Is Sam Frost the New "Roderick"?

Recently, hyperpreterist upstart Ken Palmer, said to former hyperpreterist big-shot, Sam Frost that he planned to be a "more vicious critic" of Sam Frost than I had been.  The problem is, Sam in essence is the "new Roderick" himself; after all Sam and his new suddenly orthodox tag-a-longs are using almost ALL of the arguments I've been using for years against hyperpreterism.

THE BIG DIFFERENCE

But the big difference between me and Sam/Talbotites is that I have been a just as "vicious critic" against the HYPOCRITES within the so-called "anti-hyperpreterist" camp.  I don't like dishonesty under any umbrella and will not long support someone who is dishonest no matter how much they try to play the "we're all in this together" card.  After all, I called out a seminary president for his blatant compromise.  What is Sam doing?  Toying around with some no-name hyperpreterist.  Sam has said that hyperpreterism/full preterism isn't Christian -- then let's see him put "feet to his faith" (as Sam's hyperpret buddy Mike Loomis wants to do with hyperpreterist universities, hospitals and such).  Let's see Sam tell Mike live on air that Mike is NOT his Christian brother.  Let's see Sam tell us that Don Preston is teaching an unChristian doctrine and like all known heretics that lead people astray needs to be sharply rebuked, not coddled and called "brother".

I think it is another reason even the hyperpreterists can't respect Sam and his mentor, Kenneth Talbot -- Sam and Talbot say out of one side of their mouths that hyperpreterism/full preterism is not Christian, yet out of the other side of their mouths Sam and Talbot embrace some of the smooth-talking hyperpreterists like Larry Siegle as "brothers".  Talbot is even going to train Siegle to be a "minister" -- before any repentance of the heresy of hyperpreterism.

No, Sam isn't my replacement.  Jason Bradfield isn't my replacement. Kenneth Talbot isn't my replacement.  PaulT Gates certainly isn't my replacement.  -- These men are all compromisers with the very error they claim to oppose.  And we know, C.H. Spurgeon once said:

Complicity with error will take from the best of men the power to enter any successful protest against it. --C.H. Spurgeon

 This is what has happened to the "anti-hyperpreterists".  They are utter failures.  Those who leave hyperpreterism and flock to the side of the anti-hyperpreterists like Frost or Talbot will ultimately have to stop all direct interaction with hyperpreterists and only lob potshots from afar.  A direct interaction will only reveal how many of these ex-hyperpreterists have never given up the REAL problem they have -- EGO! ARROGANCE.

I don't need a replacement.  I never wanted to be the posterboy for refuting hyperpreterism, but when men like Gary DeMar and Talbot fail to stand up, who else is there but simple laymen.