Occam’s Razor: The Fool-Proof Test Of True Christianity

    Readers of this blog will probably already know that I pay little or no attention to speculative theology.  The issues that seem so important to philosophical punditry are reckoned by myself as mere “impedimenta” which prevent Christians from attaining dogmatic positivism in matters of religion.  Since I have learned in my studies that the pathway to truth is usually the easiest and most well-traversed road, I naturally wax suspicious of any person who seeks to make Christian doctrine uncessarily complex or tortuous.  In many sectors of the professing church, speculative theorizing has become so ingrained that self-styled “gatekeepers” (the scribes and Pharisees of today) deem discipleship incomplete until one has taken a course in philosophy.  For they well know that philosophy is necessary in order to explain away the plain meaning of God’s word.  But we prefer to heed Paul’s warnings to beware of such spoilation (Colossians 2: 8).  And we are not alone in our concern.  Real Christians (and there are lots of them) generally resent any tampering with the meaning of Scripture; insomuch that they’ll clap their ears to anyone who systematically denies what Christ and His inspired apostles set down as an authoritative and uncompromising rule of faith.  Call it bull-headed bigotry if you will.  I thank God for it every day I live..

Mike Bull’s Hapless Hermeneutic

  In this article, I’m wrapping up my expose of Mike Bull’s resurrection theory, in which he claims that the resurrection of believers already happened in A.D. 70, and that therefore the bride/body of Christ has already been glorified, changing the status of present-day believers from bride/body of Christ to “children” of Christ and His bride.  It will already have been inferred by those reading my last two posts, that Bull’s theory contains grave flaws, both exegetical and historical.  These flaws have been brought out in my last two posts.  But before launching into this third paper, let me say again that I am not attacking Mike.  If I am attacking anything, it is his Preterism.  And yet Mike is no average Preterist.  I actually agree with him on certain key issues which ultimately determine (depending on one’s interpretation) whether the resurrection mentioned by the apostles is past or future..  

When Logic Slams The Door

    Last week, I wrote a brief article detailing Bryan Lewis’s journey into liberal agnosticism.  It now appears that his blog has sparked quite a bit of controversy within the Hyper-Preterist community.  But while remarks have been bandied about by those wishing to know more about his current views, and perhaps convince him that he is headed in the wrong direction, what no one seems to have observed, is that Lewis’s downfall was not sudden, but gradual and insidious.  Just last year (February 2009) he affirmed that Christendom was now ripe ‘n’ ready to learn about the truths of covenant eschatology (source).  To this end, Lewis launched a church called “Fulfilled Life Bible Fellowship,” which met on April 4th, at the Ramada Inn Conference Center in Lebanon, TN.  Despite its lofty pretensions, though, the project never amounted to anything, but fizzled out, nothing more being heard from Bryan, until around September he announced on a now-defunct Ning site, that there will never be any compatability between Hyper-Preterism and orthodoxy, since the two are like oil and water, which never do mix..

Hyper-Preterism: The Bible Is Contradictory!

Stephen,

Look at the synoptic gospels and the gospel of John, especially Mattew and John. They are very difficul (if not impossible) to reconcile in my opinion.

MrFullPreterist

Response:

“The underlying assumption that the accounts had to “reconcile” may be the problem here. Perhaps the ancient Hebrews didn’t really care if all the facts were consistent.

Afterall, they transmitted the OT canon with contradictory elements for many generations without anybody complaining or debating it.  Maybe their assumptions about “truth” and “accuracy” did not validate those contradictions (as our modern perspective does).”

http://planetpreterist.com/modules.php?name=XForum&file=viewthread&tid=1027