There has been no doubt that over the last few years this site has focused on the "Talbotites" -- Kenneth Talbot followers. Some of these are high profile ex-Full Preterists like Sam Frost and Jason Bradfield. And over these years, the Talbotites have been vicious haters of me; Bradfield went so far as to call my house and try to talk to my wife about me and even creepishly stalked out my place of work and called my boss to try to get me fired. All of this and yet the Talbotites continue to have people think they are honorable people.
Well, I want to revisit history; especially in light of Bradfield's latest article. Oddly enough, even with all his hatred, I have respect for Bradfield; always have. Of the pair, Frost and Bradfield, I certainly give creds to Bradfield having a more honest heart. Anyhow. During the years when I left the Full Preterist movement and tried to explain HOW people got into it; and specifically mentioning how Bradfield got into it, Bradfield's hatred simmered. He just couldn't hear what Roderick Edwards was saying -- he hates me that much. His hatred gets in his way.
In Bradfield's latest article, called The Subtlety of Heresy he further explains how he fell into "hyperpreterism". He says:
As readers may know and I am careful to constantly preface such articles, I have documented where the so-called "Anti-Preterists", lead by Kenneth Talbot of Whitefield Theological Seminary are actually engaged not in fighting "hyperpreterism" but instead in redefining the playing field and replacing Full Preterism with their own version. That is, their own form of Full Preterism without calling it that.
Talbot has been documented as saying as much when he said his personalized form he calls "Realized Preterism" is "akin" to what Full Preterist David Chilton was teaching (5 second audio: http://thekingdomcome.com/sites/default/files/realizedpreterism_is_hyperpreterism.mp3). Further, Talbot's star pupil, Sam Frost who pretends he left the Full Preterist movement in 2010 has sent emails to Full Preterists telling them he hasn't left everything, yet he is vague about what he retains. And to add to that, Frost recently told a group of Full Preterists on the CARM message board that he PERSONALLY is "working on" a more consistent form of preterism. So, in short; these so-called "anti-prets" aren't actually trying to fight "hyperpreterism"; they are trying to usurp it with their own brand and in so doing labeling anyone that does not follow along as the real "hyperpreterists".
That being said, Joel McDurmon; another pupil of Talbot's who gave a dismal performance at debating Full Preterist Don Preston in the summer of 2012; McDurmon even admitting he did virtually no preparation for the debate, McDurmon is now badgering Criswell College for not allowing the "Talbotites" to define preterism.
McDurmon relates in an article that he contacted Criswell College to express his concern that they invited Full Preterist Don Preston to a conference on eschatology and for Preston to represent the preterist view.
The first thing the reader should notice is that I plan to stop calling people "hyperpreterists", but will begin to refer to this group as "Consistent Preterists". Why? Well, the so-called "Partial-Preterists" or "historical Preterists" have made such a shamble of eschatology that I no longer think it fair that Consistent Preterists should be considered as being "beyond" or "hyper" preterism. After all, popular partial-preterist author and speaker, Gary DeMar has said of Christian eschatology:
"... I'm willing to listen to what others say on an issue, especially on eschatology since it's been a garbled mess for centuries. It's conceivable that so-called eschatological heretics are seeing something I'm not seeing. They're willing to take the risk. Many are not." -- source
I just wanted to let everyone know that if something happens to me or my family, they should first suspect Jason L. Bradfield, the P.R. manager for Sam Frost of RCM (Reign of Christ website). Bradfield has truly been stalking me, even coming onto the Christian Forum, CARM where he was promptly banned by the moderators after he not only blatantly broke multiple rules, but even said he "wished they'd ban him".
Shortly after this, Bradfield started emailing me, even from a fake account called roderickthecoward@yahoo.com with my name as the sender, as if he is Roderick Edwards. Bradfield obviously has a history of unethical behavior, whether it is blatantly breaking/disrespecting the rules of a community or making it look like someone said something they clearly didn't or using other people's names as a sender in an email.
In these hostile and hate filled emails Bradfield sent, he called me a "little bitch" several times among other names. He then called my home, while I was at work. Fortunately I have him recorded and will record him if he ever calls again. My wife listened to the message and was frightened and called me at work. This is not the first time Bradfield's group has called my house frightening my family. Indeed, another hyperpreterist had at one time threatened to harm my family if I didn't shut up. I reported that individual to the FBI.
Now, Bradfield is threatening me. I don't know what his threat entails but he said: "You ain't getting away that easy. It has just begun. Now keeping talking you little bitch." He said this after I asked him to:
stop emailing me
stop sending me Google+ invites
stop coming onto forums where I am
stop threatening me
stop calling my house
stop assuming you know what goes on at my house
Bradfield is upset partly because he says, unpreterist.blogspot.com is "dedicated to talking about him" and his cronies. Actually, NO it is dedicated to UNDOING over 15 years of promotion of hyperpreterism. The FACT is that people like Sam Frost, Gary DeMar, Kenneth Talbot, Dee Dee Warren and yes even Bradfield have been heavily involved in purposely or unwittingly promoting various forms of hyperpreterism.
It is no secret that there is much content on this site about Sam Frost. It is not because I have some "obsession" with Sam Frost but because like it or not, Frost has presented himself first as the voice of hyperpreterism and now as the voice of so-called "anti-hyperpreterism". Of course there will be a focus on a person like that. You know, I wish I could write articles detailing how Frost realized his hyperpreterism was a grave error and that he is going to spend many years in humility trying to undo some of the damage he has done. Instead, Frost pretends to combat hyperpreterism while actually proffering another form of it. He has even said he has "not left" elements of hyperpreterism, and Frost's mentor; Kenneth Talbot says his eschatology is "akin to David Chilton's" (an avowed hyperpreterist).
Frost also has a documented knack for narrative making; that is he creates story lines and then tries to get people to believe them. The last narrative by Frost is that the only reason he is being greatly opposed by hyperpreterist Dave Green and company, and the only reason Green and company oppose Frost's mentor Talbot is that I put them up to it. Frost says to Talbot follower, Dee Dee Warren (not her real name):
Dr. Kenneth Talbot, president of Whitefield Theological Seminary has a history of compromising with the heresy of Hyper-Preterism. This history started when he utilized hyperpreterist leader, Sam Frost to help develop student materials for the seminary. Next, Talbot has been documented as calling hyperpreterists; "brothers". But perhaps the worse affront to the Christian Faith is when Talbot knowingly enrolled hyperpreterist leader; Larry Siegle into Whitefield's "minister's" program. To whom does Talbot intend the hyperpreterist to minister with his Whitefield validated degree?
Maybe all of this wouldn't matter if Talbot presented himself as a liberal, "ecumenicist" -- we would expect such a "pastor" to be a compromiser but not only does Talbot present himself as Reformed but also as extremely orthodox. This behavior from Talbot is disillusioning to Christians and makes it worse that Talbot's followers; in a sense of loyalty to him, help to cover up for him or even help to attack those who would dare point out what Talbot is doing.
What makes Talbot an even bigger hypocrite and one that even the hyperpreterists should point out; Talbot's self-made denomination, RCPGA released a statement in 2010 condemning hyperpreterism:
"Whereas, these views represent an attack upon and undermining of the holy catholic faith once delivered unto the saints,
Therefore, in the certain Hope of the Resurrection, at the Second Coming of Christ, and the Final Judgment at the end of history, the Reformed Presbyterian Church General Assembly does hereby find that Full Preterism, Hyper-preterism or any other Eschatological System promoting any one or all of these errors is errant, heretical, and apostate, being therefore contrary to evangelical orthodoxy." -- http://www.rpcga.us/SiteContent/65/documents/Against%20Unorthodox%20Eschatology%20(RPCGA%20Approved).pdf
Why does Talbot on one hand coddle Frost for 10 years, use him to help develop student materials for his supposed "Christian" seminary, enroll a hyperpreterist into a "minister's" program with intent to bestow a degree on him, call hyperpreterists "brothers", and even say his own eschatology is "akin" to David Chilton's (Chilton who was a documented hyperpreterist -- ref), and lastly we have this picture of Talbot and his wife eating dinner with Siegle, Frost and their wives.
Talbot is the man on the far front right, Siegle is behind Talbot and Frost is at the back left. In light of 1 Cor 5:11 which says:
"But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person."
Dee Dee Warren, owner of the blog PreteristBlog who has promoted hyperpreterist compromiser Kenneth Talbot is now attacking James White. White has been consistent in opposing hyperpreterism, unlike Talbot who actually was using a hyperpret to help develop student materials for his supposed "Christian" seminary. Further, Talbot has knowingly enrolled hyperpret leader Larry Siegle into a "minister" program in Whitefiled Theological Seminary (Talbot's seminary). To whom will Siegle minister once he obtains his Talbot validated degree???
On the issue of Talbot knowingly enrolling a hyperpret into his seminary Warren said:
"I don’t believe orthodox institutions should knowingly allow those who deny an essential of the faith into their midst...Dr. Talbot knows I do not agree at all with orthodox schools allowing blatantly heretical students, but that is not the area of responsibility that God has given me. I am just noting my total disagreement for the public record, and will speak with Dr. Talbot in more detail if he wants to know more." -- source
Why does Warren want to critique Dr. James White but will not publicly address her mentor on such an important issue? Why does she claim "that is not the area of responsibility that God has given" her but thinks it is perfectly fine for her to poke her hypocritical nose into White's business? Who does this woman think she is?
Kenneth Talbot, president and founder of Whitefield Theological Seminary, and his star pupil Samuel Frost, unwittingly tell us why a person should NOT take courses from WTS. In a podcast Talbot did on October 9th 2011 with Frost the two men discuss how Frost was able to become a hyperpreterist, even though for many years Frost was under the direct tutelage of Talbot (source).
After the listener gets through Frost and Talbot talking over each other, they will hear the blatant and hypocritical contradictions of these men as they try to dance around the FACT that Frost was a major leader in the heresy of hyperpreterism while not only attending WTS but while he was actually helping develop student materials for the supposed "Christian" seminary. All this with the full knowledge and support of Talbot.
During the course of the discussion Frost tells us he was "fresh out of college" when he was exposed to hyperpreterism, which echoes ANOTHER hyperpreterist leader, Don Preston (see here).
Fresh out of college/seminary
Further, Frost AND Talbot both admit that the hyperpreterist movement sprang from the "churches of Christ" and Frost admits that "he didn't know what he was getting involved with". While Talbot says hyperpreterism is "centered" in the "churches of Christ" doctrine.
Frost admits to being a novice
Talbot on hyperpreterism being a coc movement
Yet, Frost admits his main influences while he was a hyperpreterist, were from "church of Christ" hyperpreterists, such as Don Preston, Jack Scott, William Bell and Larry Siegle. Of important note, Siegle is currently attending WTS and earning a "ministers" degree. Whom will this WTS trained heretic "minister" to? (source)
Frost in thick with hyperpreterists
Ironically, Talbot brings out the fact that Frost is one of the only "seminary trained" hyperpreterist leaders. Trained at WTS nonetheless, just like Siegle whom Talbot is training to be a "minister" though Siegle has not recanted his heresy. A lot of good being trained at WTS did Frost, since he continued to grow in the hyperpreterist movement while under the eye of Talbot. In fact, Frost would often brag that he was a hyperpreterist BECAUSE OF his training at WTS.
WTS trains heretics
Now, here comes the contradiction and hypocrisy if it hasn't been displayed yet. Frost tells the listeners that there really isn't anything "new" in theology and that the SAME ANSWERS that historic Christianity gave throughout the ages applies also today. -- AMEN! but..... keep reading/listening... Frost is a master of contradiction.
Christianity gives good and same answers
But close to the end of the podcast, both Frost and Talbot tell us the reason people fall into the heresy of hyperpreterism among other heresies is because the Church wasn't giving "good answers". Christianity does NOT give good answers?
Whose job was it to help Frost? Here he is admittly, "fresh out of college", being exposed to a group he says "he didn't know what he was getting involved with" and yet while under the guidance of Talbot and WTS, Frost isn't being given "good answers" that would help him avoid heresy. Frost says there wasn't an "adequet defense" against what the hyperpreterists were saying. Where was Talbot and WTS in all this???
Well, perhaps the most revealing and shocking comment in the entire podcast was made by Talbot when he admits his self-made, "Realized Preterism" is in essence the same as David Chilton's hyperpreterism.
Talbot is a "modified" hyperpreterist?
First, Talbot falsely or deceptively tries to portray Chilton as a "modified preterist" rather than what Chilton himself admitted was full preterism. Talbot then tells us his own form of preterism that he calls "realized preterism" is "akin to" what Chilton was advocating. Chilton became a documented full or hyperpreterist. (source). It is no wonder then that Talbot and WTS couldn't help Frost avoid the heresy of hyperpreterism if it appears WTS' president is telling us in essence that he is embracing hyperpreterism via Chilton.
So, Frost having been under the tutelage of Talbot and WTS, who we now see apparently admit his eschatological views are akin to documented hyperpreterist Chilton, Frost says he understands why people become full preterists; because the Church isn't doing its job to properly instruct people -- WHO WAS INSTRUCTING SAM FROST WHEN HE WAS DEEP INTO HYPERPRETERISM???
So, why should anyone want to go to WTS when the president and its star student tell us that WTS as an agent of the Church has "FAILED" to "properly teach systematic theology"??? Isn't this the role of a seminary like WTS, to properly teach systematic theology? That is certainly what Talbot tells us in his promo at the end of the podcast.
WTS promotion misleading?
Why would someone want to let WTS provide their seminary and theological education needs if they have a podcast admitting they fail to "properly teach systematic theology"? When you think it can't get any worse, Talbot advocates the same premise that has generated hyperpreterism and the many other heresies throughout time. Every cult or heresy, including the "churches of Christ" with its "restorationist" the-true-church-and-true-gospel-failed and thus had to be restored mentality has started with the idea that the Church is failing. Talbot joins in with this false premise.
Talbot says Church is failing
Lastly, it comes full circle. Frost told us ealier on that the answers that the Church gives, have been the same and need not be changed because all heresies are merely old heresies wrapped in new packaging yet before the end of the podcast we have:
Frost telling us he was a novice when he fell into hyperpreterism
He didn't know what he was getting involved with
That the Church fails to properly teach people
Talbot telling us his views are "akin" to Chilton hyperpreterism
Talbot telling us the Church is failing
Frost questioning why the Church (ie WTS) didn't fulfill its role
WTS' role in heresy
When in October of 2008 I sent an email to Talbot and WTS to inquire about their position on hyperpreterism and why they were allowing Frost, as a known hyperpreterist leader to develop student materials for the seminary, Talbot didn't immediately write back but instead released my email to Frost whom I never mention in the email.(source) And then after a brief attempt to smooth things over with me, even by offering me free tuition at his seminary, which I ultimately declined, Talbot and his followers have done everything to destroy me. Why??? As you can see in THEIR OWN WORDS, in context (listen to the entire windbag, elitist podcast if you have the time), you see why. Frost and Talbot are building a "modified" version of full preterism called "Realized Preterism". To this day, you can only get Talbot's notes and lectures on his "Realized Preterism" if you are part of his select group. Why not place it in the public forum? Why all of this secrecy and attempt to make Chilton look like he was not a full preterist?
Before anyone claims it, what I have presented here is NOT "slander" or "libel" or "defamation" or "ad hom attack". These are Frost and Talbot's OWN WORDS. Not spun but honestly, openly, analyzed and presented. TKC welcomes comments even from non-registered readers unlike many of the places where Frost and Talbot administer which not only require registration to comment but sometimes to even read.
In their OWN WORDS why would anyone go to WTS if this is the kind of education they will receive? Frost's "hope" and educational needs were "misplaced".
Hyperpreterist Larry Siegle has been accepted to the M.Div program of Whitefield Theological Seminary (WTS). WTS (through Kenneth Talbot) now has a history of validating hyperpreterism; first when Talbot was utilizing then known hyperpret leader Sam Frost to develop the schools Hebrew program and now as WTS accepts a known heretic to a program that WTS says is:
"designed specifically to train men for the office of minister."
"designed specifically to train men for Counseling in the ministry"
Larry recently responded to my criticism of WTS and Talbot's decision. What follows is Larry's entire quoted comments along with my reply to Larry.
In October 2008 I wrote to Whitefield Theological Seminary (WTS) and to its president and founder, Kenneth Talbot concerning its relationship with then hyperpreterist leader Samuel M. Frost. Frost had long boasted that he in part arrived at his heretical position via the tools provided him by WTS and Frost had made a point of claiming he was accepted by Talbot as a Christian brother. This is confirmed by Talbot constantly calling Frost and other hyperpreterists, "brother" and validated by the FACT that Talbot was purportedly utilizing Frost to help develop the student Hebrew program for WTS. All of this while Frost was still hot and heavy into the heresy.
My inquiry to WTS and Talbot's surprisingly rather unChristian response (see full details), caused me to distance myself from the so-called "anti-hyperpreterist" community (and the feeling was mutual, as the anti-hyperprets saw in Talbot, a new champion despite his validation of heresy).
My contention then and now is unwavering; that a Christian or a Christian institution should NEVER appear to be validating known heresy. It doesn't matter if the institution is not the Church proper, it still wears the label of "Christian" and when a known heretic can use that institution's credibility to proffer him or herself as accepted within Christianity -- perhaps even as Christian -- then that Christian institution has done a great disservice to the Faith.
For the longest time, it was just a few of us fighting against hyperpreterism from the INSIDE. Sure, Dee Dee Warren of PreteristBlog.com had been fighting the heresy and she should be commended for the great work she has done, but she wasn't ever really within the movement. But what is strange is a new crop opposing hyperpreterism has come to the fore. Lots of ex-hyerpreterists such as Jason Bradfield (who left before his mentor Sam Frost by the way), Sam Frost and some others. This new crop, perhaps at the instance of PaulT (PreteristBlog's new mouthpiece) is called the "new guard". PaulT likes to call me the "old guard". That's okay I guess since the Bible says "Stand in the ways and see, And ask for the old paths, where the good way is, And walk in it; Then you will find rest for your souls." - Jer 6:16a.
Besides the "new guards" AREN'T saying anything different than the "old guards" have been saying all along. For example, I said:
Hyperpreterist compromiser, Phil Naessens has for a long time allowed himself to be depicted as a "brother in Christ" with Hyperpreterists. Most recently, in promotion of a co-hosted podcast Naessens allows hyperpreterist Mike Loomis to say about Loomis and Naessens:
"The purpose of this program is to demonstrate how two brothers in Christ can disagree agreeably." -- source
Further, Dr. Kenneth Talbot has long called hyperpreterists "brother".
But on April 12, 2011 one of Naessens and Talbot's buddies, PaulT Gates unwittingly admonished Naessens and Talbot (about time).
"Loomis is suggesting hyperpreterism’s future lies in something similar to the Liberalism of the 19th century hyperpreterism is clearly a different religion than Christianity. Thus the only claim a hyperpreterist has to being a brother with a Christian is that they are a brother in Adam, not in Christ." -- source
Of course PaulT will probably claim that Naessens and Talbot are either exempt from this correction or try to spin it so that Naessens and Talbot haven't really compromised in depicting themselves as "brothers" in Christ with Hyperpreterists.
Sam Frost, a supposed ex-hyperpret who has yet to actually put into action his comment that "Full preterism is incompatible with Christianity", since he continues to act like hyperpreterists are his "brothers in Christ"; recently said:
"This is why Roderick’s argument would never work. To deal with any error, you have to deal with exegesis. You have to first expose the presuppositions as false." -- source
Huh??? Sam "Roderick's argument" all along has been that we have to first expose the presuppositions as false.
This was the big debate between me and your mentor, Dr. Kenneth Talbot. If you knew what you're talking about, you'd know this.
Here's the evidence. In an interaction with Talbot, now deleted by Talbot's supporters from its original source, not surprisingly so, I SPECIFICALLY point out that FACT that we have to first expose the presuppositions as false.
"Thank you Dr. Talbot for asking the questions. Yes, you are correct -- ALL STATEMENTS ARE PROPOSITIONAL -- that is exactly the point and why I like to deal first and foremost with the proposition of an argument BEFORE I get into the so-called "evidence/exegesis". The overarching proposition of historic Christianity is that God is sovereign, in complete control. God has planned and decreed things, not just let them haphazardly unfold for anyone to take up." - source
The sad but humorous part is that then Talbot after attempting to berate me, restates MY ARGUMENT as if it was his (much like Sam is doing now).
"Roderick, when the hyperpreterists state that they "start with the Bible" as Dr. Clark use to say, "that is commendable." However, that means nothing! They come with presuppositional dogma that forces them to skew exegetical studies, twist the Scriptures with "bad" hermeneutics, and then with a boldness that boast on the side of arrogance, they assert that they alone have the "key" to the "truth which unlocks the knowledge of God about the whole Bible which has been misinterpreted and everything needs to be tweaked to get it right."
Um....? Yeah, exactly my point. Hyperpreterism is about their presuppositional dogma which drives EVERYTHING else they believe. We must therefore deal with that presuppositional situation.
I just get so sick of all the falsehoods spewed not only by the hyperprets but by the Talbotites....and then they are too cowardly to interact directly and be challenged BY SOURCE LINKED FACTS. Instead they ban and bluff and bloat about.
I started this blog in December 2007 to UNDO what I had done by teaching and advocating the heresy of Hyper/Full Preterism. At the time, I was ridiculed by the hyperpreterists but now we see more and more high-profile people leaving the hyperpreterist movement. One such person is Jason Bradfield, whom anyone can tell you doesn't count me as a friend...even now. However I am constantly amazed how the Lord Jesus Christ works. Listen to this podcast Jason did and you will see he too sees the need to UNDO what he has done. There is no sweeping his past under the rug, or modifying his "preterism" into a "Chilton kind" or any such nonsense. Further, Jason understands and doesn't back down from the FACT that people who advocate hyperpreterism actually are deluded and need to repent of advocating it. Jason has stuck to his guns on this even after the perennial mushy-gushy hyperpreterist, Larry Siegle tried to lay on Jason with Larry's typical syncreticism.
Another thing that is important to note is that my ferocious opposition to men like Dr. Kenneth Talbot and Phil Naessens was in-line with what Jason is NOW saying -- I mean, if hyperpreterism is as distorted as Jason (and his mentor Sam Frost) are NOW saying; then men like Talbot and Naessens should have NEVER given it even a whiff of validation (by calling hyperpreterists "brothers" and such). So, whether Jason and Sam and some of these others are ever friendly towards me, perhaps they can NOW understand why hyperpreterism SHOULD be so ferociously opposed -- especially by men of the stature of Talbot. It continually broke my heart to see Talbot give ANY validation toward this heresy and thereby perhaps causing men like Jason to remain in it longer than he did.
Anyhow, take a few moments to listen to what Jason says NOW. It is a blessing.
After YEARS of hyperpreterists AND defenders of hyperpreterists (like Phil Naessens and Kenneth Talbot) criticizing me for CONSTANTLY pointing out that we should be battling hyperpreterism based on its presupposition rather than its proof-texts, former hyperpreterist Sam Frost AGREES with my approach. In a podcast aired March 30, 2011 Frost said:
"You can proof-text all day long. Anybody can proof-text Scripture and support their view. It's the PRESUPPOSITIONS, that's what you've got to attack. That's what you have to go over." -- Sam Frost (31 sec audio)
So what is the presupposition of Hyperpreterism?????? That God has been unable or unwilling to sustain truth and the basic understanding of truth for 2000 years. Folks THAT is the presupposition of the Full/Hyperpreterist position, no matter how they try to spin it. They MUST believe God failed. They can't say, "No, no men failed in not comprehending or in distorting God's basic eschatological plan." Ultimately God is the sustainer of truth and by the hyperpreterist presupposition, God has failed.
Now, will Sam Frost, Kenneth Talbot, Jason Bradfield, Phil Naessens and all of these people take back claiming I am a "slanderer"? No, because that would take some real humility and I just don't think they have it in them. It's good and well that Frost can say things like the quote above but never would they acknowledge THAT is what I've been saying ALL ALONG.
As readers may be aware, there has been a long time contention that Dr. Kenneth Talbot of Whitefield Theological Seminary has been attempting to insert his own "Reformed" brand of "Preterism" into the movement. With a movement that already has so many labels for different kinds of "preterism" -- "Partial-Preterism, Orthodox Preterism, Full Preterism, Hyper-Preterism" -- Talbot's new brand seemed likely to be a welcomed addition to the smorgasbord. Talbot called his brand, "Realized Preterism". Although, official and public details about what his brand of preterism entailed has yet to be released, some Full/Hyper-Preterists received it as merely a stepping stone to eventual Full/Hyper-Preterism.
Mike Bennet, a Hyper-Preterist social-site admin and friend of Sam Frost once said about Realized Preterism:
"Here is what I see happening as a general path to FULL PRETERISM.
Arminian => Dispy => Reformed => Ammilenial => Partial Preterist => Preterist Idealist => Realized Preterist (soon to complete the path) => Full Preterist" -- source
First, when people hear the word "heretic" or "heresy" they often feel some pity or sympathy for the person being called a heretic. Perhaps it is human nature to feel sorry for and root for the underdog. But is there EVER a right time to describe something as a heresy and the person advocating it a heretic?
To start, we must define what we mean by heresy. In the Christian sense, heresy is NOT simply something that goes against the teaching of those in control. Again, people often visualize the "big bad institutional church"forcing people to believe what the institution is teaching or else be labelled a heretic. However, to correctly define heresy we must decouple ourselves from the idea that the "church" is corrupt and trying to impose beliefs on the poor "followers". This wrong idea, may be a misunderstanding of Protestantism, where a person envisions themselves as a "little Martin Luther" taking on the Roman Catholic Church.
DEFINITION OF HERESY
The text in the Bible that perhaps most succinctly defines heresy is Romans 16:17-18.
Jason Bradfield and Sam Frost, long time hyperpreterists have claimed to recanted the heresy but many doubt that at least Frost has really left the movement. What follows is the first podcast done by Jason and Sam AFTER they supposedly gave up "full preterism". I assess what they ACTUALLY say on the podcast and have ACTUALLY said in the past. Listen to this 40 minute podcast here:
If you are new to this discussion, you will no doubt have seen all the aggressive words and tension going on. First, as Christians we should not immediately run from this or judge it as "unchristian". After all, there IS a time to oppose wrong doctrine -- and forcibly so. (examples from Scripture: Deut 13, Rom 16:17-18, Eph 5:11, Jude 1:3).
Hyperpreterism is unlike ANY KIND of expression of Christianity that has EVER existed. Hyperpreterism is something OTHER-THAN-CHRISTIAN. On this point, all Christians are AGREED!
Whenever someone leaves the hyperpreterist movement, one of the first things that happens is hyperpreterists come out of the woodwork DEMANDING that the former-hyperpreterist give their "new view" on eschatology. First of all, the whole thought process exposes what is wrong with hyperpreterism in the first place; it is a radical individualistic interpretation of the Bible. Hyperpreterism, much like liberal politics thinks that the things they do, others do or should do also. In this case, since hyperpreterists are prone to putting forth "their view", their personal view on eschatology they also want to hear "your view".
See, it becomes a matter of chest-thumping one-upmanship with hyperpreterists. They claim they are more "consistent" or more "logical", or more "exegetical" -- no matter what "view" anyone puts forth. We have seen this with hyperpreterists like Mike Sullivan. It is pointless to engage them since they promise to ignore what you are saying before you even start.
It is not about presenting a personal "view" -- rather let us be about determining the Christian view on any topic instead of being so eager to put forth our own personal "view". After all, we DO believe there is a UNITED Christian view on any given topic don't we??? Or are we going to give the hyperpreterists their way in the doors of our hearts and minds by wrongly agreeing with them that Christianity has been in doctrinal chaos for the last 2000 years???
This brings us to the title of this article. In a discussion with hyperpreterist leader Sam Frost, excoriating Frost for trying to re-image if not leave the hyperpreterist movement altogether; Frost's fellow hyperpreterist Jordan Grant had this to say:
"It's so crushing to see the Rod Edwards argumentation being used. I mean, I saw it with Sharon...and Vince...now Jason, and I sure hope Sam doesn't follow suit." -- source
