Tuesday, September 23, 2014

Oh, No, James White is mad!

Here is the email I got from James White and the response that I sent back to him. My responses are in red:
Mr. Anderson:

I am giving you an invitation to defend your statements in your recently posted “sermon” (hard to call it that in any meaningful fashion).  You can come to the studio and we can directly discuss your assertions.  Of course, I will have the actual recordings cued up, so you can explain your direct and documented lies to the audience.  Such as:

1)  identifying a sunday school lesson on how to engage the culture in answer to the advent of homosexual marriage as a “sermon.”
 1. The CD was handed to me and characterized as a "sermon" by the person who handed it to me.
2)  claiming I was projecting the picture, which had been all through the media, of the first “gay marriage” ceremony at the US Air Force Academy when the recording plainly shows that was not the case;
 2. Are you denying that you displayed a picture of 2 men kissing during the lesson in question? It is clear from the audio that you did so.

3)  using the first two obvious lies as the basis of calling me a “pervert”
3. See above.
4)  telling your audience the Christian response to homosexuality is “stone them” (I guess 1 Cor 6:9-11 isn’t in your KJV?)
4. See Leviticus 20:13 and Romans 1:32  

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." - Leviticus 20:13

"Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." - Romans 1:32

5)  selectively using portions of the interview to falsely portray the idea that I was running from your heretical views of Jesus going to hell, when, as everyone knows, we had discussed it fully, and it was the end of a 2.5 hour session?
5. I released the whole interview, so it is obviously not my goal to mislead anyone about our interaction. We never tried to portray you as "running away." If some people came to that conclusion, that is their problem. That scene wasn't even in the movie by the way. It was only in a trailer to get people interested in the movie. You can't expect a short trailer to provide context. It's a trailer!
6) lying to your audience by saying the basis of my understanding of gehenna/hades/hell is the Talmud, when I simply pointed out the consistency between the NT usage and the Jewish understanding of that day, and then
 6. I didn't lie to the audience. You appealed to the Mishna (which is part of the Talmud) as a legitimate source for understanding the Biblical doctrine of Hell. You then mocked me for "not accepting those sources." Again, it is a moot point since the full interview is online for all to see. I think it has already been viewed over 20,000 times, so your statements are available for all to see.
7) adding to your lies by then deceptively switching to a screaming proclamation that MODERN Jews don’t believe in hell (as if that is relevant).
7. Modern Orthodox Judaism is based upon the teachings of the Talmud (including the Mishna). The Talmud (which is what you were appealing to) itself denies the doctrine of Hell as we know it (i.e. we as Christians). Denying the Biblical doctrine of eternal Hell is not unique to modern Judaism. It is based in the Talmud, which goes back to the time of Christ in its oral form, although it wasn't written down until about 500 years later. The Talmud contradicts the Bible's teaching on Hell. Modern Judaism is just a continuation of the same doctrine.
You see, Steven, that kind of fist-pounding, screaming, pulpit-kicking insanity works real well on weak-minded zombified people, but it really falls apart fast under cross-examination when you don’t get to control the conversation.  So you know well you could never defend the slanderous display you put on behind that pulpit.  But I will be happy to demonstrate that.  My next program will be focused upon my upcoming trip to South Africa, where I will be lecturing at North West University and doing a number of debates with Muslims, including at least one in a mosque.  I return mid October, and will gladly arrange to have you join me, in studio, to answer for your public statements.  Are you ready?  Will you stand behind your statements?

By the way, though I truly doubt you care at all, here is an actual sermon (you know, in a church service?) on the subject, one of the 80 sermon series working through the exegesis of the book of Hebrews.  Any honest person, if he were actually seeking to critique me on the matter, would choose this, not a sunday school lesson.
 Regarding your last statement, I didn't "choose" a sermon by you. Someone handed me a sermon CD and asked me to listen to it, so I did. They didn't hand me an assortment to choose from.

 After sending this email I learned from him that apparently he had not displayed the image of 2 queer men kissing, but that rather he had displayed the URL where the photo could be viewed by those who wanted to see it. Apparently this was so all the creepy Calvinist perverts could look at it in the privacy of their homes. It sounded to me like he was displaying the image itself on the audio CD I was listening to because I guess they were pulling up the picture for themselves, so they could copy the URL onto the board. I wasn't "lying" since I was speaking what I believed to be the truth based on the audio I heard. Now that I hear Dr. White's explanation, I acknowledge my error. It still doesn't change my basic point: viewing or sharing such a picture is perverted, both of which he was doing.

Also be sure to watch the video below that got James White so mad and prompted him to write this email. Notice, that James White doesn't even address the fact that he used no Bible in the first half hour of what he characterized online as a "Bible Study." I could only stomach the first half hour, so I'm not sure what was in the second half. The following video was made by a channel called "SonsofThunder."


Derek said...

Sunday School lessons should have bible verses to emphasize its points...Hebrews 4:12 explains why you want to reference Gods word.
It took 31 minutes for Mr. White to reference Matt 19, which is a ridiculous use of listener time for a christian to waste on the topic of gay marriage. Toastmasters has classes on getting to the point.

Mr. Anderson did violate Proverbs 18:13 & explained his error in this blog regarding the photo.

I listened to both Mr Whites discussion on marriage from his blog(link below) & Mr. Anderson points.
The primary issue w Mr. White's biblical lesson is that reasoning/logic took up most of it as pointed out.
For a Sunday school church audience, this is no better than watching Joel Osteen on Sunday who likely has more than the 1 or 2 bible verses that Mr. White referenced. If he were speaking in a public school/university classroom or on a college debate team, this lesson “might be worthwhile”.

This is a hot topic for society & as Mr. Anderson is correct in pointing out the lesson lacked biblical references for which there are many to bring up. Its stunning that Mr. White ( who is a bible translator/scholar/author/professor, etc) would
say that this is a “useful discussion of how to address the homosexual issue” without referencing the bible in the majority of his lesson. -http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php/2014/09/23/

I've heard pastors (w substantially less experience or a Doctorate )
speak w greater biblical authority on this subject. Proverbs 15:31(Explained nicely here- http://www.letgodbetrue.com/proverbs/commentaries/15_31.php)
provides a lesson in the attitude someone being rebuked should have.

Putting aside ego, vanity, & pride is humbling and the right way for a Christian to respond when corrected.
Mr. Anderson your absolutely right in calling out Mr. White for speaking on a subject that bible condemns & not addressing it directly as a christian leader is supposed to.

JK said...

"I guess 1 Cor 6:9-11 isn’t in your KJV?"

"Your KJV"? That's the smug attitude you can expect from Mr. White and his Calvinist cohorts. As opposed to what? The NASB, which butchers God's Word? There's a way to tell what is and what isn't God's Word; it's called the Holy Spirit. I can't say for sure whether Mr. White has it or not. I would lean toward the latter.

Well done in rebuking him.

Anonymous said...

re: James White pic: Was that a coat of many colours (Gen 37:7) or him that weareth the gay clothing (James 2:3)?

Of course I inconveniently jest.

But I jest not when I also say well done Pastor Anderson. Always nice to see James White reduced to shutting down the forum, putting his fingers in his ears, throwing a tantrum, being catty, booting the camera crew, etc. - over his abiding hate of the Authorized Version.

So let him stammer on about his hate of the KJV and James White can have his revised edition of the New Internationalist Latest Double Standard Version in Slang English, he makes a wondrous foil, at least.

David said...

I notice that Anderson didn't acknowledge Dr. White's invitation to come on the Dividing Line.

I think Anderson knows better; he was clearly in over his head during the interview with Dr. White.

sanderson1611 said...

David, I responded to James White and told him I would come on the show, but he wrote back that he didn't want me to come.

Jason Wolfe said...

James White is an amusing character. He doesn't like being insulted by you in your sermon, so he responds by insulting you in his email. If it's wrong for you to do it, why is it okay for him to do it?

I also enjoyed his shameless bragging at the end about how he's going to Africa do debate Muslim's (even in a mosque!), as if you care! He's trying to shame you, and make it seem like he does so much more for God than you!

How many souls has he won? None! He doesn't even believe the gospel!

I'm also not surprised that he uninvited you to his show. He seems to have a habit (especially when it comes to KJV Onlyists) to challenging people, and then when people accept his change he withdraws it.

Anonymous said...

re: "He doesn't even believe the gospel!"

From his interviews, I think he highly regards (his scholarship's worshipful opinion of the earliest manuscripts found, by accredited scholars, to date, at present, so far, right now, at least) "the" (the - in a statistical, scientific sense) gospel.

But if they dig out a slightly earlier mummified crocodile and crack open that croc, and out rolls a more truncated papyri - or one with some other gospel, I think we can guess which croc Doc James White will go with, too. But who knows?