Let me set a few things straight regarding Mr. Stafford’s recent comments on his website:
   1) mail@aomin.org is not a valid e-mail address. Period. It has never been used by me, it is not my personal e-mail, or anything else. In fact, it has not been in use since, as far as we can tell, the late 90s, and then it was not my e-mail, but a generic e-mail. It is currently not even in use, and, would not have even gotten into an accessible, let alone read, e-mail box in October of 2006.
   2) I have an e-mail dated 12/5/03 from Mr. Stafford addressed directly to my current, and private, e-mail address. Hence, he had it, but, according to what he has posted, did not use it on 10/7/06.
   3) I am not responsible for e-mails sent to e-mail addresses that I do not and never have used.
   4) I imagine Jeff Downs did not forward the e-mail since he saw the cc address, assumed it was valid, and went from there.
   5) Therefore, my statement was perfectly correct: I have not heard from Mr. Stafford directly. Mr. Rawe has called Mr. Pierce a number of times. At one point Mr. Pierce specifically asked Mr. Rawe “Does Greg have James’ e-mail address?” Mr. Rawe indicated he did. Evidently, he has forgotten it.
   6) Mr. Stafford does not seem to understand the concept of a “blog.” Sometimes I post long, multi-part articles here. Those are meant to provide full discussions and documentation of a particular subject. I have refuted men like Dave Armstrong or Art Sippo in such formats; I have responded to Islamic attacks upon the textual integrity of the NT in such a fashion; and I likewise invested a great deal of time responding to The Da Vinci Code in this format. These include citations, references, etc. However, I have not even pretended to address Stafford’s recent anti-Calvinism campaign on this blog. Anyone with a modicum of sense and balance can tell the difference between a single note referencing a URL and noting the claims of someone, and what is intended to be a response. Unlike Mr. Stafford, I am not nigh unto uni-topical. I deal with a wide variety of topics, and what I post here is not, obviously, always intended to be an in-depth expose or refutation. Mr. Stafford has had the amazing temerity to compare my brief, one-paragraph reference to him (including the URL to his statements) with my pointing out that Norman Geisler neglected, in an entire book on the subject of the alleged errors of Reformed theology, to actually exegete John 6:37ff! I guess I should not be surprised at this glaring mixture of categories, since it is, in fact, the hallmark of Stafford’s attempts at doing serious exegesis, especially in this area. But it is still beyond imagination that anyone could be so facile in their thinking as to compare a quick URL reference at the end of a longer blog article with the mistake of writing an entire book on a topic while neglecting to engage the most basic exegesis of one of the most important texts on the topic. Amazing is again a great understatement!
   So Mr. Stafford, I suggest you back up the truck, take a deep breath, calm yourself, and stop making absurd accusations against me before you derail any possibility of a meaningful debate at all. You had my e-mail address. I have the e-mail, and will post it, if you force me to, proving you had my proper e-mail address on 12/5/03. You sent your e-mail to an address that is not valid. I never saw it. Mr. Pierce has informed Mr. Rawe that I am waiting to hear from you and that long since 10/7. Neither you, nor he, have asked us, “Well, what about the e-mail I sent 10/7?” You know this to be the case, so please, stop trying to make it look like folks are “afraid” to debate you on this topic. Drop the hysterics, Greg. Now that you have posted your 10/7 undelivered, mis-addressed e-mail, I will download it, and, when I return from my current speaking engagements, respond to it.

©2022 Alpha and Omega Ministries. All Rights Reserved.

Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?