UPDATE: This update is being posted AFTER the original article that follows, since I think it is important to encourage people whenever they show honesty and integrity.
Ken Palmer, the admin of the site in question, recently posted this apology:
"I want to extend my sincerest apologies for mishandling certain individuals in which I care very much about, and believe that they too need a place to discuss, contend and reproof theirs, and many of the ideas, circulating through the network of Christianity...My wish is that through their forgiveness, they can come feel at ease coming to Covenant Preterism and reactivate their interest in discussion." -- source
Mr. Palmer should be commended for this rare show of humility among the Hyperpreterist community. Unfortunately as soon as Mr. Palmer posted this unqualified apology (and even used the word "forgiveness" which some people don't do when they "apologize"), another Hyperpreterist soiled the apology by posting this:
"You have nothing to apologise for. Lessons to learn maybe (like the rest of us), but nothing to be sorry for. Like the rest of us you’re on a journey, none of us have all the answers, and never will, and you’re doing your best for where you’re ‘currently’ at (as are we all)." -- source
In the Hyperpreterist movement, what typically happens is little camps or factions form around a particular teaching or "teacher". This has given us the Max King/Tim King faction with their "Presence/Transmillennial" website and its humanistic agenda. ("the world is new, thus man is new") This faction mentality has given us the postmodernist/Emergent hyperpreterism promoted by Virgil Vaduva until it more or less died in the early 2000. It gave us the 1st-century rapture faction of Ed Stevens, Walt Hibbard and others. It gave us the pseudo-Reformed faction (until Sam Frost bolted) which is now in a tailspin. And lastly, the "Covenant Creationists" faction of Tim Martin, Jeff Vaughn, Tami Jelinek and others.
These factions are good at banning each other from their various websites. What has happened from time to time is that then those ran off go and start yet ANOTHER site and then hypocritically enough, invoke the SAME exclusionary policies that the administrators of the other hyperpreterist sites used to ban them.
Such a case happened when hyperpreterist Ken Palmer and some of his fellow hyperpreterists were either ran off, banned or left...um..."voluntarily" from hyperpreterist websites that would not allow them to talk about topics like anti-Trinitarianism, cessation of institutional church structures and things like that.
When Mr. Palmer started his new Hyperpreterist website, he and his fellows had dreams of making it a place where....well, let's quote Mr. Palmer:
"...this site is focused on doctrinal contention and reproof..."
"The Deity of Christ - This doctrine is the only doctrine that will not be tested here" (source)The implication is that on this site a person will be able to broach almost ANY topic without fear of banning. Well, it didn't take long for Mr. Palmer to become the very thing he ran away from. You see, Mr. Palmer came over to my main site and cordially invited me to join his site. Here is the text from that invite:
"Come on by Roderick...I would love to chat with you." -- source
I thought to myself "Really? Why? Doesn't this guy know that I take the historic Christian position that Hyperpreterism is not only heresy, it is NOT Christian any more than Mormonism is Christian". What could this guy possibly want with me on his new little website? Well, I figured I'd test it out. So, I signed up and posted my first posting which was a dispelling of mischaracterizations -- this way I could nip in the bud, any of that tom-foolery there before it even started. (The post might still be here until Mr. Palmer deletes or edits it)
Well, Mr. Palmer's "openness" didn't last long. He quickly reverted to the the cultic mentality of not allowing any challenge to the premise of Hyperpreterism. So much for "focus on doctrinal contention" and for allowing all except the Deity of Christ to be challenged. Mr. Palmer started threatening to edit my posts and even ban me unless I stopped saying that Hyperpreterism is something OTHER-THAN-CHRISTIAN -- that is a FACT. Honest hyperpreterists like a guy who goes by the name of "Rivers-of-Eden" admits that FACT.
This was too much for Mr. Palmer and many of his fellows to handle. They didn't want to discuss WHY historic Christianity sees hyperpreterism as something other than Christian -- instead they simply wanted me to shut up. Mind you, this entire time I am NOT personally insulting any of the members or Mr. Palmer. However, Mr. Palmer AND several of the members DID personally insult me; calling me:
- egotistical
- defamatory
- slanderous
- a liar
- deeply bitter
- not mature
- not level-headed
- bad mannered
Preterism, Heresy and the Church
Huh? so Mr. Palmer can take my exact arguments...arguments for which he banned me, reformulate them and somehow that is okay? Ahhhhh...
Now the issue changed. I didn't want to go further until the issue of how the PUBLISHED rules of the site are not the same as the arbitrary and unpublished rules. Granted, a site admin can run their site however they want, but if a site admin is hypocritical, then people should beware. Of course I was told by Mr. Palmer and some of the other hyperpreterists to "just let it go" and "move on". This is the method of hyperpreterism in general; it wants to just "move on" without resolving important key issues -- such as why supposedly 2000 years of Christianity has not embraced the hyperpreterist view. But the more I pushed for resolution to this issue of contradictory policy, I was threatened with banning. Quoting Mr. Palmer:
"This is not a democracy. However, if it was, the majority would give you the boot. I have rules. You didn't follow them. I don't care what you think, or whether you think you followed them or not. I own the site. I told you that you were out of line. Three times. You were suspended. That's it. If you don't like how I run the show, then go away. Capice? Now, will you please either leave it alone, and debate the topics of interest, or go away." -- source
See, Mr. Palmer I knew you would learn the ways of the very admins that ran off and banned so many of your members. As a matter of FACT another member on Mr. Palmer's site pointed out::
"What’s the point of having open forums if you’re going to delete threads you don't like and throw everyone off who doesn't conform to your own personal opinions and sensitivities, especially if their doing their best to stick to scripture? ‘Comply’ or else!!! All the hallmarks of a cult. Thanks for creating this site and may we all learn much from it." -- source
Whoops, is this fellow talking about Mr. Palmer or about the admins of the other hyperpreterist sites from which he came?? As you can see now, there is little difference. So, if one of Mr. Palmer's "acceptable" members can claim such a behavior has "all the hallmarks of a cult" -- I guess it is okay for me to point out how Mr. Palmer's site is also CULTIC -- well, I could until I got banned. Hahaha
Lastly and to show how hypocritical Mr. Palmer is; the guy commented toward me:
"Roderick, I said, this is not up for debate. I don't care about your history, or anyone else' history. Calling a view wherein people that love Jesus Christ not Christian is very personal, defamatory, malicious and false. This goes for Mormonism or whatever else. Refute the view, without accusatory remarks." -- source
Then in an email to me, Mr. Palmer says:
"Per you[r] history, which didn't affect my decision in asking to join up, speaks volumes in regards to this situation. You have a long history of name calling." - Mr. Palmer's email
So which is it? He does or doesn't care about "my history"??? My real question is, is that CLAIMED history even accurate? What evidence does Mr. Palmer have? What is his definition of "name calling"??? Saying hyperpreterism is something OTHER-THAN-CHRISTIAN is just a matter of FACT. But notice that Mr. Palmer, in his first comment doesn't even want us to say that Mormonism is not Christian. AHHHH, there's the problem -- heresies CAN'T call anything else a heresy or else it comes back to bite them. So, what Mr. Palmer wants is to accept everything as possibly being "Christian" so long as it wraps itself in "Christian" speech.
In conclusion, I knew I wouldn't last long on Mr. Palmer's FAKE "openness" site because the only thing "tolerance" can't tolerate is intolerance -- and Christians aren't supposed to tolerate things that claim to be Christian but are teaching ANTI-Christian doctrines (Romans 16:17-18).
However, I returned Mr. Palmer's gracious invitation and invited him to come on the "Antithesis Hour" podcast which begins its first episode March 24th (see here). Somehow I don't think Mr. Palmer will be accepting an invite that will allow him and others to REALLY "focus on doctrinal contention and repoof". :-)
UPDATE: Sure enough, just as I predicted, Ken Palmer deleted all of the evidence of his hypocrisy.
No comments:
Post a Comment