Sunday, December 6, 2009

Hyperpreterist Update Dec 6th 2009

Although I have left the 'Cause' of fighting the heresy of hyperpreterism, which means I will no longer be part of an organized effort I will however periodically post updates on what is going on within the hyperpreterist movement.  Those updates will appear on and


Some people may have some questions I'd like to first address.

1. Why have you left the 'Cause'?

The main reason is because the 'Cause' has been hijacked by a snobbish elitist, showboating seminary professor by the name of Dr. Kenneth Talbot.  What's worse is Talbot is the mentor to the main hyperpreterist leader, Samuel Frost.  There are a few ways Talbot has changed how hyperpreterism is being fought.  First, whether you look at Seriah, Gentry, or Mathison's work against hyperpreterism; all of these men started with the fact that hyperpreterism is OUTSIDE of historic Christianity.  For example, Doug Wilson in WSTTB (edited by Mathison) wrote:

If someone were to maintain that God did not know the location of a particular town in South Dakota, and we were to debate with him, the resultant debate would not be over geography.  In the same way, before we can understand our debates with hyper-preterists, we have to recognize that it is not fundamentally a debate about eschatology at all.  The fundamental question is one of authority.  (pg 256)
 Talbot instead, blinded by his Clarkianism seems to want to treat the hyperpreterists like they are wayward fellow "brothers in Christ".  He acts like they have equal validity to take up the Word.  He doesn't seem to acknowledge that the hyperpreterists redefine everything, so that a purely "exegetical" discourse with them is futile.  After all, if hyperpreterists aren't going to listen to the united Christian interpretation of 2000 years, what makes Talbot think they are going to listen to him?  Perhaps this quote from Talbot himself will explain why he thinks he is going to be successful:

I am good at what I do, both in preaching and in apologetics, and even better in debating. But I am not so good that I will change them. You are trying to engage about 100 to 400 people. I have a better strategy, I am going to engage every Reformed and Evangelical Pastor in this country as to what Hyperpreterism is and what they need to understand. That part of my plan is almost over. What I do next? Let’s wait and see. (Talbot - source)

That's been Talbot's entire problem the moment he has entered into the 'Cause' -- this man thinks too highly of himself and thinks he has a "better strategy" and wants every one to "watch" him to see what he does next -- he is a showboat just like his hyperpreterist protege, Samuel Frost.

PreteristBlog was for the longest time, the real only daily opposition to the hyperpreterist movement.  At first it was just Dee Dee Warren, and a few others.  Eventually, after I left the hyperpreterist movement, Dee Dee appealed that I should join her. At first I resisted, as I didn't want to become the "anti-preterist posterchild".  However, I eventually did join Dee Dee and for about 2 years we took the hyperpreterists to task for the things they were teaching, showing their conflicting supposed "exegetical" statements and corrupt character.  During this time, others joined PretBlog as well, including Brian Simmons, PaulT and more.  Simmons eventually went independent after a dispute with Dee Dee over Dispensationalism.  Meanwhile, Todd Dennis and Scott Thompson were also independently taking hyperpreterists to task.

But PretBlog changed as Talbot began offering free tuition to Dee Dee, and later even to me, even sending me free DVDs and books.  At first, not knowing about Talbot's "strategy", I thought it was just a gracious gesture, but further along I can see it is really a way for Talbot to subsume ("buy off") people so that they come under his umbrella.  This is further evidenced by people like Sharon Nichols and Phil Naessens -- Naessens was made a moderator over one of Talbot's websites and has his podcasts displayed on Talbot's site.  Dee Dee and Naessens' have asked me for "proof" they were bought off by Talbot -- they ARE the proof.  Before Talbot entered the 'Cause', no one attempted to set themselves up as leader -- not I, not Dee Dee, not Todd Dennis -- no one.  But since this pompous man has entered the fray, he seems to think he is the expert, though he has been dealing with hyperpreterism less than a year and spent years publicly ignoring the FACT that his very protege Sam Frost was one of the movement's main leaders.  I'd hardly call Talbot objective or discerning.

What is worse, is that Talbot has been putting forth a new alternative he is calling "Realized Preterism".  It doesn't even matter what it contains, and at this point no one really knows as Talbot is keeping it under wraps -- probably to parley into a book. The issue we've had with hyperpreterists is that they reject the united historic Christian eschatology and instead insert something new.  Talbot has sold the farm by now more or less conceding that historic Christian eschatology isn't sufficient, that we need a new eschatology.  The hyperpreterists see this and so do I.  Talbot is as guilty as the hyperpreterists for inserting a new eschatology.

At any rate, I will not be beholden to a man like Talbot.  Though it seems like people like Dee Dee and Naessens are in his pocket, never criticizing anything this man does, I will not be part of it. There are more details you can read here (ref).

2. Were you part of a book Talbot was going to do with other former hyperpreterists?

No, and actually I think that book was being headed up by Gentry with Talbot's oversight.  Either way, I never really was that interested in such a book.  I know some of the hyperpreterists like to wonder who the contributors of such a book might be, but it won't be me.  I will not be under the banner of a man like Talbot.


The hyperpreterist movement is mainly comprised of 5 groups:

1. Pseudo-Conservatives (often identifying themselves as "Reformed" or "Sovereign Grace")
2. BCS (Beyond Creation Science, with emphasis on applying hyperpreterism to creation)
3. Transmils (Max/Tim King group, original modern hyperpreterists from 1970s)
4. PlanetPreterists (dwindling group led by Romanian immigrant, Virgil Vaduva, son-in-law of Terry Hall)
5. Individualists (includes universalists, antitrinitarians, any who do not follow the main 4 factions)

The Pseudo-Conservatives mainly led by Sam Frost (protege of Talbot), are in constant tension with the BCS faction over what on the surface appears to be young-earth creationism (YEC) and old-earth-creationism (OEC) when in reality it is a battle over whether the movement should dump trying to be accepted as valid within mainstream Christianity. The BCS group is increasingly not concerned with whether mainstream Christianity will ever accept them and are instead "consistently" applying their hyperpreterism to ALL areas of their belief system.  BCS, therefore could be called the "true hyperpreterists".  Whereas, for the longest time the Pseudo-Cons have being trying to straddle the fence.  Frost would often claim he was "Reformed", but of one of the positive things coming from Talbot, Frost has had to recently admit hyperpreterism can never really be Reformed.

The Transmils, like the PlanetPrets and individualists are more or less non-players.  The Transmils may come to the fore again when Max King finally publishes his book on Romans, which many people think will contain a more forthright admission of their underpinning universalism.  Occasionally, an individualist hyperpreterist will venture onto one of the main faction hyperpreterist sites but often find their views not accepted.


The infighting within the hyperpreterist movement will continue, with spats of "peace" only long enough so that they can join up against some "anti-hyperpreterist" -- like PaulT perhaps.  PaulT, is now the main voice on PretBlog and has done a fine job, first during his days on the CARM forum and now on PretBlog.  Except, PaulT seems to be rooting for the wrong hyperpreterist faction.  PaulT has recently been writing supportive articles toward Frost's aversion to the BCS faction.  However, as I said, it is the BCS that is being consistent with their hyperpreterism.  Why should we stifle that?  Why would we want hyperpreterism to continue to be "haught between two opinions"?  I'd rather see hyperpreterism press all the way or give up the heresy completely.  Frost and company are more dangerous because, like Talbot's new "Realized Preterism", it is really a distortion of historic Christianity, mixed with heresy.

I predict that in the near future, more hyperpreterists will come out under Talbot's banner, maybe even Frost himself -- but the problem is, they won't really have come out of hyperpreterism.  They will simply have modified it.  Polished it up to make it look acceptable and give it a new name called "Realized Preterism".

The BCS faction will go on to represent the consistently applied hyperpreterism, and grow larger than the Talbot/Frost faction.

No comments: