James White answers DrAch

[Grasshopper]

http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=5482

A little advice for DrAch, next time have your facts straight before challenging Dr. White. White could have been charged with child abuse with this beat down.:laugh:

 

[DrJamesAch]

http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=5482

A little advice for DrAch, next time have your facts straight before challenging Dr. White. White could have been charged with child abuse with this beat down.:laugh:

And I answered James White to which he has YET to respond to!

http://dorightchristians.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/response-to-james-white/

My ORIGINAL post that White responded clearly stated that it could all be speculation and admittedly I did not have all the facts yet. So it's pretty easy to assume that one has a debate against a person who begins by admitting that their information may or may not be accurate or complete.

But then once White responded, I responded back with a clear set of facts, a clear renunciation of White's errors, and the best response he could give was on his Twitter account "I thought I could have a meaningful debate with a KJV Onlyist". Yet he seemed to have no problem when he thought he "had me". Now that I've responded, the best the White camp can do is critique my definition of "apologeticist" and "apologist" and ignore the rest of the facts in my response, including Lumpkin's assertion of White's claim that he was a professor at Golden State Baptist when GSB denies it, and the attitude he showed toward his sister when she told him about their father molesting her.

So I think you should get the entire picture first before YOU base your rhetoric on half the story

ANd you're right about "child abuse" seems to run in his family while he turns a blind eye to it when his sister needed help.

 

[Rippon]

And I answered James White to which he has YET to respond to!

http://dorightchristians.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/response-to-james-white/

My ORIGINAL post that White responded clearly stated that it could all be speculation and admittedly I did not have all the facts yet. So it's pretty easy to assume that one has a debate against a person who begins by admitting that their information may or may not be accurate or complete.

But then once White responded, I responded back with a clear set of facts, a clear renunciation of White's errors, and the best response he could give was on his Twitter account "I thought I could have a meaningful debate with a KJV Onlyist".

Your entire article has nothing to do with the topic of KJVOism. What a defense! :laugh:

 

[DrJamesAch]

Your entire article has nothing to do with the topic of KJVOism. What a defense! :laugh:

Wow Rippon! You finally said something I agree with! You're right. My article did NOT have anything to do with the KJVO, it never even started or ended that way. WHITE was the one made made it an issue merely because it is a KJVO website.

So it should be "What an accusation" instead of "what a defense".

 

[Grasshopper]

Peter Lumpkin as a source???:laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[Rippon]

Peter Lumpkin as a source???:laugh::laugh::laugh:

It could have been worse, he could have come up with Craig Daliessio!

 

[DrJamesAch]

Peter Lumpkin as a source???:laugh::laugh::laugh:

If you can explain and refute what Lumpkin pointed out, then go ahead and attack him as a source, I could care less. But, the evidence on the Columbia Evangelical Seminary website shows that White is a professor at Golden State, and not only does GS deny this, but White also says on his website that he will be invited to GS in the future of which GS stated they have no intentions to bring White on as a staff member.

So try critiquing the information instead of the source. If you can prove the information is wrong, then critique the source all you want

On second thought, if someone you think is a known liar, hypocrite, and false teacher tells you your house is on fire-just sit there because the source is obviously bogus.

 

[Grasshopper]

I’m not qualified to address sexual abuse” and yet James contends that he is not an expert on Islam. If you are not an expert on Islam, and yet engage in debates and write books about it,

You might want to listen again to the show. However, you Hyles types don't seem to let facts get in the way of your biased opinions.

White claims that just because he is a Calvinist doesn’t mean he SHOULD have knowledge about the events at SGM, and then tells me to ‘prove it’. Well at @ the 22 minute mark of the video, White admits that he has received several emails asking him why he hasn’t gotten involved and his claim that it is “utter stupidity” that anyone should assume he has a responsibility to get involved in ministries he is not involved in. If White admits to having received emails asking the same question, then I guess we just proved it!

Once again your Hyles mind can't comprehend. To have general knowledge of alleged wrong doings at a ministry is not the same as having intimate details of what really happened. How or why should he comment without knowing what happened? Just because you do this doesn't mean he should.

We do note that James has a Doctorate of Ministry which would be highly irregular for there not to be some course on pastoral counseling or some type of Biblical counseling, and thus it is ironic that James would claim that he is not qualified to speak about sexual abuse. He is also *an apologist that doesn’t have a PhD which is the degree that most apologists have. Nevertheless, Lumpkins asked White to answer some questions about this issue since there appears to be no apparent record of White being a professor at said college as stated in the many references cited by Lumpkins here. Perhaps White will do another show on this issue.

Are you seriously questioning White's work at Golden Gate? Are you really using the Calvinist hater Lumpkins as a credible source?*You are revealing much about yourself.

White denies that he ever had a debate with Dave Hunt. But here, is a YouTube video hosted by James White titled, “Is Calvinism Biblical?” in which White is on the phone with a person named Dave Hunt (or perhaps in studio), the man sounds like the same Dave Hunt that I have seen in many other videos, and is the only Dave Hunt I know that has publicly argued against White’s views of Calvinism. Sounds like a debate between White and Hunt to me . This is the debate that White often refers to in claiming that Hunt admitted he was ignorant of the Reformers. Apparently, being an ANTI King James Onlyist affects people’s memory!

Do you even know what a Debate is? Do you know what apologist call a debate and what message board*posters call a debate are two different things. No, a phone interview is not a formal debate unless your last name is Caner.

If James White would take this kind of attitude toward his own sister about sexual abuse (perhaps because he’s “not an expert” on the subject) then in my opinion that speaks volumes about why he would be unwilling to speak out about the issues at SGM

Calvinist haters would rather join up with Catholics than honestly address an issue about a Calvinist. White has addressed this but is completely irrelevant to anything except of course for Catholics and Calvinist haters.

And no Mr. White, I have never been to any of your “big conferences” because I am not willing to PAY to see a minister give a message about the Bible.

Dude, you can't be serious. Listen again to the podcast, this time without your biases stuck in your ear.

Why don't you call in to his podcast, butI won't hold my breath.

 

[saturneptune]

The fact is, it is difficult to copy and paste during a live debate.

 

[DrJamesAch]

.

You might want to listen again to the show. However, you Hyles types don't seem to let facts get in the way of your biased opinions.

Will address the Hyles issue at the end.

Once again your Hyles mind can't comprehend. To have general knowledge of alleged wrong doings at a ministry is not the same as having intimate details of what really happened. How or why should he comment without knowing what happened? Just because you do this doesn't mean he should.

Typical White response, isolate one part while ignoring the pattern of ignoring sexual abuse in his own family.

Are you seriously questioning White's work at Golden Gate? Are you really using the Calvinist hater Lumpkins as a credible source?*You are revealing much about yourself.

Lumpkins wasn't the only source, the other source was Golden Gate's own website.

Do you even know what a Debate is? Do you know what apologist call a debate and what message board*posters call a debate are two different things. No, a phone interview is not a formal debate unless your last name is Caner.

Hunt was in studio with White. Regardless of whether it was studio or telephone, IT WAS A DEBATE. Playing semantics doesn't change the fact that James White denied ever having had any kind of debate with Hunt on this issue.

Your logic on this is asinine.

Calvinist haters would rather join up with Catholics than honestly address an issue about a Calvinist. White has addressed this but is completely irrelevant to anything except of course for Catholics and Calvinist haters.

So in other words, because his sister is a Catholic, she's lying about being sexually abused. Typical cover up attitude I've seen from FAR too many Baptists.

I don't have to JOIN anyone to point out that abuse is wrong. People like you are exactly the type of people that Jesus spoke of who passed by the injured man in the parable of the Good Samaritan.

you Hyles types

your Hyles mind

Now read the following articles I wrote about Hyles and Schaap, and then come back with your idiotic accusations.

Jack Schaap Sentencing Memo: Deceiver From The Beginning

Jack Schaap Sentenced To Twelve Years

Jack Hyles Legacy: Fact or Fiction?

The fact that you have no idea where I stand on Jack Hyles and Schaap is pretty hilarious that you resort to such an uninformed and ignorant slur which pretty much summarizes your credibility to critique anything else I say.

 

[DrJamesAch]

The fact is, it is difficult to copy and paste during a live debate.

Like the copy and paste that DHK called you out on (the one where you didn't post the source of the artile)..

 

[Winman]

I've listened to that Dave Hunt/James White debate before. Here it is;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q61K6ZITck4

 

[saturneptune]

Like the copy and paste that DHK called you out on (the one where you didn't post the source of the artile)..

Yes I did. Evidentially neither of you read my post. This thread tells much about you.

 

[DHK]

Yes I did. Evidentially neither of you read my post. This thread tells much about you.

You mean the article on faith?
I dissected that article statement by statement, demonstrating that faith could not be a gift given to the unsaved. Then, by your one statement, it seemed as if you hadn't even read the article on faith that you had actually posted.

 

[Grasshopper]

Typical White response, isolate one part while ignoring the pattern of ignoring sexual abuse in his own family.

Neither you or I nor Lumpkins has any idea what went on in the household. Yet you have already made up your mind...interesting. All based on White being a Calvinist.

Lumpkins wasn't the only source, the other source was Golden Gate's own website.

Okay, your reputation is on the line on this one. Either you are a liar or White.

Hunt was in studio with White. Regardless of whether it was studio or telephone, IT WAS A DEBATE. Playing semantics doesn't change the fact that James White denied ever having had any kind of debate with Hunt on this issue.

Your logic on this is asinine.

No, he denied having a debate not any kind of debate. He has numerous times mentioned his radio interview with Hunt, so why would he now try to deny it? You fail to understand what an experienced apologist means when he uses the term Debate.

So in other words, because his sister is a Catholic, she's lying about being sexually abused. Typical cover up attitude I've seen from FAR too many Baptists.

I have no idea what happened but apparently you think you do. Again nothing but a Lumpkins smear tactic when he can't go man on man with White. I see you taking the same road.

I don't have to JOIN anyone to point out that abuse is wrong. People like you are exactly the type of people that Jesus spoke of who passed by the injured man in the parable of the Good Samaritan.

Who did I pass by? What am I suppose to do? Slander as you do?

Now read the following articles I wrote about Hyles and Schaap, and then come back with your idiotic accusations.

"Hyles type" refers to a mind set found in many IFBrs. A mind set you display daily on this board.The fact he was a pitiful excuse for a preacher of the Gospel is beside the point. By the way, how many years did the Calvinist hating IFBrs cover up for the man?

The fact that you have no idea where I stand on Jack Hyles and Schaap is pretty hilarious that you resort to such an uninformed and ignorant slur which pretty much summarizes your credibility to critique anything else I say.

See comments above.

PS, where can I find that Caner-White debate you referenced?

 

[Herald]

The fact is, it is difficult to copy and paste during a live debate.

Isn't it though? That never stops the faux-Dr. When you are shameless you have no boundaries. Dr. White refuted the faux-Dr's libelous accusation (Dr. White never debated Ergun Caner), as well as giving him a grammar and syntax lesson.

 

[agedman]

and the attitude he showed toward his sister when she told him about their father molesting her.

James, you had no right to discuss this matter with White. There is no Scriptural warrant that you interfere. You are not part of the local assembly, you were not part of the family, and you are not privy to private conversations between family members other than the record given by the sister.

You followed NO Scripture principal when you spoke to him about the matter, and then to bring it to the public of the BB is a HUGE violation of Scripture.

I am not defending White nor the sister, but I will point to the sister's testimony that states that she did not know if James even knew or not, and that when he was told by her, apparently responded to her as someone who had already a history of rebellion - therefore perhaps not taking the allegations seriously.

If there is any further contact between you and White, I suggest that you humbly ask for his apology for bringing up matters that were none of your concern and interfering with the family dynamics in which you are totally a stranger.

 

[Iconoclast]

Isn't it though? That never stops the faux-Dr. When you are shameless you have no boundaries. Dr. White refuted the faux-Dr's libelous accusation (Dr. White never debated Ergun Caner), as well as giving him a grammar and syntax lesson.

Yes Herald someone with an anti-cal agenda is not concerned with truth but becomes a cowardly and shameless accuser of the brethren.For Ach to post such evil things when Dr. White is not here to speak directly to such lies is horrendous.

Grasshopper...thanks for posting this and further exposing Ach even though we see what he is about with his plagiarism and other antics.
I did not contact Dr.White with Ach's nonsense as he is busy and I did not want to waste his time responding to such garbage, Ach cannot get past anyone in here much less Dr. White.

retract,apologize,and retreat......:thumbs::thumbs:

 

[DrJamesAch]

Yes I did. Evidentially neither of you read my post. This thread tells much about you.

NO you didn't. http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2008734&postcount=48 . There was no citation for this. None. Zilch. Notta. PLAGIARISM

 

[DrJamesAch]

James, you had no right to discuss this matter with White. There is no Scriptural warrant that you interfere. You are not part of the local assembly, you were not part of the family, and you are not privy to private conversations between family members other than the record given by the sister.

You followed NO Scripture principal when you spoke to him about the matter, and then to bring it to the public of the BB is a HUGE violation of Scripture.

I am not defending White nor the sister, but I will point to the sister's testimony that states that she did not know if James even knew or not, and that when he was told by her, apparently responded to her as someone who had already a history of rebellion - therefore perhaps not taking the allegations seriously.

If there is any further contact between you and White, I suggest that you humbly ask for his apology for bringing up matters that were none of your concern and interfering with the family dynamics in which you are totally a stranger.

And yet you and every other Calvinist on here slander Non Calvinists who are not on this board to defend themselves. The double-standards of the Calvinists here is astounding.

Did James White contact Ergun Caner before he plastered his allegations all over the internet? No, he didn't. If we are going to act all pious here, then let's see the Calvinists call out James White for not following Matthew 18 before calling Caner out. Oh but wait, Calvinists only harp on Arminians and Non Calvinists.