Only a 2G2P2P D'ist would pee on Holford's victory against Payne by showing the bone-crushing force of God's wrath predicted by Christ in that generation. And did I mention it was a victory? It caused many in England to ignore Payne's total trashing of the Bible in 1805, so thoroughly, that when the Huxleys resumed the battle against the Bible, they did not dare touch the destruction of Jerusalem. Almost to excess against Payne: he wasn't even allowed to continue publishing in England.
But only D'ists would minimize that, led here at the forum by a D'ist know it all.
Sometime ago, I was having lunch with a books based Madist.
In other words, a Madist who's so called understanding of Mad was books based.
Without his books, he could neither prove his assertions, nor go beyond to learn how to PROPERLY study a thing out for himself THROUGH THE SCRIPTURE ALONE...
He introdoces me to the waitress and asks her to share her testimony with me.
Off she goes...into how that she was a former this, and a former that...until she met Jesus...
That is you, Interplanner - having to rely on the empirical for your "faith."
You are a Charismatic.
You just don't know it.
As was Holford, in his version of your same need for empirical evidence...ignorance.
As is anyone who looks outside the completed Canon of Scripture for some sort of an empirical "evidence" of "God at work" this side of "that which is perfect."