BEFORE she sold out to the compromiser; Kenneth Talbot, Dee Dee Warren maintained the stalwart site against hyperpreterism. People may have thought of her as "rude" or "mean" or even..."crass" in her approach, but her integrity was never in question at that time. But ever since she sold out to the CULT LEADER Talbot, she has lost her integrity.
Here is an example. Dee Dee recently said:
"[Roderick] also claims that his issues with me and this site started because he kept asking Dr. Talbot certain questions. That is false. That is a cover story he created after the fact, and anyone can go back through the posts here and see that." -- http://www.preteristblog.com/?p=5691#comment-17316
Okay, let's actually look at the posts from those days. First article comment by Dee Dee about the issue BEFORE she sold out to Talbot for a free tuition:
"Hey Roderick, You Who Shall Not Be Named, I think you are once again being gossiped about back at Sammy’s kennel of trained hound-dogs. He is whining about some letter to Whitefield Theological Seminary. His readers are left guessing as to who wrote it, and since it is only you and I are who are not allowed to be named, yet still seem to be two of the primary subject matters over there, and I didn’t write it, I guess you did. Good for you. I sure hope you plan on dismantling it. If not, I will. I may write to Whitefield myself." -- Oct 16, 2008 -- http://www.preteristblog.com/?p=887
Hmmm, at that time Dee Dee thought it was "good" that I wrote to Talbot's self-made seminary and she considered writing to WTS herself. Further, in my comments on the thread, upon Talbot releasing my email to Sam Frost I said:
Sam Frost finally admits his eschatology is STILL being affected by his hyperpreterism AND that there are "some good insights" within hyperpreterism that he has "not left". And consider that Frost mentor, Ken Talbot has said his eschatology is "akin to Chilton's eschatology". Chilton who was an open "full preterist".
In an email to his former friend, Mike Bennett Frost said:
> Sam Frost to me in email 4/11/12:
> "My eschatology has been modified by my study in FP, to be sure. There are some good insights here and there that I have not left (like my millennial position)"
Unfortunately, Frost's little supporters will do nothing but ignore or cover up this statement by Frost.
Jason "book-burner" Bradfield is getting "way cool" high-fives from Frostian sycophants for burning several FPists books (see video: http://youtu.be/vQRswlaAFuI ). Jason uses Acts 19:19-20 to justify the burning. The verses read:
"Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together and burned them before all men and they counted the price of them and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed." Acts 19:19-20
Now, if FPism books are to be compared to "magic arts" then can we compare the people who teach/taught FPism to sorcerers? Especially those who claimed to be FPist "pastors"? Here comes the hypocrisy -- Sam Frost, STILL claims the title of "pastor" even though the only type of "pastor" he was, was over a FPist congregation. Why doesn't Frost disavow his time as a "sorcerer"??? Because he is a flat out hypocrite and while he bad-mouths FPists, he still wants to beef up his profile -- so he LIES to the unsuspecting Christian who may think Sam was a REAL pastor. He never was. Frost's own mentor/daddy said:
The main premise of Preterism, not just Full or Hyper-preterism but all types of preterism is that something went terribly wrong; somehow God's eschatological plan was either grossly misunderstood or covered up until almost 2000 years later when the Preterists came to fore. They explain that what mostly likely happened, since the bulk of historical Christianity has not believed the Preterist interpretation is that fallible men messed up. And what Christian wouldn't agree that men fallible and prone to fail to understand? Thus opens the door for the Preterist to walk in and relabel historical Christianity as merely "Futurism". Thus begins the dichotomy of the supposed "Bible-alone" Preterists against the supposed "Bible and Creeds" Futurists. And oddly, many Christians will lay down and accept being labeled as "Futurist" and will call themselves by this term.
While I clearly understand the need for more detailed descriptors, false or inaccurate descriptors should be rejected. For example, it would be wrong to call one person a Pro-Choice advocate and the other an Anti-Choice advocate. In the same way, Hyper-preterists are fond of claiming they are "Full Preterists" while others are "Partial-Preterists". This is a false descriptor since it implies that one person takes things fully while the other only partially. Of course, no one committed to something wants to be considered to be "partially" committed to it, thus already prejudicing judgment against the so-called "Partial-Preterist" position.
Okay enough is enough Sam Frost. I CHALLENGE you to do a podcast with me where we can discuss all these points directly. Just you and I; no little snickering Jason in the background. None of your little sycophant cheerleaders. No elitist Mullah with his own denomination hypocritically making 9 part-series on the 9th commandment as he breaks it with wontoness. No mouthy pseudo-named pill-popping woman. No "pay-per-view". No book deals or disk sales. Just you and me man to man. I will document all of the lies and contradictions and falsehoods and I want EVERYONE to hear how Sam Frost responds. Will it be cool and calm or the frantic. manic Sam I am accustomed to speaking with whenever I have spoken with you on the phone.
You can't do it. This is the reason you run back to your own website and spout off junk where your P.R. man Jason can protect you. I will and do post on any forum that is open to me. I'm not a lying coward like you Sam. Let's go!
Well, if you can stomach the stuck-up windbag tone and the blatant hypocrisy of Talbot; he has done 3 podcasts on of all things; the 9th Commandment. This is like calling Sam Frost an "expert" on eschatology as Talbot has done. Anyhow, on the 3rd podcast Talbot in a round about way calls out hyperpreterist Dave Green. As you know, Dave claims that Talbot writes or edits material for his groupies -- which has been true in the past -- since he first-handed asked to edit some of my own material and has indeed written at least one anonymous article for Pretblog that I directly know of. Yes, that corruption was going on as I was departing from that site. Further, Talbot used an anonymous name ("Superpreterist") when Sharon Nichols used to run her hyperpret site. Anyhow; in the podcast Talbot says:
President Kenneth Talbot of Whitefield Theological Seminary (WTS) has recently been calling Sam Frost an "expert" when it comes to eschatology. Remember, Frost is barely a year over his 10-15 years of being an "expert" in hyperpreterism. So, what kind of "expert" is Talbot promoting? Does Talbot want his WTS students to consider Frost to be an eschatological "expert"? Anyhow, after giving some background of the relationship between Talbot and Frost, I wanted to post something Frost sent to a message board on Feb 22, 2012:
As the Kenneth Talbot-led ex-"Full Preterists" start to wake up to the things some of us longer term "formers" have been saying; it becomes amusing or perhaps vindicating to read what they eventually write. For example,
when Sam Frost first left the movement he said:
"I won't belittle you as "hyper-preterists" or "heretics" or any of those things. I know that doesn't work. It just inflames passions. Pointless, actually. You are made in God's image, and on that basis alone, worthy of respect. I will try my hardest. " -- source Jan 12, 2011
But a little over a year later, on Jan 25, 2012 Frost said this to a group of hyper-preterists:
"...the term, historically, "hyper-preterist" was not invented by FP. It came from a July, 1997 Chalcedon Report article (Kenneth Gentry). It applied to us regular FP. Later, FP picked it up and applied it to folks like Chris Camillo, "Taffy" and the like in order to distance themselves from the term. I don't like revisionism." -- source Jan 25, 2012
This is significant because it shows that Frost may finally be getting it. The prefix HYPER is not meant as a pejorative but as a grammatically accurate qualifier. Saying a person is a Full-Preterist is as senseless as saying a person is a "Full-Calvinist" if and when they go beyond (hyper) historic Calvinism.
But the hyper-preterists where Frost posted this are threatening him with banishment if he continues. Hyper-preterist Tami Jelinek had this to say about the issue:
"We are not "hyper-preterists" (the moderators of this site, nor anyone I know of who posts here regularly). Personally, I *do* consider hyper-preterism heretical. In fact I do not consider hyper-preterists believers, or Christians. To anyone posting here who is referring to any of us as "hyper-preterists": this language needs to stop immediately or you will not continue to post here." -- source
Comparing Frost's comments to Jelinek's, it is apparent that she is doing exactly as Frost said; engaging in "revisionism". That is, it is like a liberal Democrat trying to deny his views are ideologically socialistic. Just who are these "hyper-preterists" Jelinek wouldn't consider believers or Christians and why does she think Christians should consider her a believer or a Christian? Jelinek calling others heretical is like a Mormon calling a Jehovah's Witness a cultist.
Lastly, on a little side note, Frost's sidekick, Jason Bradfield recently admitted this:
" Error begets error. I don’t think it is insignificant that hyperpreterism flourished in Church of Christ circles. That doesn’t account for all of it, but it certainly explains a great deal." -- source Jan 19, 2012
This is important because I early on pointed out that the Church of Christ denomination's "Restorationism" was a big factor in why so many of the first and still most predominant leaders within the Hyper-preterist movement come from the denomination. (see here, here, here)
So, while Frost and the other Talbot-led formers are too full of themselves to set aside their hatred for me, they are just now beginning to use the arguments many of us independent formers used almost a decade ago; and for which they lambasted us. Maybe they can have a little humility and admit they were wrong and wrong to attack us for as long as they have.
While Sam Frost was still within the FP movement, he often complained how it was not systematic enough. It seemed he wanted to dictate how it would be presented. Well, it appears he is still at it. Commenting on an article where the author was detailing how "partial-preterism", if consistent should/would lead to FPism, Sam said:
"And, I don't get FP's using this argument (I used to use it when David Engelsma was saying it). Do you want to drive people AWAY from your view? Scare them off?...[Instead] Here's what you should post: "this is what X said, and I quote X" Then, deal with X's actual words and show where they contradict Y in Scripture or in his own argument. Or, "if P, then Y" of necessary inference - but anything else, like this fellow writes, is speculation and useless "leads to" fearmongering......It's like bringing up Hitler in an argument....." -- link: http://deathisdefeated.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2362512
Long time egotist, Sam Frost likes to feign being an "expert" and if you've ever had the misfortune of engaging the man in a verbal discussion; you will have been talked-over and interrupted incessantly. However, the lingering issue with Sam Frost; who in 2010-2011 recanted his 15+ years of teaching hyperpreterism is that Frost claims to have been a self-ordained "pastor" while he was a hyperpreterist. It continues to be an issue because he continues to claim this credential as if it was ever legitimate. Think about it. Suppose a Mormon who had been an Elder in Mormonism at some point recants Mormonism. Can he rightly claim he was EVER a leader within the Christian Church? This is what Frost is trying to do.
But during a January 2012 podcast, Frost's mentor, Kenneth Talbot -- president of a seminary -- said this:
"You cannot appoint yourself a minister. It must be recognized and the gifts must be understood, examined and then he is to have hands laid on him by the presbytery. Self-ordination is rebuffed completely. It is not seen as anything viable. And it is literally an insult to the Church of Jesus Christ. He doesn't let you play fast and loose with His Word. And the Word is very specific about those things."
As I watch PaulT flail about I've been thinking why there is such a disparity between me and the "Clarkian" anti-prets. I mean we have the common goal of opposing hyper or full preterism right? So shouldn't we be getting along swimmingly? I mean look, it was not too long ago that PaulT and Sam Frost were blasting each other as "illogical" and as "liars", but now that Frost suddenly APPEARS to have switched sides, all of the "illogic" and "lying" is swept under the rug in pursuit of the common goal.
WHERE I WENT WRONG...at least by Clarkians point of view
First, in any relationship; be it a business partnership, a sports team, a military alliance or a marriage there has to be MORE THAN a common goal. There has to be common principles driving toward that goal. For example, in WW2 the Allies joined with Russia/U.S.S.R just long enough to accomplish the common goal of defeating the Axis powers. But the USA and Russia didn't share the common principles and spent the next 50+ years at odds in a "Cold War".
Where I went wrong with the Clarkian anti-prets like PaulT, Sam Frost, Dee Dee Warren and their leader, Kenneth Talbot is that I don't share their common principles...or rather, their LACK of principles. For example, when I pointed out the flawed principles of their leader, PaulT actually said: "Roderick, I don't care if everything you say about him is true, we must protect his reputation." THAT is NOT a principle I share. I don't cover up corruption even among the people with whom I share a common goal. If they are corrupt, they are corrupt. This stance has made me a pariah among the Clarkians. The Clarkians have other principles I do not share, such as blatant misquoting people or making up quotes out of nowhere. They also like to call people undefined names like "turd", "bonehead", "jerks". I have no problem describing (naming) people and things but I like to use objective words like "snob", "elitist", "liar" -- those things can be immediately demonstrated as to whether it is true or not. On the other hand, how is a person demonstrated to be a "turd"??? These kind of names are simply immature and senseless.
So, just because people have common goals doesn't mean they can work together. If a sports team who's goal is to win the game has some people who want to play by the rules to win and some people who will make questionable plays to win; then that team will eventually fail to make the goal. I don't want to be on the Clarkian team where its "players" are men and women who often operate in inconsistency, hypocrisy, senseless and immature name calling, and outright flamboyant egotism, not to mention outright lying. If that makes me a lone-ranger outcast, so be it.
Remember Braveheart? William Wallace thought he shared the common goal with the Nobles of routing the English from Scotland, but when the Nobles acted corruptly, even betraying Wallace and principles; Wallace eventually opposed both the English and the Scottish Nobles. Although I'm no blue-faced Braveheart :o I feel much like Wallace.
The anti-pret "Nobles" and their "Robert the Bruce" seminarian are compromisers and corrupt men and women who can't be trusted by either side....or is their leader really Mornay?
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
This is what happens when you go around attacking people and just attacking like....well...jerks. These two fellows expressly came onto a forum where I interact with hyperpreterists and those who are looking into hyperpreterism. They didn't come to discuss any of that. They came specifically to shout me down and shut me up. They don't like it when I point out how Kenneth Talbot has compromised with the hyperpreterists.
Well, the first fellow who arrogantly enough thinks he is a "slamdunker" is really named Phil Naessens. This is the same fellow who has threatened to sue me yet he thinks I should continue to interact with him and answer his questions. I don't communicate with folks that break 1 Cor 6. I don't communicate with folks that have such thin skin that they go to the "Gentiles" for help when they can't handle the FACTS.
The next fellow, "kingneb" is none other than Jason Bradfield; Sam Frost's P.R. man. This isn't the first time Jason was banned from this forum. He ignored the rules of the forum and started attacking the moderators -- whom I do not know from Adam. Jason even smugly accused the moderator of being "my girlfrield". Huh??? First, I've been married for over 21 years and secondly, no one knows the gender of the moderator in question. Simply immature of Jason.
Why do I relate all of this here? What does this have to do with preterism or hyperpreterism?
Some people have had a difficult time following why I am so against Clarkianism; after all its axiom is: "The Bible is the Word of God written" -- why should I oppose that? I don't. Of course the Bible is the Word of God written, but that hasn't been the starting point in historic Christianity.
Cornelius Van Til and others in 1944 lodged a complaint against Gordon Clark's ordination/licensure within Van Til's denomination. Not only did Van Til's group complain that the denomination was waiving the rules that Clark had to have 2 years seminary training; Clark was philosophically trained but not theologically -- but they complained that Clark was compromising major elements of the Faith. Van Til said:
"The Christian doctrine of the knowledge of God is distinguished as well by its affirmation of the incomprehensibility of God as by its assertion of his knowability. The point does not need to be labored that the knowability of God lies at the very foundation of Christianity. That God can be known, and that he has given a knowledge of himself through his works and words, is pervasively taught in the Scriptures. The possibility and actuality of true religion depend upon the light and truth which God communicates to men. Skepticism and agnosticism are thoroughly anti-Christian." -- SOURCE: http://godshammer.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/the-complaint.pdf
Dr. Kenneth Talbot, president of Whitefield Theological Seminary has a history of compromising with the heresy of Hyper-Preterism. This history started when he utilized hyperpreterist leader, Sam Frost to help develop student materials for the seminary. Next, Talbot has been documented as calling hyperpreterists; "brothers". But perhaps the worse affront to the Christian Faith is when Talbot knowingly enrolled hyperpreterist leader; Larry Siegle into Whitefield's "minister's" program. To whom does Talbot intend the hyperpreterist to minister with his Whitefield validated degree?
Maybe all of this wouldn't matter if Talbot presented himself as a liberal, "ecumenicist" -- we would expect such a "pastor" to be a compromiser but not only does Talbot present himself as Reformed but also as extremely orthodox. This behavior from Talbot is disillusioning to Christians and makes it worse that Talbot's followers; in a sense of loyalty to him, help to cover up for him or even help to attack those who would dare point out what Talbot is doing.
What makes Talbot an even bigger hypocrite and one that even the hyperpreterists should point out; Talbot's self-made denomination, RCPGA released a statement in 2010 condemning hyperpreterism:
"Whereas, these views represent an attack upon and undermining of the holy catholic faith once delivered unto the saints,
Therefore, in the certain Hope of the Resurrection, at the Second Coming of Christ, and the Final Judgment at the end of history, the Reformed Presbyterian Church General Assembly does hereby find that Full Preterism, Hyper-preterism or any other Eschatological System promoting any one or all of these errors is errant, heretical, and apostate, being therefore contrary to evangelical orthodoxy." -- http://www.rpcga.us/SiteContent/65/documents/Against%20Unorthodox%20Eschatology%20(RPCGA%20Approved).pdf
Why does Talbot on one hand coddle Frost for 10 years, use him to help develop student materials for his supposed "Christian" seminary, enroll a hyperpreterist into a "minister's" program with intent to bestow a degree on him, call hyperpreterists "brothers", and even say his own eschatology is "akin" to David Chilton's (Chilton who was a documented hyperpreterist -- ref), and lastly we have this picture of Talbot and his wife eating dinner with Siegle, Frost and their wives.
Talbot is the man on the far front right, Siegle is behind Talbot and Frost is at the back left. In light of 1 Cor 5:11 which says:
"But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person."
Dee Dee Warren, owner of the blog PreteristBlog who has promoted hyperpreterist compromiser Kenneth Talbot is now attacking James White. White has been consistent in opposing hyperpreterism, unlike Talbot who actually was using a hyperpret to help develop student materials for his supposed "Christian" seminary. Further, Talbot has knowingly enrolled hyperpret leader Larry Siegle into a "minister" program in Whitefiled Theological Seminary (Talbot's seminary). To whom will Siegle minister once he obtains his Talbot validated degree???
On the issue of Talbot knowingly enrolling a hyperpret into his seminary Warren said:
"I don’t believe orthodox institutions should knowingly allow those who deny an essential of the faith into their midst...Dr. Talbot knows I do not agree at all with orthodox schools allowing blatantly heretical students, but that is not the area of responsibility that God has given me. I am just noting my total disagreement for the public record, and will speak with Dr. Talbot in more detail if he wants to know more." -- source
Why does Warren want to critique Dr. James White but will not publicly address her mentor on such an important issue? Why does she claim "that is not the area of responsibility that God has given" her but thinks it is perfectly fine for her to poke her hypocritical nose into White's business? Who does this woman think she is?
Hyperpreterists always like to act like they are the grand champions of Scripture and everyone else are simply "creedalists", yet they cannot explain WHAT, WHY, and HOW the Bible is the Bible...at least without undermining hyperpreterism itself. Hyperpreterism's main premise is that for whatever reason; the Church fell flat on its discernment butt -- it supposedly grossly misunderstood and misinterpreted God's basic eschatological plan and instead, Christianity for 2000 years has been offering the world a lie when it comes to eschatology.
Well, now the champion of Clarkianism, Sam Frost has endorsed and validated the notion that hyperpreterists are the keepers of "Scripture as the Supreme Judge". Frost, in his unbridled hatred of me quips about my interaction with his 3 hyperpret co-authors.
lol….I am watching Ed, Mike and Dave slam Roderick on Pret Compost……Never argue with a FP on their foundation of Scripture as the Supreme Judge…..they’ll get ya every time (rightly so). Green smashed Wilson on this point. (source)
It is no wonder that people see the Talbotite Clarkians as compromisers with Hyperpreterists; not only has Frost's mentor, Kenneth Talbot allowed a known hyperpret help develop student materials for his seminary, and enrolled a known hyperpret into a "ministers" course at his seminary; but Talbot even point blank told us his version of eschatology is "akin" to what hyperpret David Chilton taught (see here).
Now here is this snobbish, elitist Clarkian Talbotite telling people that the hyperprets hold the Scriptural high ground. And people actually think Frost left the movement??? You could have fooled me.
Supposed ex-hyperpreterist, Sam Frost caught on to something. In my opposition to the Clarkian method as opposed to the Mathison-Wilson-Gentry method of combating heresy (see here), Frost said this:
"[Roderick] is trying to strip away the very thing from them that allows [full preterists] to START. He wants some vague “God sustains” axiom."
Well, Sam partially seems to understand it. I'm trying to get hyperpreterists to tell me 3 things:
1. WHAT IS THE BIBLE? (why 66 books and no more or less) 2. WHY IS THE BIBLE THE BIBLE? (and not just any text) 3. HOW IS THE BIBLE THE BIBLE? (where did the Bible come from)
Indeed I AM fully admitting that I am trying to STRIP AWAY the false use of the Bible by the hyperpreterists. Frost and his fellow Clarkians approach the Bible as if it was a logician primer text rather than the SUSTAINED Word of God. The axiom that God Sustains is not vague. If God doesn't sustain basic truth and the basic understanding of truth then all the Clarkian propositions in the world aren't going to help anyone.
Dee Dee Warren, also now known (by her own outing of it), her real name Caryn Dos Santos WAS the administrator of the supposedly anti-hyperpreterist website; PreteristBlog. In about 2009, Warren drastically changed the methodology she was using to combat hyperpreterism. Previously, she was using what might be called The Mathison-Wilson-Gentry Method (see here). But then Warren was paid off by Clarkian, Kenneth Talbot by way of him giving her a free tuition for defending him against his critics. (see here).
Besides Dee Dee talking about how she thinks her dead pets will be in heaven with her, Warren follows the lead of her ideological heroes. For example: Zech 7:11 - But they refused to pay attention and turned a stubborn shoulder and stopped their ears that they might not hear.
Dee Dee has an almost childish way about her where she'll claim she isn't listening to a thing you are saying, all the while she is insulting you. For example, recently Warren claimed I was a mercenary because I won't SHUT UP and support Talbot. But let's look up the word mercenary shall we?
1. working or acting merely for money or other reward; venal.
2. hired to serve in a foreign army, guerrilla organization, etc.
3. a professional soldier hired to serve in a foreign army.
4. any hireling.
Hmmm, well since Dee Dee is the one who accepted a REWARD for stabbing people in the back, for throwing them under the bus and for changing her methodology to the elitist Clarkian method, I say SHE better fits the role of mercenary. I'm not working for anyone. I didn't accept any reward. I didn't change my methodology to fit in. I'm certainly not a hireling. But Dee Dee accepted a free tuition.
This is the problem with Liberals, be it in politics or theology; they go around accusing people of the things they themselves ACTUALLY do.
Whether Dee Dee sees this or not who knows but she won't ever repent of the lies she tells. She has stopped up her ears and made her heart diamond-hard.
As readers may be aware, at one time I was part of a website called PreteristBlog. PreteristBlog was the premiere site for the effort against Hyperpreterism. The site owner, Dee Dee Warren has collected an impressive amount of material. From its founding until about 2009, PreteristBlog used what we might call the Mathison-Wilson-Gentry method or rubric in combating hyperpreterism (see here). This method started with what Doug Wilson called the Authority argument. That is, hyperpreterism MUST claim God did not maintain any authority over how the Church at large has represented God's plan. That somehow, we have been in gross eschatological error for 2,000 years. Further, Kenneth Gentry has said "We are opening our critique [of hyperpreterism] with the historic argument, that is, the argument from the historic creeds of the Church. We do this in order to establish the significance of the debate: We are defending the historic, corporate, public, universal, systematic Christian faith." (Ken Gentry WSTTB pg 2) This is not to say we never bring the Bible into it, but BEFORE we even get to the Bible and the proof-texts that hyperpreterists use, we MUST FIRST deal with their overarching premise. In the same way, when a person wants us to get into discussing which "green laws" we should pass, we MUST FIRST discuss the validity of the premise of "man-made global warming".
First, if upon reading the title of this article, if your initial reaction was "Who cares" then please move along. Don't comment, because it would be insincere and not productive to the goal of this article.
Secondly, the goal of this article is amicable resolution between myself and Sam Frost. This article was prompted by a comment Sam made on Nov 11, 2011:
"What ever I have "done" to you, you have got to let it go, brother. Just let it go. Do you really want to hang on to that? I don't. I HATE the fact that you and I fight. Absolutely hate it. I get along with every other ex [hyperpreterist], except you. Stop. Think. Why is that? What do you want me to do? Admit I am a fraud? A liar? A drunk? A failure? A snob? Fine. I am. It's time to team up. There are far TOO MANY who have come out of this movement to be sidetracked by the highway accident that is the Roderick and Sam show...I mean, without listing greivances, we can simply say, "Sam. I forgive you." "Roderick, I forgive you." Yes is yes. No is No. And move on. I am going way, way out of my comfort zone here, Roderick. I forgive you. Do you forgive me? No need to go on lists and records of past wrongs. Just a simple manning up will do. And our past can be erased as far as the east is to the west. Just like that. Poof."
The suggestion is very magnanimous and therefore I certainly don't take it lightly. My initial reaction was that Sam and I should have a phone chat to try to resolve the issues as face-to-face as possible. But, as is my practice with major issues, I try to wait a few days to act so that I can pray about, reflect upon and search Scripture over the matter. This way my actions are hopefully wise and thoughtful, productive and enduring.
Kenneth Talbot, president and founder of Whitefield Theological Seminary, and his star pupil Samuel Frost, unwittingly tell us why a person should NOT take courses from WTS. In a podcast Talbot did on October 9th 2011 with Frost the two men discuss how Frost was able to become a hyperpreterist, even though for many years Frost was under the direct tutelage of Talbot (source).
After the listener gets through Frost and Talbot talking over each other, they will hear the blatant and hypocritical contradictions of these men as they try to dance around the FACT that Frost was a major leader in the heresy of hyperpreterism while not only attending WTS but while he was actually helping develop student materials for the supposed "Christian" seminary. All this with the full knowledge and support of Talbot.
During the course of the discussion Frost tells us he was "fresh out of college" when he was exposed to hyperpreterism, which echoes ANOTHER hyperpreterist leader, Don Preston (see here).
Fresh out of college/seminary
Further, Frost AND Talbot both admit that the hyperpreterist movement sprang from the "churches of Christ" and Frost admits that "he didn't know what he was getting involved with". While Talbot says hyperpreterism is "centered" in the "churches of Christ" doctrine.
Frost admits to being a novice
Talbot on hyperpreterism being a coc movement
Yet, Frost admits his main influences while he was a hyperpreterist, were from "church of Christ" hyperpreterists, such as Don Preston, Jack Scott, William Bell and Larry Siegle. Of important note, Siegle is currently attending WTS and earning a "ministers" degree. Whom will this WTS trained heretic "minister" to? (source)
Frost in thick with hyperpreterists
Ironically, Talbot brings out the fact that Frost is one of the only "seminary trained" hyperpreterist leaders. Trained at WTS nonetheless, just like Siegle whom Talbot is training to be a "minister" though Siegle has not recanted his heresy. A lot of good being trained at WTS did Frost, since he continued to grow in the hyperpreterist movement while under the eye of Talbot. In fact, Frost would often brag that he was a hyperpreterist BECAUSE OF his training at WTS.
WTS trains heretics
Now, here comes the contradiction and hypocrisy if it hasn't been displayed yet. Frost tells the listeners that there really isn't anything "new" in theology and that the SAME ANSWERS that historic Christianity gave throughout the ages applies also today. -- AMEN! but..... keep reading/listening... Frost is a master of contradiction.
Christianity gives good and same answers
But close to the end of the podcast, both Frost and Talbot tell us the reason people fall into the heresy of hyperpreterism among other heresies is because the Church wasn't giving "good answers". Christianity does NOT give good answers?
Whose job was it to help Frost? Here he is admittly, "fresh out of college", being exposed to a group he says "he didn't know what he was getting involved with" and yet while under the guidance of Talbot and WTS, Frost isn't being given "good answers" that would help him avoid heresy. Frost says there wasn't an "adequet defense" against what the hyperpreterists were saying. Where was Talbot and WTS in all this???
Well, perhaps the most revealing and shocking comment in the entire podcast was made by Talbot when he admits his self-made, "Realized Preterism" is in essence the same as David Chilton's hyperpreterism.
Talbot is a "modified" hyperpreterist?
First, Talbot falsely or deceptively tries to portray Chilton as a "modified preterist" rather than what Chilton himself admitted was full preterism. Talbot then tells us his own form of preterism that he calls "realized preterism" is "akin to" what Chilton was advocating. Chilton became a documented full or hyperpreterist. (source). It is no wonder then that Talbot and WTS couldn't help Frost avoid the heresy of hyperpreterism if it appears WTS' president is telling us in essence that he is embracing hyperpreterism via Chilton.
So, Frost having been under the tutelage of Talbot and WTS, who we now see apparently admit his eschatological views are akin to documented hyperpreterist Chilton, Frost says he understands why people become full preterists; because the Church isn't doing its job to properly instruct people -- WHO WAS INSTRUCTING SAM FROST WHEN HE WAS DEEP INTO HYPERPRETERISM???
So, why should anyone want to go to WTS when the president and its star student tell us that WTS as an agent of the Church has "FAILED" to "properly teach systematic theology"??? Isn't this the role of a seminary like WTS, to properly teach systematic theology? That is certainly what Talbot tells us in his promo at the end of the podcast.
WTS promotion misleading?
Why would someone want to let WTS provide their seminary and theological education needs if they have a podcast admitting they fail to "properly teach systematic theology"? When you think it can't get any worse, Talbot advocates the same premise that has generated hyperpreterism and the many other heresies throughout time. Every cult or heresy, including the "churches of Christ" with its "restorationist" the-true-church-and-true-gospel-failed and thus had to be restored mentality has started with the idea that the Church is failing. Talbot joins in with this false premise.
Talbot says Church is failing
Lastly, it comes full circle. Frost told us ealier on that the answers that the Church gives, have been the same and need not be changed because all heresies are merely old heresies wrapped in new packaging yet before the end of the podcast we have:
Frost telling us he was a novice when he fell into hyperpreterism
He didn't know what he was getting involved with
That the Church fails to properly teach people
Talbot telling us his views are "akin" to Chilton hyperpreterism
Talbot telling us the Church is failing
Frost questioning why the Church (ie WTS) didn't fulfill its role
WTS' role in heresy
When in October of 2008 I sent an email to Talbot and WTS to inquire about their position on hyperpreterism and why they were allowing Frost, as a known hyperpreterist leader to develop student materials for the seminary, Talbot didn't immediately write back but instead released my email to Frost whom I never mention in the email.(source) And then after a brief attempt to smooth things over with me, even by offering me free tuition at his seminary, which I ultimately declined, Talbot and his followers have done everything to destroy me. Why??? As you can see in THEIR OWN WORDS, in context (listen to the entire windbag, elitist podcast if you have the time), you see why. Frost and Talbot are building a "modified" version of full preterism called "Realized Preterism". To this day, you can only get Talbot's notes and lectures on his "Realized Preterism" if you are part of his select group. Why not place it in the public forum? Why all of this secrecy and attempt to make Chilton look like he was not a full preterist?
Before anyone claims it, what I have presented here is NOT "slander" or "libel" or "defamation" or "ad hom attack". These are Frost and Talbot's OWN WORDS. Not spun but honestly, openly, analyzed and presented. TKC welcomes comments even from non-registered readers unlike many of the places where Frost and Talbot administer which not only require registration to comment but sometimes to even read.
In their OWN WORDS why would anyone go to WTS if this is the kind of education they will receive? Frost's "hope" and educational needs were "misplaced".
Don K. Preston, perhaps the last active "leader" within the hyperpreterist movement has begun a podcast series he is calling "Morning Musings". In this series, Preston recounts how and why he became a "full preterist".
First, I always think it is amusing how Preston claims he is the "president" of "Preterist Research Institute" as if there is an entire staff of officers. It is basically just Preston. But anyhow, during the initial podcast Preston tells us he "doesn't worry about traditions" and "doesn't worry about the creeds" (minute 2:31-2:44). Really? So, Preston is admitting he is a lone-ranger who only "worries about" his own interpretations of the Bible. However, Jesus didn't come to found a disconnected faith of radical individualists. Jesus founded a community of believers with common held beliefs. (1 Corinthians 10:17, Philippians 1:27, Jude 1:3) This disconnecting from the historic Christian community is the first step to any heresy. Preston has in essence made himself his master and disciple, whereas the Bible says:
Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle. -- 2 Thes 2:15
Preston tells us from the start that he "doesn't worry about" or rather doesn't CARE about these "traditions". Instead he wants to listen to his own voice alone.
The hyperpreterist movement is always seeking a "big name" that will help validate them and carry them into "mainstream". They thought they were going to get this from Gary DeMar or R.C. Sproul, or Hank Hanegraaf.
The latest "trophy" is a man named, Frank Speer. Watch hyperpreterist Mike Loomis interview Mr. Speer.
UPDATE; Hyperpret Mike Loomis made it so I can't display the video on this site. This just goes to show you what kind of people these are. They are afraid to be assessed and will do everything to hide their true intent. You can still view the video by clicking the link at the bottom of the video box.
Dave Green, the hyperpret owner and moderator of the yahoo group, PretCosmos has been the last hold out against the hypocrisy of Ken Talbot-influenced anti-prets. Green continues to point out, and is validated in pointing out the influence Talbot has had on the anti-pret PretBlog and now on ex-hyperpret Sam Frost's website, RCM. But now Green's support is beginning to crack among his fellow hyperpreterists. Only a handful remain in solidarity while the rest are giving way to the Sieglesque duplicity.
Be clear about it; I win either way -- If the "Talbotites" convince more people to leave the heresy of hyperpreterism -- it's a win, even though now the person would have to work their way out of the snobbish elitism that is Talbot's world. Or if Green succeeds in convincing people about the reality the of hypocrisy of the Talbotites -- it's a win because it will give people a chance at leaving the heresy without joining a cultish group like the Talbotites.
So, how does Green get out of this mess? Blame it on me. Give some mushy heart-felt apology to everyone and say that you were tainted by your association with me. Trust me Dave, it will work.
