I just received Hunt’s January, 2005 Newsletter. At one point we read:
Question: James White, on his Alpha & Omega Ministries web page, said that you had “repeatedly agreed in the past” to a “live debate” with him but have gone back on your word and now refuse. What do you have to say?
Answer: “Repeatedly agreed in the past” to an oral debate? When? He refers to speaking to me at my book table at a conference just after publication of What Love Is This? We did indeed agree to a debate. Later, we agreed to do the debate in a book. Since that book was published, I never agreed to an additional debate. It would be redundant. I don’t know what that would accomplish. White continues to claim (as on our recent radio discussion) that I agreed to an oral debate and went back on my word. In fact, the only references to an oral debate have been one-sided false statements by White, claiming that I agreed to one.
My response: I never, ever agreed that the book would take the place of a public debate. While I was very concerned Hunt would do exactly what he is now doing (David King in our channel at the time the book idea surfaced directly said this was what he would do), I never, ever said, “OK, let’s not do a public debate, let’s just do a written one.” The fact of the matter is, Dave Hunt knows he cannot debate this subject against me. He cannot produce the mythical Hebrew originals of Acts prophecied by the Dead Sea Scrolls. He cannot exegete 1 John 5:1 or explain why it disappeared without notice from WLIT? He cannot allow himself to be exposed to the myriads of questions and citations we have documented here, for he knows in his heart of hearts he has no answers, and nobody he can call on can provide them to him, either. This is not a matter of speculation anymore: anyone familiar with the large amount of material we have posted here knows Hunt has no answers and hence this, and this alone, is why he will not debate. Period.
Ironically, in the next portion of the newsletter, Hunt goes after Rick Warren. I really can’t figure out what Hunt is trying to say, since he cites Warren quoting Acts 13:44, but then talks about “temple courts” in the NIV (which appears nowhere in the NIV in Acts 13 to begin with). Whatever it is he’s trying to say, for some odd reason, the Hebrew original of Acts 1-15, which only Dave and his Secret Hebrew Scholars have access to, is not referred to here! How easy it would have been to have the SHS’s produce a more “accurate” translation of whatever passage it is he is referring to, directly from the Mythic Hebrew, and that would have been enough to refute Warren right there! I wonder why he didn’t pull that out?
Remember, folks need to be asking Hunt about his “Dead Sea Scrolls, early church writers, Hebrew original of Acts 1-15 which renders the canonical text of Acts secondary and errant” claims in WLIT? His next two events are: Jan. 12, Berean Calvary Chapel, Kirkville NY, 315-656-7107 and Jan. 13-16, Calvary Chapel Finger Lakes, Farmington NY, 585-398-3550. If you are in the area, attend, and if given the opportunity, respectfully ask Mr. Hunt. Don’t let him dodge and duck: we want the specific portions of the Dead Sea Scrolls where the authorship of Acts is addressed. We want early church writers who specifically address the authorship of Acts 1-15 and say it was in Hebrew (all the comments about Matthew are, of course, utterly and completely irrelevant). And we want to know where we can see this Hebrew text, and, the names and teaching institutions of the scholars who “translated” this Hebrew text for Hunt. Nothing less than these specifics will do. Also, don’t let discussions of “Aramaicisms” or “Hebraisms” in Acts 1-12 throw you, either: that’s a completely different subject as well. Hunt needs to be held accountable for throwing out this kind of stuff.