Archive for category: Reformed Apologetics

   Among the charges the Reformers leveled against Rome was that it was corrupt and heretical. The Reformers also leveled charges against the Anabaptists stating that they were schismatics and unjustified in leaving the church. This same charge was, simultaneously, being leveled against the Reformers by Roman defenders, labeling the Reformers as being schismatic for departing from the catholic faith. Setting

   I was listening to a debate while riding this morning (nothing new there). What was unusual was 1) it was cold (for Phoenicians, 43 and windy is cold, and for anyone, really, on a bicycle, that’s cold), and 2) the Christian in the debate illustrated for me yet once again how theology matters. Your theology determines your apologetic, by nature.

   What keeps God’s love from becoming mere maudlin sentimentality? What is the bulwark, the firm foundation, that keeps the love of God from falling into the abyss of universalism, and prohibits us from the idolatry of seeing God as the great grandfather in the sky, filled with woe and sadness at His inability to make us all happy? I suggest

   The Calvinist Gadfly posted this. It’s…uh…wow. Be prepared.

   Gene Cook did the first part of an interview with Dan Corner on his program yesterday. Here’s a link. I listened to it while riding today. It was a tremendous example of the massive contrast between viewing the gospel as a divine act, focused upon God, done to His glory, and being man-centered in your outlook. Dan Corner may be

   Right before I left for St. Charles a friend of mine sent me a URL to the Envoy Magazine web-board where medical doctor Art Sippo, one of the more famous folks on this blog (do a search if you really must), had begun a series on Calvinism. Now, remember, Art Sippo is the same non-exegete about whom I wrote in

   When I was in seminary I had the wonderful opportunity of writing a paper on the theology of Jonathan Edwards on the sovereignty of God. It was one of the most exciting studies I did at that time. The “Edwards” field is huge, with many modern writers and speakers addressing the topic. But if you’d like to get an engaging,

   Ergun Caner obviously got a few e-mails about the less-than overly humorous book cover noted below (remember, when the truth content takes a dive, so does the humor, or, for my UK brethren, humour). He has posted a short article on his blog about it. Once again, almost as if Dr. Caner lives to help us illustrate the incoherence and

   Ironic, I think, that within a few hours of our providing a reasoned refutation of he and his brother’s error-filled attacks upon straw-man versions of Calvinism, I am directed to this image posted, with almost no commentary whatsoever, on Ergun Caner’s blog. If the image size is a bit small (I’m limited to 400 pixels across in my current blog

   As we promised, we are making available an mp3 of the presentation made by myself and Tom Ascol at our national conference in Orlando. In that presentation we both gave a presentation summarizing what we wished to say in our opening statements in the debate-that-never-was. Then, we played clips from the sermons of Ergun and Emir Caner against their flawed

   Now, keep in mind, this fellow, himself a veteran of about every religious movement in Christendom at some point in his young life (“the wind-blown theologian”), was not at our conference. He was replying to the live blogging of the conference by some of our faithful folks. And his motivations are significantly less than above-board: he is just looking for

   For some reason, Paul Owen is addicted to my blog. It’s sorta sad, really. I have to be dragged kicking and screaming to his oxymoronically monickered blog, but for some reason he loves reading mine. I have lost track of how many times something has appeared under his name shortly after the topic came up here on this blog.    In

   A number of years ago I made a presentation on the impact of the Donatist Controversy and the Pelagian Controversy on the theology of Augustine. I have repeated the essence of that material a number of times in various venues. To encapsulate it, even the most brilliant of Christian theologians and leaders are impacted by the contexts in which they

   Yesterday on the DL I mentioned the appearance on Roman Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong’s blog of a brief statement on Romans 9. As much as I wanted to respond to it myself, I had to finish a project by last night (does a little after midnight count?). So I asked Colin Smith, who has written for this website before (you

   There is little need to comment much on Ergun Caner’s Q&A on his website regarding the debate. Any person who has read the materials Tom Ascol and I have provided can only shake his or her head in amazement at the behavior of Dr. Caner. He insists upon ignoring the signed agreement and the documentation of its existence, and it

Two students from Liberty University interview James White about the games that were played by the Caners that would lead to its eventual cancellation. Note:For those wondering about the interview I did on Monday with two students from Liberty, I have been informed that they will not be allowed to air it on WWMC. I am not shocked, of course.

   Just a few quick items before the Dividing Line this morning with Tom Ascol. Pastor McBrien will not be joining us, which disappoints me, but I am sure the situation in Lynchburg this day is quite volatile. It would not have had to have been.    Emir Caner has posted an article on his website. Emir titled his article “OCD: Obsessive

A few months ago I took more than a little heat for posting the e-mails that had been exchanged between myself and Ergun Caner (even though, as they show, he himself had simply requested that they be posted en toto, which I did). When they asked that the second “round” of e-mails be kept private, Tom Ascol and I said,

   I get the feeling Ergun Caner is spending a good deal of time at his computer today. However, all of the responses I have seen so far sort of neglect one little thing: the facts. Instead, he seems intent upon redefining theological terms and misrepresenting others, a sad consistency in what we have seen from the President of Liberty Seminary

   Personally, I think it is somewhat symbolic of not only the past eight months worth of attempted interaction, but of the entire situation in seeking to have meaningful debate and biblically-based dialogue with the opponents of God’s freedom in salvation in the Southern Baptist Convention. You’ve read the e-mail I posted that was sent to all parties; you’ve read the

   Dr. O’Donnell has verified with Dr. Falwell that there will be no debate on Monday the 16th. Dr. O’Donnell wrote, “Given that the two sides cannot agree on the terms of the debate in a spirit of compromise he concurs that the debate should not occur and therefore there will not be a debate on October 16 agreeing with the

   Some of you know Gene Cook had Greg Stafford on his program recently, and that they were joined by Bob Morey. The discussion focused on God’s exhaustive knowledge of all things. Many are unaware that Jehovah’s Witnesses are unorthodox even on the knowledge of God Himself. Their position bears a striking resemblance to Open Theism. In any case, it was

   The following e-mail was just sent to Emir Caner, Brett O’Donnell, and Ergun Caner. Gentlemen:    Thank you for finally writing, Dr. Caner. I believe a quicker reply would have saved us all a lot of trouble, but that is water under the bridge.    In essence, Emir, you have just said that while you worked with Tom to arrive at an

   I received an e-mail within ten seconds of 5pm EDT. In essence it states that the agreement that existed between the two sides since September has been abandoned unilaterally. Dr. Ascol is currently traveling back from Sao Paulo, Brazil. Unfortunately, he called me about five minutes before the response was sent to me, and since he was standing in a

   Brothers and sisters, the debate October 16th at the Thomas Road Baptist Church is in severe peril of not taking place. Unless I hear back from the other side by 5pm EDT that the agreement which was reached by all four participants in September remains in force (it has been arbitrarily rescinded without discussion by outside individuals), the debate will

   John Orlando, a sometimes-visitor to our chat channel, has posted a very interesting article here. I found it interesting not because it is complimentary of me, but for the citations it provides from Jerry Falwell relating to Reformed theology and John Calvin. Anyone who reads those comments from Falwell and compares them with what has been preached within the past

   Less than a month till “crunch time” for me. Two major debates in three days, the first, October 16th at the Thomas Road Baptist Church on the doctrines of grace, and then, only a few days later, October 19th, on Long Island, my debate with Bill Shishko on baptism! Then I only have a few days home before I head

   I am continuing my response to Frank Page during my Sunday School lessons at www.prbc.org, working right now very slowly and carefully through Ephesians 1, testing Page’s assertion that God predestines the how but not the who. This week we entered into the heart of the text, specifically addressing the “why” of predestination and election. So far we have found

“Dr.” White:    Thanks for the plug on your blog, however mendacious it is.    Please note, not for accuracy’s sake, but for your own future judgment, that although SermonAudio.com takes credit cards, my church does not sell anything on SermonAudio. And we do not sell anything in or at our church.    Such merchandising of the Gospel is offensive and sinful. And

   I may have mentioned this before, but I have been doing a series in Bible Study at PRBC on Frank Page’s book, Trouble with the Tulip. I started right after his election as president of the SBC, then I went off to the UK, and didn’t get back to it for a few weeks upon my return. I’ve taken a

   In our last installment in reviewing Tim Warner’s response to me on John 6 we entered into his assertion that the use of the word “see” in the present tense meant physical sight, so that Jesus was only referring to the Jews of that day believing in Him. Though Warner recognizes that “believing” is likewise a present tense participle (would