Partial Preterists Sell The Farm

Whenever you see a Partial-Preterist, such as Gary DeMar arguing with a Dispensationalist over eschatology; you will notice that the Partial-Preterist uses almost the exact (if not the exact) same proof-texts that a Full Preterist uses to "prove" hyperpreterism.  The Partial-Preterist will point out to the Dispensationalist that "near" means "near" and "soon" means "soon".  They will point out that the first-century Christians expected "the end" to come within their life times.

But when a Partial-Preterist dusts up with a Full Preterist, suddenly they say that the Full Preterist goes too far.  Who gets to decide how far is too far?

Assessing the Jason and Sam Show

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:



Download right click link and SAVEAS

Is Partial-Preterism A Problem?

I know that what I'm about to say here may be difficult to take, but please bear with me. I AM a former 15-year long hyperpreterist, out of that movement now for 3 years. All glory to God!

I also know it has become vogue for some people, even prominent teachers such as Ken Gentry, Gary DeMar, and Hank Hanegraaff to call themselves "preterists", or "partial-preterists" as it relates to their eschatological views.

My question is, does partial-preterism cause a problem? After all, is it something new? Is it a new view on eschatology? Does it lead people to the heretical form of preterism called hyperpreterism?