A while back in my response to Mark Bonocore’s errors regarding Irenaeus and a few other matters, I noted his association with Dr. Art Sippo, a medical doctor and Roman Catholic “apologist” of sorts (if angry ad-hominem and blustering denunciation can be equated with doing apologetics). I first encountered Sippo in Toledo, Ohio in 1991. It does not look like his behavior has improved a lot since then. This afternoon as I was continuing the wonderful process of re-installing dozens and dozens of programs (and flirting with disaster as I hunted down every reference to “Norton” in my registry) someone in channel mentioned that Sippo had posted a “review” of my book, Scripture Alone, at amazon.com. Now, for years I have rolled my eyes as my opponents have posted nasty reviews on Amazon. It is so utterly childish, so infantile, to pretend these screeds are “reviews.” The review function at Amazon, in these cases, does nothing but provide an opportunity for folks to vent, or more often, spew their hatred of myself, or more importantly, for the gospel and the truth. So, I went over and read Sippo’s “review.” It was so absurd, so poorly written, that I decided I would not even bring it to Amazon’s attention. Anyone who has read the book cannot help but realize Sippo hasn’t, or, if he has, he is desperately dishonest. In either case, of course, it is not his intention to impact those who have read it: he is seeking to keep others from doing so. So, here’s Sippo’s review. Just remember to close your mouth when you are done.
In this book Mr. White merely asserts his private opinion about the nature of the Bible but fails to give a single complelling (sic) reason for accepting his views other than theolgical (sic) preference. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. White provides none of this.
he (sic) whole book acan (sic) be summmed (sic) up as follows: “If you want to beleive (sic) my theological conclusions, then you have to accept my premises.” Using this he tries to confirm people in their prejudices and does not allow for any disageement within the house of faith.
Mr. White assumes a lot about the Bible without any grounding or proof. There is a good reason for this. In typical Protestant fashion, he has divorced himself from historic Christianity and its witness to the Scritures (sic). Consequently, he cannot with integrity appeal to the authroity (sic) of tradition in support of his views. He makes some mention of the authority of the Bible in the pre-Deformation Church but fails to give the corresponding evidence that Tradition and the “Regula Fidei” were also held to be norms of faith by the very people he quotes.
A far better treatment of this topic is an appendix on ‘sola scriptura’ in the book “Retrieving the Tradition and Renewing Evangelicalism: A Primer for Suspicious Protestants” by Dr. Daniel H. Williams. Dr. Williams is an acknowledged international expert on the Arian Controversy and has a REAL doctorate from an accredited university. His short appendix totally undermines the idea that ‘sola scriptura’ ever represented sound Christian teaching.
