Comments on: Full Preterism: A Building On Fire http://antipreterist.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/full-preterism-under-fire/ Tue, 15 Dec 2009 02:52:26 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Kurt Fiech http://antipreterist.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/full-preterism-under-fire/#comment-912 Kurt Fiech Tue, 19 May 2009 00:52:02 +0000 http://antipreterist.wordpress.com/?p=3122#comment-912 What strikes me is the tenor of the article that implies that because the movement has broken down into "divisions" it is proof positive of error. If that be valid, then Protestantism, itself, is the most grievous of errors as it is the KING of divisions. I think where those like Roderick went awry in their turning against preterism was the focus on personalities rather than Scriptural discrepancies. Once they determined that they didn't like most of the leaders, they moved into supporting their dislike by linking with Preterist haters. Just as bad as the liberal preterists in my book. What strikes me is the tenor of the article that implies that because the movement has broken down into “divisions” it is proof positive of error. If that be valid, then Protestantism, itself, is the most grievous of errors as it is the KING of divisions. I think where those like Roderick went awry in their turning against preterism was the focus on personalities rather than Scriptural discrepancies. Once they determined that they didn’t like most of the leaders, they moved into supporting their dislike by linking with Preterist haters. Just as bad as the liberal preterists in my book.

]]> By: Brian Simmons http://antipreterist.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/full-preterism-under-fire/#comment-872 Brian Simmons Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:39:28 +0000 http://antipreterist.wordpress.com/?p=3122#comment-872 Hi Rod, Thanks for the link. Incidentally, Jeff Vaughn swears up and down that he and Martin are "conservative." As always, a change of definitions is needed in all directions, before one can even take H.P.'s seriously. Brian Hi Rod,

Thanks for the link. Incidentally, Jeff Vaughn swears up and down that he and Martin are “conservative.” As always, a change of definitions is needed in all directions, before one can even take H.P.’s seriously.

Brian

]]> By: Brian Simmons http://antipreterist.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/full-preterism-under-fire/#comment-871 Brian Simmons Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:28:38 +0000 http://antipreterist.wordpress.com/?p=3122#comment-871 Hi Dorothy, Yes, it seems divisions ARE becoming more frequent among H.P.'s. I think that it's extremely difficult to systematize Hyper-Preterist theology. Because it relies almost exclusively on "a priori" logic, conclusions will differ radically among its adherents. Apart from their belief that all predictive prophecy was fulfilled in A.D. 70, there is very little agreement amongst them on some major areas of the faith. The "tongues" debate only exemplifies this. Simply put, it is impossible for H.P. to attain to any kind of objectivity. Brian Hi Dorothy,

Yes, it seems divisions ARE becoming more frequent among H.P.’s. I think that it’s extremely difficult to systematize Hyper-Preterist theology. Because it relies almost exclusively on “a priori” logic, conclusions will differ radically among its adherents. Apart from their belief that all predictive prophecy was fulfilled in A.D. 70, there is very little agreement amongst them on some major areas of the faith. The “tongues” debate only exemplifies this. Simply put, it is impossible for H.P. to attain to any kind of objectivity.

Brian

]]>