Calling Someone a Hyperpreterist is…

apparently namecalling, or flaming. I recently got the following message from one of the moderaters of Gary DeMar’s forum, concerning the following post:

You said that it “follows” the Nicene Creed, but it does *not* come directly after it. It does come after the recitation of the creed, but halfway into the next section, and thus, is not in the same context. It is in the context of the rememberance of the Lord’s supper. That is why I didn’t pay any attention to it. You made it sound as if they were in the same context, and they are not. And, as I said, there were many church fathers that believed in a “coming” of Christ in the first century, <i><b>but still looked forward to his coming back for the resurrection, and the consumation</i></b>. Your interpretation makes the text absolutely self-contradictory, as they say that they believe in a future coming of Christ, and they say that they don’t.

Shouldn’t that tell you something about the way you are reading the early church? The fact of the matter is that there is no church historian alive who would be willing to support you on this. Everyone says the same thing. Hyperpreterism is a twentieth century invention, and, while the early church did believe that the A.D. 70 “coming” was significant, they all affirmed a future coming of Christ, and a future bodily resurrection, things you, as a hyperpreterist, deny. Hence, your task is, not only to prove that they believed in a past “coming” of Christ, but also to prove that they did not believe in a consummation coming and future resurrection.

For that post, I got the following warning:

User warned in violation of Rule 1-2 — Flaming/Name Calling. Be respectful to other users. Vaughn has showed disapproval of being called a hyper-preterist several times and you have been persistant in your usage of the term despite his request.

It is difficult to know how calling someone what they are is “namecalling,” “flaming,” or “disrespectful.” Notice how, in other words, if JLVaughn, a hyperpreterist, does not like being called a hyperpreterist, it is namecalling and disrespectful to call him a hyperpreterist. I might disapprove of someone saying that I am wrong, that does not mean that it is disrespectful for someone to say that I am wrong. I might disapprove of someone calling me a heretic, does that mean that it is necessarily disrespectful for someone to call me a heretic? Absolutely not. Of course, you can do anything in a disrespectful manner. As anyone can see from my post, I never intended anything to be disrespectful.

Hence, I don’t really know why in the world anyone would think such a post is disrespectful. However, I know one thing. I can play the system here. I have expressed disapproval for JLVaughn saying that I am “wrong.” If I work the system, I could always be right!

Actually, what I am going to do is try to see if there is any way to reasonably talk to the moderators and get them to see where this logic leads. I should have every right to call false teaching exactly what it is, whether the false teachers approve of it or not.

Addendum: Well, this might explain some of it. Apparently, the moderator who gave me the warning [a guy with the screenname of “matthollycart,”] was also arguing against the idea of eternal punishment, and even used an argument by Max King! A user named “Moses” caught him on it. At very least, this guy has hyperpreterist sympathies, if he is not a full blown hyperpreterist himself. Not only that, he has sympathies for a very extreme [although, more consistent] form of hyperpreterism, the universalistic kind. This definitely explains a lot.


2 Responses to “Calling Someone a Hyperpreterist is…”

  1. rodericke Says:

    As all the hyperpreterists will be glad to point out, I was promptly banned from AV forums shortly after I joined — not because I was rude or disrespectful, but because I wanted to publicly discuss how & why Gary DeMar thinks hyperpreterism is NOT a heresy.

    The main moderator of the AV forum is James DeMar, Gary’s son. James was up until recently a member of a hyperpreterist web community — he suddenly deleted that profile after it was being publicized that he was a member.

    As for the word “hyper” being offensive or name calling, the dictionary definition says: hyper = a prefix appearing in loanwords from Greek, where it meant “over,” usually implying excess or exaggeration (source)

    This is not a derogatory term but rather an etymological accurate word describing ANYTHING that goes over, above, beyond the original scope. Calling the view HYPER-preterism is accurate because it goes over/above/beyond the original form of Preterism.

    Besides, would AV forum ban you if you called a homosexual a sodomist?? Even though it may be offensive to a homosexual because it gets to the gist of what a homosexual is, it is an etymological & BIBLICAL descriptive.

    Yes, I think you are right. AV forum is being moderated by either hyperpreterists themselves or those friendly to hyperpreterism — they are just following Gary DeMar’s example.

  2. Jason Stumpner Says:

    I think though that one should try to not use epithets that are considered to be derogatory, and or offensive. It would be like if someone were to refer to Adam, the owner of this blog, as being a “roundhead”, after Oliver Cromwell’s Puritan forces. Would it be accurate? Yes. Would it be respectful? I don’t know. I do know though, that if Adam were to respond that he does not appreciate being refered to in such a manner, I would refrain from using the monniker. Instead, I would use some other synonym. I do think though that it is petty, and silly, to be offended by the term hyperpeterist.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: