Welcome to TKC


97
Click the play button ► to play
REFRESH to see more presentations
Please report non-working presentations by #.

Another Hyperpreterist’s “Journey” Ends at Atheism

Hyperpreterism to AtheismHyperpreterism is the teaching that against all of historic Christian interpretation, that the Second coming of Jesus, the general resurrection of the believers, & the Judgment all occurred in AD70.  Hyperpreterism is often that last stop before the person finally takes the leap of unfaith into atheism.  I know at least 6-7 former hyperpreterists who have become functional atheists & now yet another man has come out & admitted he no longer believes in God.

 

Jared Coleman, who was a former administrator of the most vocal hyperpreterist website; “Planet Preterist” has come out & revealed:

On the Councils and the Church: Luther on Reform, Government, and Institutions of the Church

In almost everybody there is a certain tendency of romanticism. There is this look at a past, where things were better. Maybe it is in one's personal life, or at some point of history where life seems to have been better or more exciting than our daily life right now and here. People reenact the Middle Ages, the renaissance, the Civil War, playfully sometimes, and sometimes out of a deep longing for a golden age.

There is also a variation of this romanticism in Christianity. Christians who see the heroes of the faith in the past and compare them with what appears to them a far less appealing present long for the good old times--it might be the Jerusalem of the apostles, the Wittenberg of Luther and Melanchthon, the St. Louis of C. F. W. Walther and Francis Pieper, or another time and place. But there was never this age where the church was unanimous, where there was no strife and struggle, where everybody lived in peace and harmony. Reading the New Testament shows us congregations loaded with problems. Any study of church history gives us a picture of a church in distress. And how else could it be in this world, in this age, where sin is still here, where the devil still tries to destroy God's holy Church through false doctrine and temptation to a sinful life? But how do you deal with the problems of the Church? How can you fight heresy and how can you stop new and strange ideas of what is the proper godly behavior of a Christian?

One of the answers given in the course of the history of the church is that councils decide points at issue. Councils were assemblies of bishops, either of a certain area, or of all Christian countries, the so-called ecumenical councils (ecumenical means here universal, it has nothing to do with the modern ecumenical movement). There is an impressive series of these ecumenical councils, starting with the Council at Nicea 325.

In the late Middle Ages there was a universally-felt need for reform in the Roman Catholic Church. So several "reform councils" met, but they did not succeed. One of the reasons was that the Pope sabotaged any efforts to diminish his power. And, as it is often in organizations, the bureaucracy won against boards that meet only from time to time. When the Reformation movement started, the urge for a council became even greater. But the Pope was busy waging war against the emperor. When there was finally peace, a council was announced, and then postponed, and then transferred, and then again postponed, and after that delayed and so on, since the Pope did not want to have a meeting that was not under his total control. This went on for 14 years, and only after Luther's death was there finally a council in Trent. But it was no fair hearing, no free council, but an assembly in which the Pope set and controlled the agenda. Lutherans were not even admitted for a hearing.

Undermining of Faith

Undermining of FaithDuring an era in history called, The Enlightenment, it was fashionable to use what has been termed as higher criticism to introduce questions & doubts about biblical inerrancy, biblical historicity, & general presuppositional belief – that ultimately would lead to the undermining of faith.

 

One way that higher criticism has been defined is:

 



Higher criticism treats the Bible as a text created by human beings at a particular historical time and for various human motives, in contrast with the treatment of the Bible as the inerrant word of God. Lower criticism is used for attempts to interpret Biblical texts based only on the internal evidence from the texts themselves. (source)

 

Another offshoot of the higher criticism approach is often misunderstood as “exegesis”.  The word exegesis literally means to “bring out of” in that a person who is approaching the Bible in an “exegetical” manner is supposed to be bringing the meaning of the text out rather than reading their opinion back into the text. 

A Real Discussion with Brian Simmons: Refuting the Erroneous Premise of Hyper/Full Preterism

A Real Discussion with Brian SimmonsListen to this one-hour audio discussion with Brian Simmons where he & Roderick Edwards discuss not only Brian's experience on a hyperpreterist podcast but also the overall false premise of hyperpreterism.

 

Hyperpreterism is considered a heresy not simply because it is different than the majority view of Christianity but because like Mormonism & Jehovah’s Witnesses, hyperpreterism is a complete disconnect from historic Christian faith.  Hyperpreterism is a novel invention that attempts to revision itself back into history by claiming many theologians of the past were also “preteristic” – however, almost NONE of those past theologians espoused anything like hyperpreterism.  Hyperpreterists clearly are trying to highjack history in the same way they have actually highjacked the theological term “preterism”.

 

Hyperpreterists spend a lot of time & effort trying to get people to “debate” them using “exegesis” alone – but it really is nothing more than their attempt to have a testosterone match, little different than sword waving fanatics yelling “Allah Akbar!” & pounding their chests.  It gives them a sense a validity. UPDATE: Soon after this response podcast was posted, the host of the hyperpreterist show on which Brian appeared, threatened to sue Brian for of all things, "harrassment".  Now folks, these hyperpreterists come on to the various blogs against them & constantly beat their chests & double-dog dare people to "debate" them & now they have the nerve to threaten to sue people for harrassing them???  It isn't the first time & I suspect it won't be the last time a hyperpreterists ignores 1 Cor 6:5-6...perhaps they have never read those verses since they aren't so-called "time-texts" -- or maybe they think that only applied pre-AD70.  AMAZING! 

An Explanation to Friends & Foes

An Explanation to Friends & FoesBecause I am receiving emails from friends & foes alike wondering about my apparent sudden theological shift, I thought I'd take this opportunity to give an explanation.  Obviously it isn't just my eschatology that has changed but all of my "ologies" are being affected.  This should be expected as I have always advocated that all of the "ologies" of theology are intertwined & should not & cannot be compartmentalized.

My theology, like most American Protestants or Evangelicals had been based on a few concepts:

 

  1. That Sola Scriptura (Bible Alone) equates to private or ultimately independent interpretation.
  2. That the true Church was never represented within the Roman Catholic/Greek Catholic Church.
  3. That the creeds, councils, & confessions of the historic Christian Church are to be approached with an amount of contempt if not outright disdain.
  4. That the role of the apostles in the foundation of the Church should be downplayed or else we may sound too "Catholic".


With these typical American Protestant concepts for a basis, I was prime to accept & advocate the most outlandish, unhistoric, & unchristian teachings.

Tinker Toy Theology: How Much Can People Tinker With The Historic Christian Faith before it is No Longer Really Christianity?

Tinker Toy TheologyRecently a leader from a quasi-conservative faction of a cultic group made the statement that he doesn’t reject all of historic Christianity but that he only wants to be able to “tinker” with the parts with which he doesn’t agree.

 

The problems with this sentiment are:

 

#1 How is it decided who can “tinker”?

#2 How is it decided how much “tinkering” can be done?

 

I mean, there are certainly people who have & still would like to “tinker” with such staple doctrines as: the deity of Christ, the sinlessness of Christ, the virgin birth of Christ, the Trinity & others. On what basis will these first “tinkerers” deny other “tinkerers” from tinkering with anything?

PreteristPodCast Interview

PreteristPodCast InterviewListen to this enlightening discussion between Roderick Edwards & Dee Dee Warren as they discuss an obscure but increasingly vocal cultish belief called "hyperpreterism".

Warren is known for her long time opposition to the hyperpreterist movement -- a movement that teaches Jesus already returned & the general resurrection of the believers happened in the first-century.

Edwards had been a hyperpreterism advocate for about 15 years & had renounced it since late 2007.  He is now spending time helping explain how he & others slipped into the heresy of hyperpreterism & how people can avoid making the same mistake.

To listen to this helpful audio, go to PRETERISTPODCAST.COM

The Historic Christian Faith: Introduction to the series

The Historic Christian FaithSome of the typical responses from Christians of Protestant/Evangelical background to the phrase, "the historic Christian faith" is a response of ridicule or contempt.  Many of us Protestant/Evangelicals view this phrase as too "Catholic" -- after all, wasn't this phrase often used against the Protestants?

This is the introductory article to a series of articles I plan to write during 2008.  In the series, I will attempt to work through the Protestant reluctance to understand & embrace what is really meant by "the historic Christian faith".  The historic Christian faith is not merely blind adherence to the creeds, as is often the complaint from some Protestants.  It is understanding & seeing the Sovereign work of God's will throughout the ages.

Join me as we explore & reconnect with the Church against which Jesus said not even the gates of hades would prevail. (Mt 16:18)

Opposition does not equal advocacy

Todd Dennis, long time proponent of "full preterism" (rightly called "hyper-preterism" because it goes beyond biblical definition) has begun a new blog site where he plans to work on refuting the teaching he had embraced for over 13 years.  This is significant because Dennis is credited with being perhaps the "founder" of the online expression of full preterism.  Other hyper-preterist sites that now enjoy prominence actually directly lifted materials from Dennis' work...often without even crediting him.

One thing that Dennis points out on the new site is very important to note. Opposition does not equal advocacy.  What he means by this is, that while there have been many people that oppose hyper-preterism, there needs to be a better job done in advocating the correct position.