This is a transcript of a call I had with Hank Hanegraaff on his radio show. This call was prompted by the vigourous promotion by a certain hyperpreterist site (which site has at least partially corrected by prominently advertising the fact that Hank was misquoted as a result of this call, which is a very good thing - but have not removed the insinuative entry iabout Hank making a "fully preterist" comment). Thus my focus is the inquire of Hank whether he ever told a reporter that the Rapture was past. My beef with that particular site is what came up here in the program - it is utterly irresponsible to run with a comment like that knowing Hank's history without serious noted reservations or qualifications; it is simply beyond belief that he would ever say anything like that.

HH: "First caller up, Dee Dee. Hi Dee Dee."

DDW: "Hey, how ya doin, Hank?"

HH: "I'm doing well. Nice talking to you."

DDW: "Nice talking to you, too. I had a question or a concern to bring to your attention. I had read an interview that you had given with somebody from the Dallas Morning News, Ira Hadnot, that took place I believe on November 5th, at least that's when the article ran. And in that article he has you quoted as saying that the Rapture was a first-century event. And this statement has been picked up by at least one prominent full preterist site with the insinuation that you've made a full preterist statement. It's a typical tactic of this particular group of people to try to cloak their heretical position with the indicia of credibility by quoting an orthodox person that appears to agree with them. And they're getting a lot of mileage out of this statement and I was hoping you could clarify."

HH: "Well thank you, Dee Dee. First of all, this is not a man, it's a woman. And her name is Ira. She wrote this article, and after she had written the article I saw the quote that had been attributed to me. So I gave her a call, and she's no longer with the Dallas Morning News. What she explained to me is the editor that took the story over after she had initially written it, but not finished it, confabulated some of my statements. And she... And I clarified with her, "Have I ever said anything like that to you?" She said "No." And I said, "You're absolutely certain?" And I also asked her about some of the other quotes that were made with regards to Dr. LaHaye saying that I believe that Christ came back in AD68, and she did clarify that and say "Yes, that is precisely what he said. I have that in my notes." But she also made it very clear that I did not make this statement. Nor would I make this statement. Anybody that's listened to me for any period of time knows that I would not make that statement."

"So I think that the full preterists that are now running with my statement, as though I actually made that statement, ought to do the right thing and call and verify, and I appreciate you doing that. That's what Bereans do. They check these things out. They just don't run with things. Look, there are a lot of things. We saw this during the presidential campaign. Just because CBS says it, doesn't mean it's so. Just because you find it in a newspaper, doesn't make it so. You need to check these things out because the newspapers don't always get it right, nor do the news shows on television."

DDW: "Well that would be my position especially when the statement flies in the face of affirmative statements you've said on the air. I knew that wasn't correct, and it was either a misstatement or misunderstanding of some sort, because you weren't about to reveal on some morning newspaper article that the resurrection was some first century event like "Oops, I let that slip out." You know?"

HH: chuckles

DDW: "But Hank I want to encourage you with something. I'm very vocal and active in dealing with eschatology. I would call myself a preterist, even though I know that you don't do that."

HH: "And, and by the way, sorry to interrupt you there..."

DDW: "That's okay..."

HH:  "But let me just clarify something here. I have a lot of sympathy for the partial preterist point of view. I simply do not call myself a partial preterist because I don't agree with everything that the partial preterists say. I think that in some cases the partial preterists make the same mistake that the futurist does, only in reverse. The futurist is in essence reading the Bible with one hand and the newspaper with the other, and the partial preterist oftentimes is trying to correlate events in history with what they read in the book of Revelation - oftentimes when that particular allusion in Revelation is symbolically intended as opposed to having some literal correspondence in first century history."

"Now that may be a minor point of difference, but it is an important point from my perspective. Not only that, there are a lot of things that a partial preterist, from my perspective, makes an either/or proposition that I'm not comfortable making an either/or proposition. And I'm going to explain that in further detail in a book that I'm writing right now with Tyndale called 'Exegetical Eschatology'."

DDW: "And I think that I would agree 100% with everything you've said. I'm not necessarily your typical orthodox preterist.  And I wouldn't have had a problem with anything you said there, and each statement I have heard you make on this subject have been fantastic.  But the encouragement I wanted to give you. It's both an encouragement and a warning. A warning sounds ominous but you'll see what I mean when I say it. I've been very active in dealing with preterist issues.  And I'm don't know if you're aware of the things that are out there on the Internet."

HH: "I try not to pay any attention to them."

DDW: "Lord, if you go on the internet. It's, it's, anyone can publish on the internet because there's no peer review or accountability, and it us just filled with heretical preterist material, Hank, and I don't think you have any idea of how you're going to be, at least attempt to be exploited by this particular group."

HH: "Yes."

DDW: "They are extraordinarily obsessive and so many people, Hank, are getting swallowed whole by this particular heresy. I personally struggled with it to the point of almost renouncing my faith. I know other people that have. I honestly believe Hank that you're in such a position that God could have raised you up to save people from this error, and  I'm just praying for you in this endeavor."

HH: "Well, I appreciate that so much, and I want everybody out there to recognize. Look, I'm not shooting from the hip when it comes to the subject of eschatology. I have purposefully not given my point of view for almost fifteen years on the radio because I wanted to be very careful to look very diligently at what scripture says to count the cost before I spoke. And so people now are at grabbing statements that I'm making, and you know, spinning them and so forth. But I think that people that listen to me, what you have to do ultimately is read what I write and listen to what I say, and judge me on that basis because I think you are right Dee Dee, I think a lot of people are going to spin my statements."

"Just before I came on this show Chuck Missler of the Berean Call. And in this, un this particular piece, there is a complete misrepresentation. Excuse me, Dave Hunt of the Berean Call, pardon me.  Again, Dave Hunt completely spins and misrepresents my position with regards to Joshua 21:43-45. After he spins my statement, then he says, 'Even a superficial reading of the passage along with a minimal Biblical knowledge and a little common sense,' suggesting I don't have any of those things, 'reveals the fallacy of the claim' that I'm making here. And, and, you know this is the kind of spinning that happens when people do not want to engage the issues but rather indulge in hominem attacks. And I'm sorry it's coming from all kinds of camps, from futurist camps, from preterist camps, and Dr. LaHaye, quite frankly, has been disappointing I would say in terms of how he has dealt with this issue, and how he's put words in my mouth as well, words he knows full well, not only I have not said, but would not say."

DDW: "Well Hank, your book, I really enjoyed it. I'm going to post, you know, the information about our conversation just to clear up the Rapture thing, because I own a couple websites, especially with the preterist issue. All that's out there pretty much is heretical stuff, so I started a site that just the links of all orthodox stuff so that people, now especially since you've taken this position they're getting on Google and they're typing in that word."

HH: "Yeah"

DDW: "So now I started The Preteristlist [old name of this site, the former domain name being owned by a creepy bunch] which is just a site of orthodox material and no heretical material. I'm an active busy girl I also own a theology debate forum in which this subject comes up a lot, which is, TheologyWeb, you may have heard that. I will post this information and get the correct information out. I was just really, really, disturbed to see that because I know your stand for orthodoxy, and just to end, just to let you get on with other callers. I'm really encouraging you to take a look at this hyperpreterist issue and the heresy and to get very well versed in it, Hank 'cause you're gonna need it. I've been doing this for a couple of years now and I just cannot even.... I mean if you speak with Kenneth Gentry or Gary DeMar or any of those guys they will tell you the minute you take a stand, it is like dying the death of a thousand emails because it's like they never stop."

HH: "Well I think you're right, and I appreciate your prayers and your kind remarks."

DDW: "Thank you so much Hank. Have a great night."

HH: "God bless you Dee Dee."

DDW: "God bless you."

MANY THANKS TO THE SPIRITUAL MECHANIC FOR TRANSCRIBING THIS FOR ME!!!!

See the Author Index for a listing of further Christian Research Journal resources on this subject.