The well documented “divide”, in the hypreterist community, (Sam, Dave perhaps you used the title too early) is over the issues of the standard of truth. Clearly there is a faction within the hyperpreterist community which recognizes God’s special revelation is the standard by which all claims of truth are to be measured. However, there appears to be a large faction within that community, indeed anecdotal information would suggest it is the majority of at least the vocal advocates of hyperpreterism who deny God’s Word is the lone standard by which all truth is to be measured.
The reformed evangelical Christian perspective has based its claims of truth on the Bible as the lone standard by which all other “truths” are measured. Reformed evangelical Christians take very seriously the Apostle Paul’s claim in the second chapter of Colossians,
…Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. 2 Colossians 2:8,9, ESV
Indeed, when members of the hyperpreterist community draw the line in the sand that truth is to be measured only against what is stated in God’s special revelation, reformed evangelical Christians acknowledge these statements with a hearty “amen”. There is nothing more fundamental to the Christian position than its source for truth. However, it seems to me, the element within the hyperpreterist community that upholds the standard of truth is also attempting to confuse the clear “divide” established within their camp with that of an ethical issue of a single individual.
Sam Frost writes,
So, how should we treat this “split”? How do the Pret Blah writers treat our arguments with one another (like, BCS and us “Clarkians”?). Should we do the same thing? Should we “take advantage” of this situation with the now ousted Roderick? What? Is it unraveling for them? There is a God in heaven…..
You see, there is a new enemy in town for Roderick. It’s not us. We are wolves. Heretics. We are satan’s minions, and that’s obviously true since we hate church history and creeds. No, see the REAL problem is the compromisers….Paul T., Dr. T., Phil, Dee Dee, Sharon…..see, that’s the problem now…..those are the new enemies….and, heck, lawsuits have even been entertained…..
It will be interesting to see how this faction works itself out in the name of “all things orthodox.” Oh, and while I am at it…..Can Glen tell me the “orthodox” position on the Lord’s Table?
Where is the “logic” in comparing the fundamental disagreement in what is and isn’t “truth” with holding a colleague or associate accountable for an ethical issue? Indeed in the continued “divide” in the hyperpreterist community over what is the standard of truth a rather naïve hypepreterist, one of the few who seemingly recognize God’s word is the standard writes,
Comment by greglee20 9 hours ago
“Folks there are reasons that Clarkian philosophy is looked upon as an aberration in the world”
This is a great comment (not). Could not the same be said of full preterism? Or even BCS?
Apparently the hyperpreterist doesn’t understand the underlying principle of “BCS” is theistic evolution which is nothing more than a rationalization of God’s word with a system designed to deny God’s existence. Indeed Dr. John Walton affirms the underlying premise of his book,
…the view presented in this book, neither camp (Neo-Darwinism and Christianity) must give ground…(The Lost World of Genesis One, John H. Walton, IVP, pg. 167)
For those following the discussions within the hyperpreterist camp Dr. Walton’s book is all the rage for those holding to “BCS”. His reinterpretation of the Biblical narrative is seemingly an effort to reconcile what he terms as the “reigning paradigm” (Neo-Darwinism) in the world of science for the explanation of man’s origin with Christianity.
Pointed out in the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd edition,
Significance of Creation. Since God as Creator is the explanation for the existence of the world and for human existence, it is the activity of creation that establishes our deepest and most essential relation to God: as Creator and thus Lord. (Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd edition, Walter A. Elwell, Baker, pg 304)
Neo-Darwinism is “a theory of evolution that is a synthesis of Darwin’s theory in terms of natural selection and modern population genetics” (Webster’s Dictionary)
Darwin’s theory for the origin of humanity is a frontal assault on the Christian concept of the divine origins of mankind. It isn’t just a coincidence the “theistic” evolutionists are attracted to “BCS”. The fact of the matter, “BCS” is an effort to marginalize the very core of God’s special revelation making the Bible subservient to fallen man’s evaluation of natural evidence. This is exactly what the “world” desires. Rather than being held accountable to the Creator God, remove God from the process altogether by dumbing down the meaning of His special revelation to mankind. The Apostle Paul wrote,
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, Romans 1:18-22 ESV
This is exactly what those of the “BCS” are doing, “they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” Roman 1:25 ESV. In this case the “creature” is modern science’s “reigning paradigm”.
Yet Sam Frost would seek to place this fundamental “divide” on the same level as holding an associate accountable for his ill advised actions. Sam, your issue with Norm, JL Vaughn, John “Death” Scargy, Tim Martin, Tami Jelinek, etc, etc, isn’t just because they claimed,
Frost, ever the master of the unprovoked and completely misrepresentational cheap shot,
Your issue is not that those of the “BCS” are making ill advised comments and unwarranted charges that need to be repented of as in the case of Roderick. Your issue isn’t simply a disagreement over whether one dunks or sprinkles. No Sam, your issue is that a clear majority of your group is reading the Bible in such a way as to redefine the creation account so that it is no longer an explanation about humanities existence. The apparent majority faction within your community has usurped the authority of God for their own based on their rationalized standard for determining truth. I understand that you agree with my assessment that the “BCS” faction represents theistic evolution. Theistic evolution is nothing but Darwinism repackaged in Christian terminology. Sam, don’t marginalize the width of the “divide” in your camp by comparing an apple with an orange.