Filed Under (Uncategorized) by dee dee on 20-06-2012
Have many of you read Animal Farm? If so, this analogy would make perfect sense in relation to David Green’s Talbotian Fantasy. Like Biblical parables, there is one main point I am making, though I am sure, in classic form, the cosmonauts will concentrate on pigs and contests. So here we go…
At the beginning, when the animals take over, there was a conflict between a good pig, Snowball, and an evil pig, Napolean. Napolean prevails, and Snowball is ran off. From that point on, Napolean cannot admit any breakdown in his own system, so that whenever anything goes wrong, well, it must be the long-absent Snowball’s fault. If a fence breaks, Snowball must have crept back in the night and broken it. If crops fail, well it is obvious that Snowball must have poisoned them.
And so it is with David Green’s peculiar obsession with Dr. Talbot. He is invoked as the causal agent for nearly everything theologically displeasing to David Green.
Here are some examples. Perhaps I will add more if David provides us with more such poignant samples.
In speaking of his allegation that Christians have only one text with which to condemn hyperpreterists, David Green makes this astounding statement:
Since I wrote that, Dr. Talbot has added 1 John 4:3 to the “Hyper-Preterists Are Damned” category. But the Talbot-approved exegesis of that verse is so comically flawed there’s no reason to give it any countenance.
Yet…. I was making this precise argument years before I ever met Dr. Talbot (and even today, I personally don’t know if Dr. Talbot would agree with me, and quite honestly, it matters not one way or another). This was written and published by me in October 2005:
Further, if a hyper-preterist goes down that road, he finds himself in yet another heresy that is specifically condemned by Scripture. There are two similar passage, 1 John 4:2-3 and 2 John 7, which speak of deceivers and antichrists who deny that Christ has come in the flesh. While the phrase “come in the flesh” is the same in both passages, the Greek construction is not. In the second passage the perfect, rather than the present, participle has been used. This argues strongly for a “timeless present” indicating not only Christ’s past coming in the flesh, but his current abiding in the flesh, and as many have argued, including the late Walter Martin, his future coming in the flesh.  The consequence then of the denial of any current enfleshment of Christ is that such a person is antichrist.
David is aware I wrote this since he and Samuel Frost discussed the article it comes from and Samuel wrote a response to it (when he was a hyperpreterist).
This is very similar to the fantasy that David had regarding PaulT’s posts on Acts 24 and “mello” in which David falsely claimed:
Clearly unable to deal with content in the above post Mr. Green writes,
Anyone who is familiar with TalbotT knows that his “ghost writer” wrote that for him.
As it turns out, TalbotT’s “ghost writer” actually wrote it for him back in October of 2009.
And TalbotT was so impressed with it, he has been re-cycling it word-for-word ever since (December 2009, May 2011).
And as Paul pointed out, that exact post was actually first posted on CARM in September 2008, prior to Paul ever meeting Dr. Talbot. David has refused to retract this statement.
And of course here is the overaraching theme of David’s delusion:
Talbot uses his disciples as “human shields” and sends them on “suicide missions.” They defend Talbot and his doctrine tooth and nail, while Talbot remains safe behind his curtain. And, EVERY argument Talbot gives them is a loser. Every argument. Bar none. His disciples lose every single time. The humiliating defeats that Talbot’s disciples endure while defending his position and his arguments makes us all cringe.
I challenged David to provide any arguments of mine that were given to me by Dr. Talbot. Just one. There are allegedly so many it should be easy.
What has been David’s answer? Crickets. Nada.
A strong delusion indeed. DTOD (Dr. Talbot Obsessive Disorder).