Todd Dennis
Without any regard for the argument that Paul was merely stating that he was a little ahead of his time (the resurrection coming within 10 years), this is not germane to the point in question. Whether stating that the resurrection was in AD60 (Hymenaeus), 70 (Full Preterism), or 2006, if one is teaching that the resurrection of all the dead is past already, then they are placing themselves underneath the consideration of this statement by Paul. And lest one think that the common teaching is that the resurrection started in AD70 yet continues to this day, it is taught that because Hades was cast into the lake of fire in AD70, there is no place for believers to be resurrected from ; instead, believers go straight from "life to life."
There are also other aspects of Paul's problem with the teaching of Hymenaeus besides simply his timing of the resurrection. By seeking to "overthrow the faith" of sincere people, the heretic was treating the body of Christ destructively and with disrespect -- placing his love for his beliefs above his love for his brother. This same 'scalping' tendency can be seen among many full pret "true believers," who openly relish overthrowing the faith of Futurists in order to establish their own.
The claim from a former full preterist that the hymenaean charge rings true (in both the error and the overthrow of faith) would hopefully raise serious flags of warning. And yet, those who are "true believers" in the view reflexively dismiss the hymenaean charge with a wave of the hand, and will say something like "this charge is nothing new, and has been dealt with before." Regarding this infamous "oh-so-certain" self-assurance of certain Christians, ignorance is bliss.
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterist/Idealism/dennis-todd_06-03.html
