Sam Frost’s Frustrated Flood Theory
Filed Under (Roderick's Posts, cults/cultic, humour, hyperpreterism, worldview) by Roderick_E on 02-12-2008
Tagged Under : bcs, beyond creation science, Samuel Frost
If you are following the wildly erroneous & speculation filled movement that is hyperpreterism, you will have noticed over the last few years that it has entered a new area of theological distortion. Right before I left hyperpreterism, I warned the so-called “conservatives” in the movement that in the coming years the movement would be dominated by a new Creation/Flood theory proffered by two guys named Tim Martin & Jeff Vaughn. They call their theory, “Covenantal Creationism” & is basically a view that sees the biblical creation account as merely localized/tribalized/covenantalized — that is, to them Genesis isn’t really about the creation of the physical universe, the physical planet, the physical humans, physical plants & animals but really only about a symbolic or contractual creation. They even claim Adam was not the first created human but only the first human created into a “covenant” with God. (see my refutation of “Coventantal Creationism”)
Anyhow, it is happening — hyperpreterism is in the process of hyperpreterizing the Creation/Flood account (so much for hyperpreterism only affecting eschatology – don’t let them fool you, it AFFECTS EVERYTHING folks)
Hyperpreterist leader, Sam Frost was originally opposed to “Covenantal Creationism” yet something seemed to change after his fellow hyperpreterists issued this stern warning:
Covenant Creation is spreading through the rank and files of the Preterist community. You are not necessarily privy to other forums where this is being discussed and understood. In a few years you and your site will become embraced only by the Ed Stevens and Kurt Simmons follower types of Preterism and maybe some reformed folks. The Covenant Creation understanding will move on into the mainstream leaving you guys in the dustbin of history as just another remnant of curiosity in about 5 or 10 years. Fifty years from now the questions being asked is “what happened to that Sam Frost guy who started out so good?” Will history simply say that he got “left behind”? (message to Sam Frost from a fellow hyperpreterist)
Shortly after that, Frost finally got around to writing a supposed refutation of Covenant Creationism, the only problem being, after the publishing of the stereotypically verbose Frostian offering Frost’s fellow hyperpreterists DIDN’T see it as a refutation of Covenant Creationism but more as a hybrid or even capitulation to Covenant Creationism.
After reading Frost’s supposed “refutation”, one hyperpreterist even comments:
Sam seems to have taken a “Partial Covenant Creation” position… Of course, the correct position is probably a “synthesis” of Tim and Sam. (comment by hyperpreterist about Frost’s view)
So you see, for whatever hyperpreterist claims I am just “smearing” Frost by saying his “refutation” was more of a pandering to the middle ground & not be “left behind” as his fellow hyperpreterists said he would — let them read comments by their own hyperpreterists.
But it doesn’t end there. Recently the Covenant Creationism guys (Martin & Vaughn) responded to Frost’s supposed “refutation” & STILL, Frost’s fellow hyperpreterists think he was proposing some hybrid form. Here is a quote:
I thought you clearly presented a local flood view too. And I thought Tim did a good job of recapping exactly what you stated in your presentation. ok, now I really need some clarification on your part concerning the flood and your position. (hyperpreterist stating he thinks Frost is teaching a type of local flood)
Frost does clearly tell the hyperpreterist he doesn’t mean to teach a local flood yet then why can’t the supposed “presumed scholar” of the hyperpreterist movement make propositions that no one would mistake? Perhaps it is either because he is trying to do a balancing (pandering) act or he really isn’t that great of a communicator as he is touted. Either way, the little dance between the creation/flood factions of hyperpreterism is interesting AND I still think the Frostians will come out on the short end. The Martin/Vaughn view is more consistent with the over all premises of hyperpreterism & will appeal to more of the “church of Christ” denominational background hyperpreterists than the Frostian elites holed up in their corner of the ningosphere.
But no doubt, Frost has the warning of his fellow hyperpreterist ringing in his head:
The Covenant Creation understanding will move on into the mainstream leaving you guys in the dustbin of history as just another remnant of curiosity in about 5 or 10 years. Fifty years from now the questions being asked is “what happened to that Sam Frost guy who started out so good?” Will history simply say that he got “left behind”? (message to Sam Frost from a fellow hyperpreterist)
Frost will never let that happen, he loves his position as the “presumed scholar” & will do whatever it takes to hold on to it…even pander or capitulate.
Some interesting & telling quotes from hyperpreterists Martin & Vaughn concerning this issue:
As you can see, Martin & Vaughn accurately assess Frost’s sly attempt to sneak in a hybrid form of their “Covenantal Creationism” & yet they also take him to task for not being consistent with his hyperpreterism.
Sam, if you or your buddies are reading this, you have a few options but first realize the future of hyperpreterism is going to include more & more of this kind of reasoning. Congrats! That’s what you get with private interpretation models. That’s what you get with a “theology” that is disconnected from 2000 years of Christian interpretation.
So now you can:
(1) Capitulate all the way & openly join the Covenantal Creationism revolution that is “at hand”.
(2) Keep trying to create a Frostian hybrid which will only seclude you further & further (Martin & Vaughn aren’t going to let you steal their baby & claim it was your idea)
(3) Begin to REALLY question the entire premise of hyperpreterism & reject it & start to lead your buddies out of it. Do you have the humility for option 3 & to re-join historic & biblical Christianity? I pray you do & would be glad to see the day when you reject hyperpreterism.
I am astounded at the testicular fortitude it takes to assume that anyone is going to be talking about them in fifty years to begin with. Sorry Samuel, it is fun to play word games with your last name, but that’s about it.
And the hits just keep coming…
Sam tried to claim he ISN’T an apprentice of Virgil Vaduva (see youtube video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_e75KHVhQVA ) yet let’s look at a recent exchange between Vaduva & Frost over this whole “Covenant Creation” issue.
Wow! Like Vaduva is Sammy’s Daddy or something…or rather his mentor since Vaduva obviously sees Sam as not yet where he is, but that Sam has “come a long way”. Someday Sam, you’ll be as “generous” & “loving” as dear, dear “brother Virg”. Sheeesh.
How does Sam the apprentice respond?
See, what I said about Frost being Vaduva’s apprentice is true…at least in regards to hyperpreterism. This is nothing to be ashamed of Sammy — we all should have mentors, it’s just that you won’t admit that Vaduva is perhaps your biggest mentor when it comes to hyperpreterism.
But in case the reader is STILL not convinced that indeed Vaduva is his mentor & Frost is his apprentice, look at this next comment from Vaduva to Frost after Frost asked what the harm was in believing in a physical/literal Creation/Flood account:
So, you see, Frost is INDEED the apprentice of Vaduva. Vaduva put Frost on the hyperpreterist map. Frost owes Vaduva a lot.
Hi guys
I think this limiting of creation and the flood is totally consistent with hyperpreterism, because hyperpreterism misses the chiastic structure of history. AD70 was the end of the SOCIAL divide between Jew and Gentile begun in Abraham. It was a SOCIAL flood limited to seven bowls. The full floodgates await a future day.
They have an eschatological shoehorn and aren’t afraid to use it.
While I was still a hyperpreterist, Dee Dee was here documenting the shenanigans of the hyperpreterist movement.
When most Christians first hear of the things hyperpreterists believe, the first question that generally comes to mind is, “What kind of people can believe this stuff?”
Dee Dee has been profiling & chronicling the personalities of the hyperpreterist movement longer than anyone. I say all of that in answer to a question the reader may have…“Why do you focus on the individuals of hyperpreterism?” Because a belief isn’t just about propositions but also what is behind those propositions. A person’s beliefs drive their character & a person’s character drives their beliefs…or as the Bible puts it “So as a man thinks in his heart is he” Proverbs 23:7.
At PreteristBlog, we bring you RELEVANT documentation of hyperpreterist beliefs & the motivations behind those beliefs. That is why articles like this are written, so that the reader can see “what kind of people believe this stuff”.
Now, in response to this article which was mainly quotes from Sam Frost’s own hyperpreterist fellows, Frost had these snarky comments:
Besides Frost ignoring the fact that no one in the hyperpreterist movement ever heard of him until Virgil Vaduva started promoting Frost as his token “Calvinist” Frost tries to elude the fact that Vaduva DID IN FACT publish ANOTHER book by Frost called Exegetical Essays on the Resurrection of the Dead (see documentation, notice the publisher is “Truth Voice Publishing” - Vaduva’s label)
So, to answer in part the question of what kind of people are hyperpreterists? We see (again & again) they are very sneaky & deceptive people.
Frost calls people “flys” when he thinks he is bigger & better than them — as a matter of fact he called some of his own fellow hyperpreterists, “low rent” & “whacky” (see here).
So, Frost clearly has an inflated ego even among his own hyperpreterists. But more than that, Frost is constantly talking about who is & isn’t “relevant” or “legitimate”. First off, it is interesting that it took Frost 3+ years to finally address the hyperpreterist “Covenantal Creation” view. He seems to forget I did a chapter-by-chapter review of the view back in 2006, only a year after it came out. (see here). Again, what kind of people are hyperpreterists? Judging by Frost’s behaivor, they are dishonest people.
Lastly, we have seen Frost constantly trying to ride the coat tails of other people, be it Gary DeMar, James Jordan, or Ken Talbot. Frost has a propensity to name-drop. Add to that, Frost has been seen trying to steal away concepts from others & claim it as his own. We see him trying to do this with Tim Martin & Jeff Vaughn’s “Covenantal Creation” view. Even his fellow hyperpreterist recognize that he is trying to do this…so you Frostians don’t accuse me of making it up.
At any rate, I do pray Frost would eventually do the right thing & reject hyperpreterism, but before even that I pray his ego, his arrogance, & his deception is dealt with. Simply rejecting hyperpreterism yet him keeping those other bad attributes is not good. Perhaps though some of the bad character is explained by 1 Corinthians 15:33.
Please pray for Frost & the other hyperpreterists, but if you ever interact with them, realize “what kind of people” they are EVEN before they open their mouths. After all, it takes a hefty dose of arrogance to claim 2000 years of Christian interpretation has been majorly wrong while hyperpreterists’ claim their private interpretations are correct.
Mike great comments about the Chiastic Structure. You are so right. I knew that one major problem with the hyperpreterist “Covenantal Creation” view is its lack of understanding typology, but your mentioning Chiastic Structure takes it levels deeper.
For those interested, read about Chiastic Structure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiastic_structure
Frost is all cold air and no substance. He and his crew think that swaggering and rote repetition is convincing. Not only does he like to name-drop, he loves to play the martyr, going so far as to drama queen his response to one of my articles painting me as a murderous heretic hunter and then proceeded to show off that he knew a bunch of Latin terms that meant hooey to the discussion but looks impressive to the ignorant. So I named his fallacy the Argumentum Ad Googleum and that was that.
It is a humourous read if you haven’t read it.
http://www.preteristsite.com/docs/warrenfrosty.html
I believe it was right after that that he wrote me rambling about a lesbian housewife. Yep, some scholar you got there.
Yep it was right after that article that he turned into Mr. Hyde. In the introductory paragraph the reader can see that Frost and I got only just fine, but once his ox was gored, well that was a different story.
Oh my, I just re-read the piece (and eek, there are some grammar crimes I need to fix) and Samuel name drops in that very article!!!! Sheesh. But here is what I found interesting. Samuel said:
Here, another interesting problem arise. Dee has expressed kindness to me for expressing kindness to her in our discussions (which have never been over texts). Would Paul have extended the same courtesy?
Samuel has bought into the fluffy bunny Testamints mentality. Here was my response to that statement:
Yes he would. That is in fact what is meant by the whole New Testament teaching of loving your enemies. It doesn’t mean allowing them to preach unmitigated heretical twaddle unopposed with a false veneer of tolerant gobbledegook. It does mean that if Samuel was being unjustly personally abused, or in some personal need of basic necessities, and I have any power and influence to make a difference, that I do so. That is why I had no problem of calling on Samuel to do so in my case, which challenge he answered and did the right thing. If Paul saw Hymenæus being slandered unjustly, blackmailed, or collapsed and bleeding on the street, I believe that the commands of Christ require that he help him. Samuel and other hyperpreterists are my theological enemies. However, they are not my personal ones.
Roderick knows this first-hand. We chatted for years over all kinds of mundane life happenings and fought like cats and dogs over doctrinal issues. It is not necessary to “hate” someone who holds to heresy or is in a cult or is an atheist. I hate the doctrine. Samuel has never been able to fathom that. I pity him for that as such is a very immature mental state. I gored Samuel’s doctrinal ox, and he can’t separate his doctrine from his person. That happens oftentimes with people who hold new and novel ideas that gives them inflated egos that they are part of the elite few that know the truth.
And what makes it all worse is that Samuel, quite bluntly, isn’t funny. He tries to be funny and satirical and each time he tries that with me I am all over him like a piranha on a corndog. Please Samuel, you have zero talent for satire, stop embarrassing yourself.
Is the “piranha on a corndog” analogy a Dee Dee Warren original?
Why yes it is. I think a Samuel original is “Queen of Stupid.” He heard it once in kindergarten and thought it was so awesome that he would keep it in his arsenal. I keep expecting him to tell his readers to stay away from me because I am a yucky girl with the cooties.
You’re right Dee Dee, most hyperpreterists can’t pull off a good satirical sense of humor. They come off snarky instead. Perhaps one guy that comes close is Jason Bradfield, the protege to Sam Frost. Bradfield at one point, even moved his family to the state where Sam lives to be together with him in a “ministry” (now more of less defunct).
I also think Bradfield makes more rational & intelligent arguments than Frost & really Frost should be Bradfield’s protege.
For some time now, Bradfield when referring to me & others he has come against has been repeating a phrase something like, “If I ever did drop hyperpreterism & return to orthodox Christianity, I wouldn’t hang around boobs like you guys”. Hey Jason, guess what? We aren’t looking for proteges or followers. I’d be glad to see you drop hyperpreterism, & yet you need not hang around me — that’s fine, I’m not looking for cronies.
Anyway, Jason said something recently that if he stops & reads his own words, should cause him to pause & think. Speaking against the “Covenantal Creation” view of “Beyond Creation Science” (BCS), he says:
Ok slow down for a moment Jason. Now apply this to what you hyperpreterists are doing in general. You guys keep getting upset that historic Christianity won’t engage your arguments — well, it’s because “we’re talking two different languages” — hyperpreterists are speaking the language of terminology redefinition & radical departure from historic Christian interpretation. That is NOT the language of Christianity but rather the language of heresy. That’s not to say that hyperpreterism doesn’t “stumble upon” some correct concepts — mainly they “stumble upon” classic postmil victorious/trumphantism & repackage it as hyperpreterism not realizing it isn’t their own concepts (Sam Frost should actually know better & I suspect he does but he has to keep this thing going).
So Jason, perhaps take some time & pray about these things, uninfluenced by your hyperpreterist heroes. Take some time just between you & Christ & the witness of His Church. You need not follow me or hang around me to return to orthodox Christianity. I’m praying for you.
I certainly respect your opinion, but you know it is one that I don’t share of Jason, but perhaps I never got the chance to know him well enough. I barely know him, and the last thing I remember in an interaction was a really dumb argument he was making after I appeared on your show regarding the millennium. Maybe I can find an old post about it. Perhaps that has miscoloured my opinion. We all have dumb arguments from time to time.
We have a spammer right now who seems obsessed with the word “boob,” if that is Jason, then my opinion may be closer to reality because people who are so obsessed that they post on a blog where they know it goes directly to the spam filter have issues. I guess they think well at least DDW and Rod get to see them. Nope. I occasionally check the spam filter, and delete after barely skimming. I don’t think you Rod ever see them, I don’t know if you ever check the moderation queue or the askimet spam filter. Whoever is behind the spam is pretty obsessed with you rather than me, so that sounds like it would be him.
What is funny is that Jason’s comment is really typical, but I wish I had money for each time I have had an email or conversation with someone who told me that all they heard was that I was such a horrible person and the way my name was used in some hyperpreterist circles was like almost a cuss word, that when they actually spoke to me personally, they had a completely different opinion.
The reason is because once someone gets out of the web of deceit they realize that the opposition mounted wasn’t done in hate or any other bad motive, but because hyperpreterism IS that bad.
Yep I know it is probably Jason spamming since one of his signature things to call people is “boob” (he did it on CARM & was banned for it). This is also the reason I made the subtle reference to it when I said in comments,
See,
Now, I agree with you, Jason behaves like an adolescent most of the time. I don’t even think he is 30 years old yet BUT compared to Sam Frost, Jason seems to at least try to interact with the real issues, no matter how poorly so. I mean that he makes better arguments only because I think his ego isn’t getting in his way as much as Sam’s. There may be hope for guys like Jason & even Mike Bennett (who I’ve seen show flashes of civility when he isn’t around his hyperpreterist pals). Guys like Sam (the “leaders”) seem to have too much invested to actually reject their little “movement”.
As for how hyperpreterists try to portray us a hump-backed orges out to eat little children is hilarious. As a matter of fact a recent example was about 2 days ago when I went on PalTalk (an online live audio chat) & went into a hyperpreterist area. There were about 6 hyperpreterist who apparently had been pounding their hyperpreterist proof-texts for over an hour on some poor guy. I started “private messaging” him about the TRUTH of hyperpreterism & sending him refuting texts in complete context. He eventually wanted to talk on the phone so right in the middle of the hyperpreterist on-slaught, he went quiet for about 30 minutes while he & I were talking on the phone. The hyperpreterists began posting messages saying stuff like how the guy is silent because he must not have an argument to what they were saying — blah, blah blah. Why do hyperpreterists always think they are master debaters?
Anyhow, suffice it to say, as you pointed out, once people disengage from the lies of hyperpreterists, they begin to see we aren’t “heretic hunters” out to slay & fillet, but rather we just trying to uphold Jude 1:3.
[...] application of its hyperpreterism — even other hyperpreterists claim this about this site (see link). But anyhow, the statement comes in the context of her question as to whether the “Offices [...]
[...] faction will be left in the “dustbin of history as just another remnant of curiosity” (source). As for me arguing against Covenant Creationism as I was coming out of hyperpreterism — [...]