by C. Jonathin Seraiah)
...the heretical preterists have denied the historic Christian faith in its essence ~ Dan Trotter
I don't treat hyperpreterist doctrine the way I do other eschatological views with which I disagree. Rather, I treat it as the serious heterodox doctrinal deviancy that it is. ~ Dan Trotter
[Christ] ... was crucified, rose again on the third day; and having ascended into heaven, sat at the right [hand] of the Father; ... sent the only Spirit with vicarious power to lead those who believe; is going to come in glory to take the saints into the enjoyment of eternal life and of the heavenly promises, and to condemn the godless to eternal fire, after the resurrection of both classes and their restoration in the flesh.... This rule, as will be proved, was taught by Christ, and admits of no questions among us, except those which heresies bring in and which make men heretics. ~ Tertullian
This book (Keith Mathison's "When Shall These Things Be?) is a very useful collection of essays on the latest heretical fad to afflict conservative Reformed churches. It will be immensely useful in reclaiming those who have been deluded by this heresy [hyper-preterism].Peter J. Wallace
We must not let them get away with calling themselves "preterists" or "consistent preterists," or believers in "fulfilled eschatology." The word "preterist" is a good word. The disciples of Hymenæus are not preterists; their "dispensable eschatology" makes them heretics. ~ Jim West
You may be allowed to eat meat offered to idols, but you cannot deny the future bodily resurrection and claim that denial as an allowable Christian option. N.T. Wright (The Resurrection of the Son of God)
[1] I have explicated the difference I make between damnable heresy (which hyperpreterism definitely is being little more than Hymenæanism repackaged for a modern audience) and damned heretics (of which any particular hyperpreterist may or may not be - that is not my job to know or declare, nor do I attempt to) here. The quotes will deal will both the denial of the physical resurrection of believers and the physical resurrection of Christ. Although most, if not almost all, hyperpreterists do not deny the physical resurrection of Christ (though I firmly believe they are inconsistent in not doing so) some do (such as hyperpreterist commentator John McPherson and multiple forum board participants I have ran into) that inclusion of this category is appropriate. Sadly, as those emeshed in heresy are often wroth to condemn any other belief system (thus the descent into universalism observed by many as happening with the hyperpreterist camp), I have not personally seen one public condemnation or public separation from those that deny the physical resurrection of Christ within hyperpreterism itself - unlike universalism which is causing hot controversy. To me this is odd as universalism pales in comparison to the supremacy of the physical resurrection of Christ.