Archive for category: Reformed Apologetics

Took calls at the beginning of the show then had to rush, too much, I fear, through reading Calvin’s comments on John 6:37ff so as to contrast them with those of Paul Owen and his “Covenantal” (Eisegetical) reading of the same passage. Lord willing and I ever clear my desk so as to get to the John 6 project, I

The fresh, crisp air of Alaska, normally in the mid 50’s, was quite the contrast to the current 102 degrees here in Phoenix, as I knew it would be. But, such joyous experiences only last so long, and now it is back to so many other projects and tasks. My next trip will take me up to speak in the

Concluding Thoughts     God has no obligation to predestine anyone in the first place. The astonishing reality is not that God has only elected some to be saved but that he would elect anyone in the first place! So, if God has no obligation to save anyone, then why are there folks that object to God’s gracious choice in election?

Biblical Data that Teaches God Predestined Individuals     Does Scripture only teach that God predestined a plan and purpose and not individuals? Lets jump into the Biblical evidence, 2 Thessalonians 2:13 But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of

Guest blogger Alan Kurschner addresses “How to Refute the God only predestined a planof salvation and not a people objection to Election.” Placing this Objection in a Context     Many people are comfortable with allowing God to be sovereign in matters such as nature, answering prayer, ordaining a plan of salvation, etc. But for some reason they are averse to

Even the great distance of being in Skagway, Alaska, cannot protect me from rolling my eyes in simple disbelief and, I admit, no small amount of disgust, at the utter unwillingness of Dave Hunt to simply be honest in his continued attacks upon the sovereign kingship and freedom of God in salvation. I pull down my e-mail here on the

Last evening Tom Ascol of Founders Ministries led our “theology talk” time. At one point he mentioned a text that I had never seen in the light in which he placed it. Possibly that is because it is often passed over because it is in the “end stuff” of 1 Corinthians, I don’t know. But here’s the passage: 1 Corinthians

It is very late so I won’t go into details now, just a quick note to thank all of you for your prayers and support. The debate went far better than I could have possibly imagined. I was particularly happy with the interaction between myself and Dr. Crossan during the cross-examination. Kudos to Rich Pierce and all the gang who

I just received my copy of the July, 2005 issue of the Reformed Baptist Theological Review (www.rbtr.org). I have a new article in this issue titled “Textual Criticism and the Ministry of Preaching” (3-26). Not too late to subscribe!

It came in the mail today. I almost didn’t bother looking at it. I mean, who knows better that Dave Hunt has no interest in speaking truthfully about Reformed theology than I do? I’m overwhelmed with preparations and details in reference to next week’s events, so why even bother looking at Hunt’s new little anti-Calvinism book, the one he did

Back in 1999 (if my memory is serving me correctly) Mike O’Fallon contacted me and asked if I would speak at a conference at his church and then go on a 4-day, 3-night cruise thereafter. And so it started. Mike comments on how we started this aspect of the ministry. If you have followed the ministry of Dr. James White

I will not belabor a thorough line-by-line examination, but I will address a few more comments made by our author. In what seems to be an attempt to create a lack of confidence in hermeneutics, we are presented with the following assertion: Not only did the original authors of the New Testament generally avoid the sort of historical/grammatical method of

I began writing an article in response to a “reformed Catholic” who took aim at John Samon’s article posted 7/28, and wrote a few paragraphs before Mike Porter asked if he could respond, so I thankfully handed the task to him. But I had already sent the first few paragraphs to John, so, I include them here, followed by the

In November of 2002 I wrote the following e-mail to the editor of the BaptistFire website: Greetings: My name is James White. I am an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church, the director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, and an author. I wrote a full rebuttal of Norman Geisler’s Chosen But Free titled The Potter’s Freedom, am currently writing

I was directed to yet another blast at “hyper Calvinism” by a Southern Baptist just a few days ago, and now Tom Ascol has started posting a thorough reply at the Founder’s blog. Why is it that the opponents of Reformed theology 99.99% of the time have to rely upon straw men? If these folks really believe what they say,

Incorrigible. That’s the only term I can come up with. It does not matter how many times Dave Hunt does the theological and scholarly equivalent of a face-plant as he is refuted and shown to be in simple error over and over and over again. He just refuses to learn.   Hunt has now released a new book on Calvinism,

Once again we have been given further evidence of the damage done by embracing inherent contradiction (aka “reformed Catholicism,” which is neither) in one of the most amazing articles I’ve cast eyes upon in…days. Kevin Johnson, who has lately been keeping himself at the top of Phil Johnson’s blog spotting escapades by arguing about coffee and alcohol, attempted a broad-minded,

A few weeks ago I commented on Johnny Hunt’s sermon prior to the Southern Baptist Convention regarding election. Here’s an SBC take on the same sermon, replete with links and pictures.

My copy of the July/August 2005 Modern Reformation magazine came today. It is on the Emergent Church movement. I was thumbing through it and ran across a “bullet” quote that struck me: The Emergent movement has discovered something I think that the prior generation has forgotten. There needs to be a connection between doctrine and practice. One can well wonder

There is much I could say about what I am about to post, but to be honest, I think just letting the words speak for themselves is more than enough. Any honest person who knows my work will “hear,” and everyone else I just can’t worry about. The following all appeared in the space of three days on the Envoy

The reason all major English translations do not produce the tortured, first-year Greek rendering Lavender offers is simple: they recognize the common use of the subjunctive in these sorts of conditional sentences. John uses this kind of construction frequently, and consider the utter mess it would make of the language to use Lavenders artificial translation: John 3:2 this man came

Every few months someone will ask, “Have you seen this site?” and will drop www.crisispub.com on me in e-mail or in our chat channel. And I always sigh and say, “Yes, years ago. Nothing new.” But, since the author of the material, “Malcolm Lavender, Litt.D.” fills his writings with repetitive, obscure references to Greek, few are able to critically analyze

While my focus is primarily upon the issue of Roman Catholic inclusivism for the debate tomorrow night, I couldn’t help but run into an e-mail written to the Internet Monk regarding his former view that “Calvinism is Cool,” asserting just the opposite. It was referred to under the incredible title, “Finally Some Honesty about Calvinist Baptists” from a former “Calvinist

Phil Johnson of Grace to You, Grace Community Church, a speaker at our Conference last year, and a generally all around good guy, has finally succumbed and joined the blogosphere. If you’ve only seen Phil in suit and tie, you have to check out the Hawaiian version on the blog. I’ve already added the RSS feed to my Sage list.

Charles Haddon Spurgeon once said, “As the salt flavors every drop in the Atlantic, so does sin affect every atom of our nature. It is so sadly there, so abundantly there, that if you cannot detect it, you are deceived.” The great works of Christians down through the centuries are filled with the same testimony: man is the slave of

The perfection of Christ’s work of salvation—from the reality of God’s eternal decree, the deadness of man in sin, the effectiveness of His substitutionary death in behalf of the elect, to the application in time by the Spirit of God—is the sole and only basis of any consistent doctrine of perseverance or “eternal security.” Every system that reduces the work

Yesterday I began replying to the comments found in the May, 2005 “Partners in Grace” publication from the Grace Evangelical Society. I conclude my remarks in this entry. Wilkin noted: He criticized me for being overly concerned about works-salvation. I responded by saying that the reason he wasn’t overly concerned about works-salvation is because his view of faith is works-salvation.

Over the years I have chosen to allow listeners to debates to decide for themselves regarding presentation, behavior, and substance. Many times I have not even had to say a word: the behavior of a Tim Staples, or a Robert Sungenis, has said all that needed to be said. The few times I have commented I have done so because

Different site, same stuff. ReformedCatholicism.com is gone, now we have in its place, www.communiosanctorum.com (Latin is so much more classy than English could ever be, of course). OK, the good things: love the template. I want one like that. Nay, I demand it! OK, so I don’t have much control over that. But I do like it, though, if you

I read this sermon over dinner last night, and was so blessed I had to invite others to re-read it. Yes, it’s the one Hunt and O’Guinn and others didn’t bother to read before slaughtering it, which only makes it worth the read all the more. Follow the link for the whole thing, but for those without a lot of

For those of you who get Bob Ross’ e-mail updates, yes, I know he’s still on the warpath. I feel for him, but decided last year that he is beyond correction, and in light of his encouragement of Wilkin’s efforts, and his manifest ignorance of Wilkin’s views, and his continued comments about a debate he did not see or hear