http://unpreterist.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-man-full-preterists-hate-most.html
While in June of 2010, then full preterist circuit speaker, Sam Frost said that I am "one of the most abhorred persons in the history of full preterism, it is now 2013-2014 and that honorable title has been passed to a new recipient. There is a fellow who has been a full preterist since the early years of the movement...that's the 1970 for you newbies. Because of the nature of his federal work, he chooses to use an alias. He currently uses the name "Rivers Of Eden" He consistently posts under this name so there is no attempt to hide his identity otherwise. Hey, it's not like he was a seminary president who went on a full preterist site using the name "superpreterist" and told his friends not to tell anyone it was him...oh yeah, that was Kenneth Talbot, the fraud of frauds (that's for you Jason Bradfield, you need a post to steal and repost on your cowardly site). Anyhow, back to the point.
WHY?
Why do full preterists hate this guy so much? Well, first off, let me demonstrate the kind of hate they show him. Full Pret, Dave Green often calls Rivers' "Rivers of Evil". (ref) Although I'm not certain who first coined this name for Rivers, Green's buddy and fellow full pret, Michael Sullivan claimed it was "seasoned" full preterist, Larry Siegle. (ref)
Another fellow on Facebook, presumably a full pret named Joe Simpson even took to the Vaduva-Bradfieldesque approach of trying to elicit violence against Rivers by posting over and over, in what state Rivers supposedly lives. How is this relevant? It is just bully tactics to try to get someone to shut up. I've had bullies like Phil Nassens do this to me before, even posting the city where I live and where my daughter went to school. Why?
But as for the reason these folks hate Rivers so much; it is because he is demonstrating what full preterism is if applied consistently. And if applied consistently, full preterism destroys a person's faith...or at least their ability to claim they are Christian in any historical sense.
CONSISTENT FULL PRETERISM
To understand what is meant by consistently applied full preterism we must understand full preterism premises
It's all about audience relevancy
All is fulfilled
These two points sum up, beyond just "Jesus already came back" what it means to not only be a full preterist but how to think like a person who can become or is a full preterist.
What I mean by this is that even people like Gary DeMar is a "preterist" who thinks and speaks like this -- that it's all about audience relevancy (who is the Bible speaking to - especially the "endtimes" texts) and that all is or has been fulfilled. DeMar and his fellow "partial preterists" are INCONSISTENT preterists because they do not fully apply these premises. However, so-called Full Preterists are ALSO, inconsistent preterists because now that a man like Rivers is trying to apply the premises consistently, full prets are up in arms.
What gets full prets in a tizzie is that Rivers tells people that the audience was only the first century Christians -- who according to Rivers were only converted Abrahamic peoples (ie Jews). Rivers claims that the use of term "Gentiles", at least in the N.T. is referring to wayward sons of Abraham who may have been away from the Holy Land. Verses like John 4:22, where it is said that "salvation is of the Jews" may appear to support Rivers' claim.
But this alone isn't enough to make full pret stars like Don Preston call Rivers a "racist and an atheist" as Preston has called Rivers in attempt to dismiss Rivers' debate challenges to Preston.
Rivers also takes the "all is fulfilled" to a very consistent level. Like his fellow full preterists, Rivers says all was fulfilled by the year AD70. In this way, Rivers agrees with ALL full prets. But when Rivers says this, he really means it. If all was fulfilled by AD70, then there is a different situation going on, a situation that negatively affects not only Christianity's role in the world, but even full preterisms' Here are some examples if all is fulfilled.
No more pastors (Eph 4:11-16, 1 Pet 5:1-4)
No need for anyone to teach anyone else about Jesus (Heb 8:10-13)
What do these notions do to the concept of "authority"? Who would go to a Church let alone sit under a full preterist "pastor"? Who will buy John Noe's latest self-promotion book?
It's no wonder that full preterists -- especially those in "authority" like Preston and Green (with his minor following) and Michael Miano with his pastorate, MUST oppose someone like Rivers. He is a danger to their gigs.
PILE ON
You know Rivers must be doing something when the full prets start to pile on. Preston has even been on Miano's radio show trying to tamp down anyone looking into what Rivers is saying. Granted, Miano has had Rivers on his show too, however I'm having a problem finding a link to that show. I hope it hasn't been deleted as has been done to Rivers when he did podcasts with full pret Michael Loomis. It got so bad at one point that Loomis received threats of withdraw from supporters for having Rivers on his podcasts.
Oddly enough, Preston got on Miano's podcast disparaging people like Kenneth Gentry for only acceding to a type of fulfillment instead of a "real end". Well, Rivers IS advocating a "real fulfillment/end" but his fellow full prets hate him for it.
For more examples of the piling on hatred of Rivers, take a look at this Facebook thread (before it is deleted).
DEBUNKING
Lastly I wanted to debunk some LIES going around about Rivers:
His real name is Chris Camillo -- per Rivers, that is another alias he used early on.
He teaches Christian Identity doctrine -- yet Rivers never quotes their material, only Bible verses.
He is a racist -- this comes from the falsehood of saying he teaches Christian Identity.
He is an atheist -- this comes from the falsehood of thinking that if all is fulfilled, then there is no faith.
He is lying -- yet people who say this about him, never tell us what he is supposedly lying about.
He is not a full preterist -- yet he meets all the beliefs FPs share. He's just more consistent.
He is a hyperpreterist -- this comes from FPs who claim they are not hyperprets.
He is a showboat egotist -- yet he doesn't even have his own website and doesn't sell books.
So, even though I no more agree with Rivers than I do with any other Full Preterist, it is worth your time if you are a Full Preterist or studying Full Preterism to contact Rivers (I call him the Martin Luther of Full Preterism). See what he has to say. Listen to why Full Preterists hate him so much they want to silence him at all costs.
Rivers on Facebook
Rivers-email
SIDE NOTE:
As soon as Michael Miano gives me the links, I'll post the links to podcasts he did with Rivers and with Preston where Preston talks about Rivers.
No comments:
Post a Comment