tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3172789211880677949.post1186333608731205192..comments2023-09-27T00:34:32.253-04:00Comments on The UnPreterist: Hyper-Preterism: The Root of DeathUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3172789211880677949.post-85831876733109262712019-07-19T11:16:27.089-04:002019-07-19T11:16:27.089-04:00I'm a bit disappointed by this blog. You used ...I'm a bit disappointed by this blog. You used big words, like 'lethal' and 'death' and even claim preterism affects a person morally - and given your position I presume you don't mean a change for the better! But unfortunately, those are nothing but claims and you don't present anything to back it up.<br />At this moment, in the Netherlands a whole debate has started on preterism, because of a recently published preterist book. My take is that the whole subject of eschatology is highly overrated and people take too absolute positions. I don't buy hyper-preterism as I never bought the extremes of other positions. The bible is simply not that detailed on eschatology. Maybe the whole issue is just a matter of Christians wanting to know more than God revealed. If someone writes a 500 page book about the Millennium or the Great Tribulation or the Antichrist, there's something wrong anyway as the bible only has a few verses mentioning those notions. I think theologians should be more modest about eschatology anyway. It's not the heart of the gospel.Peter Lamannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3172789211880677949.post-68259863981865547082008-01-03T07:25:00.000-05:002008-01-03T07:25:00.000-05:00Hi Roderick,Quote: Before a complete refutation f...Hi Roderick,<BR/><BR/>Quote: Before a complete refutation first must come the realization that something is wrong.<BR/><BR/>(me) <BR/>So what plumbline are you using to identify something is wrong? Scripture OR experience. If experience - then you are on a emotional tare. If scripture - show it to me. I can assure you, and you know me, I'm not going to stop asking for it. <BR/><BR/>IF you can't refute preterism scripturally, then all this blog becomes is a postmodernist version of a conversation. All talk, no substance. <BR/><BR/>You know me, I'm going to ask for scripture again and again and again. I do hope the others here will join me in that effort. <BR/><BR/>A postion must be built on the truth of scipture or it has no foundation. I know of no Christian who will not support that statement. <BR/><BR/>DorothyDorothyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15675216979103732352noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3172789211880677949.post-6744415023791952152008-01-01T23:51:00.000-05:002008-01-01T23:51:00.000-05:00Before a complete refutation first must come the r...Before a complete refutation first must come the realization that something is wrong. Again, I know enough at this point that the root of full preterism is causing bad fruit -- AND it is NOT just a "few" people or a "splinter-group" among Full Preterists that behaves like this -- it is the majority, so those people comparing the general corruption in the early Church & during the Reformation are making poor comparisons. Corruptions in the early church & in the Reformation were minorities AND were dealt with, not allowed to fester.<BR/><BR/>Dorothy, you & the few others I know who do not have corrupt characters NOR wink at those who have corrupt (& corrupting) characters are such a minority. you know that.<BR/><BR/>Does this alone make Full Preterism wrong? No, I even said so on the <A HREF="http://odeo.com/show/17566763/4/download/InterviewWithAFormerFull-Preterist.mp3" REL="nofollow">audio with Gene Cook</A>. But this is a starting point.<BR/><BR/>Some exegetical specifics I'll get into soon & again mentioned on the audio is how most Full Preterists advocate that the <I>"Law has been destroyed"</I>. The next will probably be how Full Preterism is anti-creedal & anti-confessional -- YET proposes to introduce its own new "creed" & "confession" & obviously anyone that disagrees with their creed/confession will endure the wrath of the most arrogant among them.<BR/><BR/>Give me time Dorothy -- I'll get to the source of what causes the bad fruit...I'm simply following the stench backwards at the moment & it is leading me down these paths.<BR/><BR/>Lastly, for some people to keep stating I should shutdown this & other websites until I specifically settle what I believe about eschatology is just more evidence that these people are consumed by their eschatology...which is a very dangerous position for them to be in. One-trick pony's tend to only run in circles.<BR/><BR/>There are more "ologies" than just eschatology & I am fairly settled on many other "ologies". I see no reason to shutdown anything while I go through this process.Roderick_Ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02169535715630771551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3172789211880677949.post-45624773458067831972008-01-01T11:30:00.000-05:002008-01-01T11:30:00.000-05:00Hi Roderick,On Dec 26th, at your site Kingdom Come...Hi Roderick,<BR/><BR/>On Dec 26th, at your site Kingdom Come, you state you are not returning to futurism. <BR/><BR/>(Quote) Some people have been asking me if I am saying that I am returning to "Futurism" (belief that Jesus is coming in the future & most prophecies are still unfulfilled) -- No I am not, it is not possible for me to honestly return to futurism. Some people have asked me if I am turning to "Partial-Preterism" (belief that AD70 did mark "a coming" of Jesus in judgment but that there will still be a future coming of Christ) -- No, I don't see that as viable either, especially how partial-preterist often handle the Olivet Discourse, specifically how they tend to split up Mt 24 at verse 36 as being some past & some future. What then? Shall I turn to "Preterist Idealism"? (a new invention by Todd Dennis, of preteristachive.com which seems little more than over-application, hyper-individualism with a huge dose of personal/private interpretative hermeneutics, having Christ constantly returning to each individual) -- No, I have no intention leaving one man's bandwagon for another man's bandwagon. Besides, I have not seen much better character from the founder of PretIdealism as I have seen from the main proponents & would-be trademark holders of "Full Preterism" -- that is a red-flag right there.<BR/><BR/>(me)<BR/>So what position are you refuting? It sure doesn't sound like you are refuting full preterism here. If, as you say, you can't return to futurism, then how are you un-preterizing yourself? Please explain. <BR/><BR/>DorothyDorothyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15675216979103732352noreply@blogger.com