NavigationSimilar entriesUser login
Loading...
Archive by terms |
Do Gary DeMar's Books Lead to Full/Hyper-Preterism?Many of a full/hyperpreterist has launched into that "movement" first via the "partial-preterism" of men like Gary DeMar and even Kenneth Gentry; often citing their books. The difference between Gentry and DeMar is that Gentry has made it clear in print and audio that he believes full/hyper-preterism not to merely be a "dangerous error", but to be heresy on par with heresies like Arianismi or cults like Mormonism. DeMar, on the other hand has not only not called full/hyper-preterism a heresy, DeMar has actually spoken at full/hyper-preterist conferences without making any distinction. DeMar has joined numerous full/hyper-preterist message boards in support of it. DeMar allows his materials to be promoted and published on full/hyper-preterist websites. DeMar was once asked outright by now ex-full/hyper-preterist Sam Frost if DeMar thought it was heresy. DeMar answers that he doesn't think full preterismi is heretical (ref#1-mp3, ref#2, ref#3).
Mike Loomis, operator of the full/hyper-preterist podcast network, once said about DeMar:
If this is true, does DeMar have a responsibility and obligation to clarify that he doesn't approve of people using him and his materials to conclude a full/hyper-preterist position? Imagine if people kept crediting a "Christian" minister as leading them to Mormonism. Would that Christian minister have a responsibility and obligation to make a statement and clarify the things that people claim are leading them to Mormonism. DeMar has made no such distinction or clarification. As a matter of FACT, if you read DeMar's statements, he often says things that sound almost exactly like a full/hyper-preterist argument.
Why can't a person then take this reasoning and claim ALL WAS FULFILLED in the first century? But DeMar's support of the full/hyper-preterist premise doesn't stop there. On a Facebook comment, DeMar once made this statement:
This is the EXACT same "logic" that undergirds the very foundation of full/hyper-preterism. Full/hyper-preterism MUST see historic Christianity as a "garbled mess"; unable to figure out eschatology and so needing a Max King to come along like a modern eschatological Martin Luther. Again, DeMar is reluctant to call full/hyper-preterists heretics. This feeds their entire premise that they are like a new Reformation that is putting the eschatological pieces together where supposedly 2000 years of UNITED Christian interpretation on the basics of eschatology was according to DeMar; "a garbled mess".
To conclude, I would NEVER recommend Gary DeMar to someone studying eschatology, or for that matter ANY theology since DeMar is irresponsible in potentially or maybe even outright promoting full/hyper-preterism. For years and years people have been concluding full/hyper-preterism based on DeMar's "partial-preterism". DeMar, even according to full/hyper-preterists themselves has "made more full preterists" than all the full preterist advocates combined -- that includes men like Don Preston.
Lastly, what is most frustrating is that DeMar's peers won't hold him accountable for any of this. DeMar is NOT credited with causing more people to leave Dispensationalism than anyone else -- DeMar's supposed ministry focus, but rather DeMar is making minions of new full/hyper-preterists every day. It would be honorable to see DeMar spend at least a few YEARS UNDOING the damage he has done to folks. Even Sam Frost credits DeMar with being influential in making Frost the 20 year long full/hyper-preterist "teacher" he was:
DeMar needs to clean up the "garbled mess" he has made of the lives of people like Sam Frost and so many others.
|
Cumulus Tag CloudDon't Worry, Be HappySearchTKC Optimal Search Poll |