Archive by terms
The Martin Luther of Hyperpreterism: Rivers Responds
Hyperpreterism (sometimes called Full Preterismi) is a theological perspective and movement that is considered to have began in the 1970s after the rogue "church of Christ" minister named Max King published a series of books advocating the view. Basically, the view is a combination of the following claims or points:
I had previously done a podcast with a Full-Hyperpreterist in June 2010, called "The Consistent Conclusions of Full/Hyperpreterism where I discussed with a hyperpreterist that goes by the name "Rivers of Eden" (ROE), the consistent conclusions of the hyperpreterist view, which is that God gathered all Elect and is thus effectively done with humanity and earth. Although I overall disagree with hyperpreterism, I agree that its consistent conclusion is that if God's plan was to gather the Elect AND we assume that happened in AD70, then there is no more to the story.
Since that podcast, the Full-Hyperpreterist community has been trying to stifle or re-image ROEs presentations. First, in early November 2010 ROE was invited to a hyperpreterist podcast by Mike Loomis of AD70.net where Loomis had ROE basically present the same topics discussed in the June 2010 here on TKC. At first it looked as if Loomis was simply allowing ROE to present a different "perspective" on the full-hyperpreterist theme However since that first and a sub-sequential podcast on AD70.net, Loomis has had lots of backlash, including one non-hyperpreterist program canceling their show on the network (source). And from his fellow full-hyperpreterists, Loomis has also had backlash. For example, hyperpreterist Mike Sullivan, speaking to the issue of backlash:
Loomis has since showed his TRUE goal for having ROE outline his view was NOT to present a different "perspective" but to try to use ROE as the fall guy or escape goat for when people call Loomis' and his fellow "full preterists" as hyperpreterists. Loomis said, speaking to another hyperpreterist named Duncan:
HOWEVER, originally, before the backlash Loomis defended ROE by saying this about him:
Granted, Loomis has a reputation, even among his own hyperpreterists as being a flip-flopper and not able to commit to any single view, but Loomis' greatly contrasted comments about ROE seem to indicate someone who is trying to throw ROE under the bus because of backlash.
Further, another hyperpreterist after hearing ROEs presentation stated this to hyperpreterist leader Sam Frost:
Frost's "side of the fence" has been increasingly modifying its hyperpreterism to be more like historic post-millennialism, so much so that many of Frost's fellow hyperpreterists claim he is no longer a "full preterist". At any rate, notice that the individual quoted doesn't deny that ROEs conclusions correct, just that they are "not pretty". Compare that with Loomis' comment about going wherever his "journey" takes him, even if it's "not comfortable". Which is it?
Lastly, hyperpreterist debatesman, Don Preston who typically avoids getting involved in the various factional disagreements of the movement quickly responded to ROEs presentations. (ROEs presentations on AD70.net were aired Nov 10 and Nov 18). Preston, along with fellow hyperpreterist speaker William Bell aired a response on AD70.net on Nov 23.
If the full-hyperpreterists are going to get Preston to come out of the woodwork on this, then you know it is causing issues within the movement.
Much of this podcast is responding to the full-hyperpreterist response and especially to Preston's objections.
LISTEN to the Podcast
River's/ROE welcomes continued interaction.
Cumulus Tag Cloud
Don't Worry, Be Happy
TKC Optimal Search