Deathisdefeated

O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

Bradfield and Frost "In Their Own Words"

Ward Fenley's Debate with Sam Frost and Jason Bradfield held on 02/03/2008

This is the famous debate where Frost makes the infamous statement " My eyeballs tell me nothing"

Gives a whole new meaning to Mat 24:15 "So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),

Just another "
Doubting Thomas " or "Sam" in this case.

A few things to listen for...An answer to Wards question to Jason "Is the devil the old serpent the same one that is in Genesis literal or physical in Revelation?
Listen here

Views: 126

Comment by Tim Martin on September 19, 2010 at 8:39pm
John,

Here is an interesting passage that might have some relevance:

"After that, He appeared in another form to two of them as they walked and went into the country. And they went and told it to the rest, but they did not believe them either. Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen." Mark 15:12-14

People in the Bible witnessed miracles through their senses. We have many examples of credible witnesses to attest to the truth of miracles recorded in Scripture. How else would we know that miracles actually, really did happen? The testimony of many (credible) witnesses.

If human sense perception is not reliable, then why should we believe those who wrote the Bible regarding things they saw and heard?

The irony here is that those who deny miracles make the same argument as the Clarkians -- human sense perception is unreliable and cannot yield knowable, reliable truth.

Clarkianism undercuts the Bible's own argument for the gospel of Jesus Christ as presented in places like Luke 1 and 1 John 1.

We had an entire chapter in BCS, titled "The Test of Truth," which went into this subject in detail. Clarkianism cannot account for or accept the empirical nature of the the Bible's own standard for the test of truth.

Jason Bradfield wrote a criticism of that chapter titled "Re Test of Truth" which was referenced in this thread here at DiD. Jason's article has since been removed (as far as I can tell). I wish I could find it because Jason made a major blunder in his article that highlights the problem with Sam and Jason's abstract, philosophical objections to certain aspects of Beyond Creation Science.

I wish I could quote it precisely, but in that article Jason tried to imply that the legal standard for the test of truth applied only in legal settings. He mocked the suggestion that the testimony of many witnesses models the Bible's own approach to discovering truth in God's world.

At one point, he denied the suggestion that Moses was to be received as a prophet by his brothers due to the testimony of miracles. He asked a rhetorical question about how the people of Israel would know that Moses was God's prophet.

How were the people to know that Moses was sent from God? Actually, through miracles that God told him to show them. In other words, their eyeballs would confirm that Moses was indeed a prophet sent by God.

I never did bother with a response to his old article. So I should tidy up that loose end with this Scripture reference:

Exodus 4:1-9

Yes, Moses applied God's own test of truth to himself when he appeared to his people in bondage in Egypt.

Case closed.

Tim Martin




"
Comment by Tami on September 20, 2010 at 6:07am
"If human sense perception is not reliable, then why should we believe those who wrote the Bible regarding things they saw and heard?"

Exactly. And this is one of several points that Ward made in that "debate." But Sam was too busy talking over him to even hear what he was saying, let alone respond to it.
Comment by John on September 20, 2010 at 7:59am
Tim,

You'll find out that many articles have been moved or deleted completely.Here is a reference to the article in question posted by Mike Bennett.Mike also provides a link to the original artilce by Jason but it's a dead link :)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Bennett
RE: THE TEST FOR TRUTH - JASON BRADFIELD

* Posted by Michael Bennett on November 23, 2009 at 11:50am in General Discussion

Jeff Vaughn, co-author of Beyond Creation Science, has recently confessed something that is rather startling: [emphasis mine - jason]

So after 7 years of calling me an empiricist, are you finally conceding that I am not? Page 383? Let’s see. Chapter 19, The Test of Truth, starts on page 363. We spent 12 pages developing Biblical epistemology, the wise use of multiple witnesses. We showed how this standard worked in practice and how this standard has changed the world. We then demonstrated the failure of the Church 1600th century church because it ignored the Biblical standard and relied on a single witness, authority. This was followed by a section on the failure of 19th century liberalism because it ignored the Biblical standard and relied on a single witness, science. Then a section on the failure of 20th century fundamentalism because it ignored the Biblical standard and relied on a single witness, interpreted Scripture.

A point of clarification may be in order here. No one can use Scripture as a witness or authority. All we have are various interpretations of Scripture. Admittedly, some are better than others. Scripture itself, is not able to make its meaning known. The changes in doctrine during the Reformation are ample evidence of this. Was the Church wrong for 1500 years on soteriology? Some witnesses say, “Yes.” Some say, “No.” Both of these groups believe Scripture supports their respective views.

At this point in the book, by implication, we have demonstrated that Clarkian epistemology does not meet God’s standard. It is also a single witness view. It denies the validity of all other witnesses except for interpreted Scripture. You’ve not argued against this conclusion. Have you conceded?

After 20 pages, we have a section for the purpose of demonstrating that Genesis assumes the standard we presented. That is, God’s standard for epistemology, is known separately from Scripture. It is part of God’s Law written on our hearts so to speak. {Source}

This deserves some comment. It also deserves to be rejected. I would like to explain why by examining the comments above and the contents of Chapter 19.

FOR THE REST GO TO LINK BELOW
http://thereignofchrist.com/re-the-test-of-truth/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's a dead link unfortunately.But when your someone like Jason that calls everyone you disagree with a lair but never offer a source or proof for your claim it's best to just delete then have to admit you were mistaken or just out and out lying.
Comment by MoGrace2u on September 20, 2010 at 12:54pm
That link is dead but this one about cigarettes is close to the same thought

Cigs & Science
Comment by Tim Martin on September 20, 2010 at 9:14pm
Thanks, John.

I really wish I could access the unedited original.

Jason made a pretty remarkable statement about how the children of Israel were to recognize Moses as God's prophet. It was a rhetorical question implying that the use of sense perception (what he calls "empiricism") would be absurd, and that they would only know by revelation.

His presentation was an outright contradiction of Exodus 4. Note that God gave Moses 2 signs in that text to show the people in order for them to believe Moses was God's prophet. God told Moses that if they didn't believe those two signs to offer a third. Aren't those details fascinating?

"By the mouth of two or three witnesses..."

It's woven into the story of Moses. Clearly not a legal context, but details like that never get in the way of the critics of Covenant Creation.

I tell you, it is hard to take the critics seriously when they remove their old articles and change their views from one month to another. How many people realize that Sam Frost has abandoned his original 25 page critique of Beyond Creation Science where he argued that Gen. 1 is the physical universe and Gen. 2:4b ff is the creation of a covenant world? Now the argument is "both/and."

But that is not the argument from 2008!

Oh well. I guess those that study the issue out objectively and examine both sides will see all of this. Those are the people I respect... a lot. Don't take anyone's word on it, one way or another. Study the issue out completely. Read both sides. Contemplate it. Then decide on which view makes the most sense within the framework of covenant eschatology. That's what I have always recommended to people.

Blessings,

Tim Martin
www.BeyondCreationScience.com
Comment by Tami on September 21, 2010 at 1:33pm
Well, Ken, you and I might be (actually, I would simply be agnostic). But you might be surprised to learn that there are preterists out there who have stated that they would be preterists even if the temple was still standing.
Comment by John on September 21, 2010 at 1:41pm
I'm on vacation and out of town so it's hard to get here as much as i would like.Especially to remark on this debate.

This debate is a classic example of the differences in our hermeneutic approach and why there is so much confusion.

You'll notice Jason never answers Ward's simple question and Sam basically takes the "well it's both spiritual and physical" which is exactly what the futurist claim.This can't be missed as other writings of Sam's confer this type of hermeneutic gymnastics.

Other then reading from a book Jason has no answers and seems shell shocked in his inability to come up with a plausible answer that would be consistent with the Full Preterist position.

This could be a reason theses guys are looking for a new form of preterism.I'm sure there is more to come.

It's tea time here BBL.
Comment by John on September 23, 2010 at 6:21am
Tim ,

Ed you and your co-authors might appreciate this one too.

Tim wrote "I tell you, it is hard to take the critics seriously when they remove their old articles and change their views from one month to another. How many people realize that Sam Frost has abandoned his original 25 page critique of Beyond Creation Science where he argued that Gen. 1 is the physical universe and Gen. 2:4b ff is the creation of a covenant world? Now the argument is "both/and."

Probably not those that follow Sam and especially those close to him.His co-authors (House Divided) had to find out the hard way.

I saw Sullivan make this quote on pret cosmos the other day about Sam

"And I thought at one time he apologized in regard to our differences on Isaiah 65, but I can't recall that either. I thought he had changed his position because
I went back and edited it and left out his name (from the original article)."

The reason he can't find it is that it was posted at preterism debate which is no longer up but luckily we have a copy of the page.

Sam Frost on December 19, 2009 at 6:33am

"Where I think I possible went to far and apologized to Mike S. and Dave G.) on the Isaiah 65 and "limited atonement" route (I apologized to them somewhere around, what guys, May? Maybe Dave G. remembers, or Mike S.)"

Of course we know Sam now back slides once again to this futurist view.

I don't mind Sam changing his views but his constant misrepresenting Covenant Creation is a little disturbing.

Sam has recently accused covenant Creation of being an old earth only view and denying miracles in a book review he did of Douglas F. Kelly book on Genesis.

Sam "The problem (often ignored by our Covenant Creationist friends) is epistemology – not “evidence”. “Facts” are interpreted, not “given” (or as Kant would say, Ding an Sach)."

HUH?

Sam continues to mislead people saying " It is refreshing to see that young earth challenges are being made to the status quo of the science gods, and growing. In spite of the mockers, you are not a fool or an idiot in believing in the power of God to speak things into existence solely by the executive power of His word."

Of course this is an outright false accusation Sam attributes to Covenant Creationist but as you have pointed out and Sam has shown time and time again when Sam's views and criticisms are shown to be null and void Sam will resort to miss characterization or building another straw man argument to try and hide the fact he is basically clueless and has no honest arguments...just more of the same ole Sam.

In the debate Sam asked Ward..."Have you seen Jesus?" I just about fell out the chair when i heard him ask that question.That is the #1 question all futurist ask preterist when first confronted with the view that the second coming is a past event.
Comment by Tami on October 5, 2010 at 10:12am
"In the debate Sam ask Ward..."Have you seen Jesus?" I just about fell out the chair when i heard him ask that question.That is the #1 question all futurist ask preterist when first confronted with the view that the second coming is a past event."

Yeah that was trippy.
Comment by Norm on October 5, 2010 at 11:15am
It is clear to me that interaction with Sam and Jason is not a productive endeavor by and large. Over the years we have seen Sam’s approach to scriptures and his tendency to support what I would classify as a “hybrid” hermeneutical approach to scriptures. This “hybridization” is becoming more pronounced as Sam appears to be getting boxed in by others not only in Genesis now but even in matters of eschatology. Sam is no different than all of us students of the scriptures in that he carries with him his own presuppositions of scripture just as I’m sure that I do.

What is often difficult in moving from a “hybrid” hermeneutic is adapting and recognizing the consistency of scripture from beginning to end and allowing it to guide rather than to force our former understandings upon it. We recognize that the vast numbers of Christians (if not all) retain some form of cultural presupposition and I believe it calls for grace toward those who do not move as strongly in the direction of what we consider theological consistency.

For those who tend to kick against the goads aggressively then the message appears clear from “Christ” in that we should shake off the “dust” from our shoes and move on. It does no good to remain entangled with those who are not seeing what we see for one reason or another. God’s Grace is sufficient for us all who stand clothed in the new Kingdom of Christ.

I would propose that we let those who want to aggressively confront our CC hermeneutical approach to all of scripture continue in their own camp and we should try our best to ignore their ad hominem approaches as best we can. When we respond we should let our yes be yes and our no be no and attempt to be as matter of fact about matters as we can. We have way too much water under the bridge with Sam and Jason to smooth issues over easily so the better approach is to let them be as best as humanly possible.

Rom 12:16-18 ESV Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. (17) Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. (18) If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.

Let’s concentrate on examining the challenging word instead of examining what is being said about us by the Pault’s and others who disagree with us. Of course I realize it is easier stated than done and I am speaking to myself here also.

Norm

Comment

You need to be a member of Deathisdefeated to add comments!

Join Deathisdefeated

Events

Forum

Adam as Israel

Started by Internet_Troll in Eschatology. Last reply by Internet_Troll Nov 5. 9 Replies

The parousia and judgment of nations

Started by Internet_Troll in Eschatology. Last reply by Joseph Rehby Jul 6. 16 Replies

Preterist Networking

Started by Judy Peterson in Prayer Requests. Last reply by John Aug 8, 2016. 17 Replies

The 10 Tribes of Israel

Started by Internet_Troll in Questions and Best Answers We Can Give!. Last reply by Internet_Troll May 22, 2016. 9 Replies

Online Teaching Elders

Started by Eohn Rhodes in Eschatology. Last reply by Doug Dec 22, 2015. 4 Replies

Who is the abomination of desolation ?

Started by Stairway To Heaven in Eschatology. Last reply by Brother Les Dec 11, 2015. 3 Replies

Divine council

Started by Sharon Q in Eschatology. Last reply by Sharon Q Oct 3, 2015. 5 Replies

Marriage and Divorce Motif Between God and Israel

Started by Andrew Reish in Eschatology. Last reply by Brother Les Jul 5, 2015. 5 Replies

Millennium

Started by Mark Baker in Eschatology. Last reply by Internet_Troll May 4, 2015. 48 Replies

Fulfilled prophecies of Jesus

Started by joy sung in Eschatology Mar 22, 2015. 0 Replies

The End of the Old Covenat

Started by Internet_Troll in Eschatology. Last reply by Internet_Troll Jan 21, 2015. 60 Replies

© 2017   Created by Tim Martin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service