Category Archives: hyperpreterism

HYPER-PRETERIST CONFUSIONS (3)

hyperpreterism, Interpretation December 21, 2018 Leave a comment

PMW 2018-102 Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is the third and concluding article in a three-part series highlighting a few samples of Hyper-preterist confusion regarding my writings. Their stumblings here illustrate how they can stumble elsewhere. And how they can confuse their followers so easily: they themselves are confused! Their poor followers are making the mistake that Jesus warned about: “If a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit” (Matt. 15:14). You should read the first two articles before reading this one.

Continue reading →

HYPER-PRETERIST CONFUSIONS (2)

hyperpreterism, Interpretation December 18, 2018 Comments: 28

PMW 2018-102 Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is the second in a three-part series highlighting several Hyper-preterist confusions regarding my writings. Hyper-preterists stumble here just as they do in their attempted exegesis of key passages of Scripture. You should read my first article before reading this one.

In the previous article I pointed out that my arguments for a transition in Matthew 24 between AD 70 and the Final Judgment are not my (distinctive, self-created) arguments. I picked them up from others. In this article I will point out the arguments from those other writers, my predecessors.

For instance, the following commentators see Matt. 24:36 (or its parallel Mark 13:32) as shifting the focus of the Discourse from the near-term (“this generation”) AD 70 destruction of the temple to the distant (while “delaying,” Matt. 25:5) Second Advent and Final Judgment at the end of history. This, of course, does not prove that the shift is true, but it will prove that the argument for a shift at v. 36 was not created by me. I will list a few of these scholars: Continue reading →

HYPER-PRETERIST CONFUSIONS (1)

hyperpreterism, Interpretation December 14, 2018 Comments: 4

PMW 2018-100 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Hyper-preterism is an heretical view of eschatology that denies the historic, corporate, public, universal, systematic Christian faith. (Don’t mention this to them, though, for they want by themselves to determine what the church of our Lord Jesus Christ should believe.)

Specifically, the four leading (but not only!) Hyper-preterist errors involve their denying important biblical doctrines:

1. They deny a future, physical resurrection of all men. Some even deny the continuance of Christ’s physical resurrection after he left the earth!

2. They deny a future, visible, glorious, physical return of Christ.

3. They deny a future, universal, final great judgment of all men.

4. They deny a future end to temporal history and the beginning of the final, physical, consummate, reconstructed new creation order (which is anticipated in the spiritual new creation existing now in the gospel, 2 Cor. 5:17). In their view, history continues forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever. Thus, God must forever endure a sinful universe without any final judgment and removal of sin. God’s created order will continue in a sinful estate. Continue reading →

JESUS’ BODY IN HYPER-PRETERISM (2)

Christ, hyperpreterism, Resurrection December 4, 2018 Comments: 17

PMW 2018-097 by Samuel M. Frost, Th. M. (Vigilate et Orate)

Gentry note: This series’ original title was “The Body of the Son of Man.” It was written by former Hyper-preterist, Sam Frost. Sam’s observations in this series show the heretical mutations occurring in the Hyper-preterist movement. This is the second in the two-part series. As Sam’s website urges: “Vigilate et Orate” (“Watch and Pray”). I recommend his site for helpful articles exposing Hyper-preterism.

Since writing the first part of this series, considerable conversations happened on Facebook. The agreements are overwhelming, but the small band of Full Preterists demonstrated an almost total lack of understanding of even the basics of what Christianity discusses under the subject of Christology – the careful study of just who this Jesus fellow is. Continue reading →

JESUS’ BODY IN HYPER-PRETERISM (1)

Christ, hyperpreterism, Resurrection November 30, 2018 Leave a comment

PMW 2018-096 by Samuel M. Frost, Th. M. (Vigilate et Orate)

Gentry note: This series’ original title was “The Body of the Son of Man.” It was written by former Hyper-preterist, Sam Frost. Sam’s observations in this series show the heretical mutations occurring in the Hyper-preterist movement. As Sam’s website urges: “Vigilate et Orate” (“Watch and Pray”). I recommend his site for helpful articles exposing Hyper-preterism.

According to the Gospel of John, Jesus, the man, was raised and glorified the morning of his resurrection. John has no ascension scene at the end of his Gospel. I believe this simple proposition can be more than adequately deduced from his Gospel. Continue reading →

DEBATING HYPERPRETERISTS

AD 70, Creeds, hyperpreterism, Preterism August 5, 2016 Comments: 2

Brick wallEvery few years I will get a request such as this. I thought it might be helpful to answer it publicly so that in the next few years when I get another one, I can simply point to this article.

Dr. Gentry:

I have a friend who has pointed out problems he has with some of your response to HyperPreterism. He asked me these questions about you: Why do you not publicly debate HyperPreterists? And: In your chapter in Mathison’s book against HyperPreterism, you focus solely on the creedal argument. Does creedalism preclude exegesis?
LFR (North Carolina)

Continue reading →

IS PRETERISM SPIRITUALLY DEPRESSING? (4)

AD 70, hyperpreterism, Interpretation, Revelation April 17, 2015 Comments: 4

Future lookPMT 2015-047 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

As I continue considering the question whether preterism is depressing, I come to my fourth article in answering a reader’s concern. It is at this point that we actually get to the reason that Rick sees preterism as potentially depressing. I have summarized this portion of his concern as follows:

Does preterism discount our eternal hope in a glorified estate? If the new Jerusalem and the new heavens and new earth have already begun, what comfort is that since so much in the world is in such bad shape? Such thinking has almost ruined the writer’s faith. Continue reading →