If Hymenaeus is teaching a spiritual resurrection is a past event, and Don Preston is teaching a spiritual resurrection is a past event, then how in the world is Preston different than Hymenaeus, both are being condemned by Paul which is a very serious charge. If the resurrection is indeed spiritual then how can it be a past event?
Don Preston Article Covenant Eschatology and the Hymanaean Heresy
"If the resurrection is a time ending, earth burning, history ending event, when the material body of every person who has ever lived is instantaneously reconstructed and raised out of the ground, not to mention the sea, just how in the name of reason could anyone convince anyone that this had already occurred? Paul dealt with the same issue in Thessalonica (2 Thessalonians 2:1-2)."
"If Hymenaeus was teaching the wrong concept of the resurrection, Paul could have easily negated him by showing that he was teaching the wrong kind of resurrection. Paul could have said, "Brethren, the resurrection is a physically observable event! Hymenaeus is teaching that it is a spiritual event."
(And HOW is this different than Preston?)
"Jesus was approached by the Pharisees, who believed in a physical resurrection, and asked, "when the kingdom of God would come" (Luke 17:20). Jesus' response is critical, "The kingdom of God does not come with observation." If the kingdom and the resurrection are inseparably linked, and the kingdom is not with observation, why is the resurrection a visible event?"
"Hymenaeus simply had his timing off, and believed that Old Covenant things belonged to Christ's New Order."
(NOW WATCH THIS!!!!. Preston says the resurrection is not a visible observable event. But he continues to maintain this was simply a timing issue, rather than a error of teaching spiritual things were really temporal in nature. So by Preston's own comments, if something is in fact invisible, and not observable, how can he prove the resurrection occurred in 70ad. If he can prove it, when exactly did it occur and how does he know it occurred? If is is not a visible event, observable event, then how can it be observed by Preston in 70ad? How can he maintain it is a past event?)
eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=224&Itemid=61
In David Green's own words "IF futurism is true and the Resurrection has not yet happened since the time that Paul wrote II Tim. 2:17,18, then preterism is indeed -- in the words of II Tim. 2:17,18 -- "ungodliness," "gangrene," a deviation from the Truth, and a Faith-overthrowing doctrine. If the Resurrection of II Tim. 2:17,18 has still not yet happened, then preterists are certainly heretics." preteristcosmos.com/if-futurism-is-true.html
Please see other comments under "Hymenaeus / Philetus" for how Preterist misinterpret and try to justify the issue of the resurrection being a past event.
