Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

James White

G

GOD'S ARMY

Guest
I was introduced to some writing by Mr. James White who doesn't have much good to say about my faith, but I was also surprised to hear what he had to say on Catholicism. What do you all think of this guy? I don't know if the link will come up, but http://aomin.org/

By the way, Daniel Peterson (in my opinion) is a very intelligent man who won't engage in White's rhetoric so he now has a personal grudge.
 
GOD'S ARMY said:
I was introduced to some writing by Mr. James White who doesn't have much good to say about my faith, but I was also surprised to hear what he had to say on Catholicism. What do you all think of this guy? I don't know if the link will come up, but http://aomin.org/

By the way, Daniel Peterson (in my opinion) is a very intelligent man who won't engage in White's rhetoric so he now has a personal grudge.

*********
Hi Elijah here:

Let me just be up front & clear (I hope) ok? These folk do not interest me as far as my thinking on the question you pose. What the Bible (THE WORD OF GOD) says is for me. And it states plenty! :wink:

Now: Denominations are 'FOLDS'. Inside of these denominations ARE SOME OF CHRIST'S PEOPLE. HE SAY'S SO!! John 10:16 & Rev. 18:4. Also the CHURCH was started by the OFFSHOOT of His OWN! OK?? See Matt. 10:5-6.
So the question needs to be asked, are the DENOMINATIONS (FOLDS) Christian? Israel BECAME D-E-S-O-L-A-T-E (Matt. 23:38) of Christ! Were they still in Christ's GRACE? (Heb. 11:13) No way, but still, 'few' would leave to follow Christ in time. But, we are talking of the FOLD. Who do you suppose took over when Christ was put out??? We do remember Saul of Tarsus, & his evil work, what fold was he in membership with? (see a comparison in Rev. 3:9 for a whole fold)

But the Word in John 10:16 was.. 'other sheep, not of this FOLD, them also MUST I BRING..." Well, if these, or this other fold had Christ in it, or them, why must He BRING THEM OUT OF IT?? And seeing that He is NOT IN THESE FALSE FOLDS, who is?? And can any true Christian say that these are Christian by ANY STRETCH of the WORD OF GOD?? :sad :crying:

Then: The bottom line is that any TRUE SHEEP that are 'yoked' in membership of [any] denomination, & is supporting it with God's tithes & offerings while he knows that there are ones living in open sin doctrine/wise, (false known teaching) or having OPEN sinners as members living in sin, he has a eternal life or eternal death DECISION to make! See Rev. 18:4

That SEPERATES the Saint from the Fold, huh?? Now, is this FOLD CHRISTIAN? Not on your life! See Rev. 17:5
 
Alpha and Omega Ministries is unashamedly Reformed in its theology. Dr. White is an elder of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. While such a stand is not overly popular in the Church of the late 20th Century, we are convinced that the Reformed emphasis upon the sovereignty of God, His immutable character and purpose, the deadness of man in sin, and the freedom of God's grace in Christ Jesus, not only provides the only consistent and meaningful response to the errors of our day, but is the most consistent, pure, biblical understanding of divine revelation.

According to their website Jas. White is "Unashamedly" Reformed in its theology!

This neither a heretic, nor an infallible apologist makes him. We can agree or disagree with him.
 
I was just wondering what you all thought of the guy and the things that he says.
 
GOD'S ARMY said:
I was just wondering what you all thought of the guy and the things that he says.

White is a very honest writer. He always backs up his position with solid facts. There are no empty accusations in his books. If he says someone did something or said something, they DID. He not only can prove it, he does prove it, because the footnotes and documentation sections at the back of his books are often as long as the text of the book itself.
 
If I'm not mistaken, God's Army is a Mormon. James White does a good job of attacking the Mormon church which maybe the cause of the bias in his post.

Dr. James White is solid.
 
God's Army asked:
I was just wondering what you all thought of the guy and the things that he says.

I heard him once on the "Bible Answer Man" radio broadcast - debating with another gentleman over predestination. It was difficult to listen to . . . as it was two men calling themselves Christians, arguing about words and ideas that Scripture doesn't seem to say enough about to draw an absolute conclusion.

I've only read one book of his titled, "The Forgotten Trinity". He makes some statements in there that, in my opinion, "Go beyond what is written" (cf. 1 Corinthians 4:6).

For example, in the book he says; "Think of it this way, in eternity past God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, each voluntarily took on the role that each would play in the redemption of man". (My paraphrase - a friend has the book right now).

That statement would seem to fly in the face of Hebrews 5:1-5 which clearly says (specifically verse 5) - that Jesus did NOT take the honor to "become a high priest" unto himself . . . rather, God called him to it.

Your true brother in the faith,

David Murphy
 
Hi, David:
The arguement over the 'forknowledge of the GodHead' is truely [one of] necessity for some. (not the ones doing the arguments, and God's book is one with arguments!)

A verse that stands out explaining your verses is missed by most perhaps? The verse is from. Rom. 4:17's last part of rhe verse:

"... even God, who quickeneth the dead, [and calleth those things which *be not as though they were]." So the bottom line is that one needs to be sure when reading Heb. 1:5's "Thou art my Son, [THIS DAY] have I begotton thee? And again, [I WILL BE] to Him a Father, and He [SHALL BE to me a Son.]" --what day is meant?

In other words, what is the time/frame of this Truth?

Then: "I [WILL DECLARE THE DECREE]: the Lord hath said unto me, [THOU ART MY SON; [THIS DAY HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE]." Psalms 2:7

Perhaps that helps? When was this day? :fadein:

The question for me is & has always been, how much do I LOVE MY MASTER? See Matt. 4:4 for a clue. How much can one learn seems to be questioned?? (who was Christ before human birth? 1 Cor. 10:1-4 & Acts 7:37-38 seem's VERY CLEAR?)

Psalms 77:13 says: "Thy way, O God, [is in the sanctuary], ..."
I wonder if the folk here remember the Vail that seperated the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place going rent at Christ's death? If a person is to understand Rev. they need a good report on this study, for from start to finish Rev. has many of these articles of furnishing's in the book.

The 'Everlasting Gospel' of Rev. 14:6 will never have complete understanding by one believing that it is 'finished' at the Vail! There is the other side still in progress!

---Elijah
 
Hebrews 5

Quote: The glory of His Person, manifested as man on the earth, and that of His function, are both of them plainly declared of God: the first, when He said, "Thou are my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Psalm 2); the second, in these words, "Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedec." (Psalm 110) Such then in both personal and official glory is the High Priest , the expected Messiah, Christ.
But His glory (although it gives Him His place in honour before God, and consequent on redemption, so that He can undertake the people's cause before God according to His will) does not bring Him near to the miseries of men. It is His history on earth which makes us feel how truly able He is to take part in them. "In the days of his flesh," that is , here below, He went into all the anguish of death in dependence on God, making His request to Him who was able to save Him from it. For, being here in order to obey and to suffer, He did not save Himself. He submitted to everything, obeyed in everything, and depended on God for everything.
he was heard because of His fear. It was proper that He who took death on Himself, as answering for others, should feel its whole weight upon His soul. He would neither escape the consequences of that which He had undertaken (compare Chapter 2), nor fail in the just sense of what it was thus to be under the hand of God in judgment. His fear was His piety, the right estimation of the position in which sinful man was found, an what must come from God because of it. For Him however to suffer the consequences of this position was obedience. And this obedience was to be perfect, and to be tried to the utmost.
He was the Son, the glorious Son of God. But thought this was so, He was to learn obedience (and to Him it was a new thing), what it was in the world, by all that He suffered. And, having deserved all glory, He was to take His place as the glorified Man  to be perfected; and in that position to become the cause of eternal salvation (not merely temporal deliverances) to them that obey Him; a salvation which taken in consequence of His work of obedience, saluted by God as "High Priest after the order of Melchizedec."
That which follows to the end of Chapter 6 is a parenthesis which refers to the condition of those to whom the epistle is addressed. They are blamed for the dullness of their spiritual intelligence, and encouraged at the same time by the promises of God; the whole with reference to their position as Jewish believers. Afterwards the line of instruction with regard to Melchizedec is again resumed.
For the time, they ought to have been able to teach: nevertheless they needed that some one should teach them the elements of the oracles of God  requiring mild instead of meat.
We may observe that there is no greater hindrance to progress in spiritual life and intelligence than attachment to an ancient form of religion, which, being traditional and not simply personal faith in the truth, consists always in ordinances, and is consequently carnal and earthly. Without this people may be unbelievers; but under the influence of such a system piety itself-expended in forms  makes a barrier between the would and the light of God: and these forms which surround, preoccupy, and hold the affections captive, prevent them from enlarging and becoming enlightened by means of divine revelation. Morally (as the apostle here expresses it) the senses are not exercised to discern both good and evil.
But the Holy Ghost will not limit Himself to the narrow circle and the weak and futile sentiments of human tradition, nor even to those truths which, in a state like this, one is able to receive. In such a case Christ has not His true place. And this our epistle here develops.
Milk belongs to babes, solid food to those who are of full age. This infancy was the soul's condition under the ordinances and requirements of the law. (Compare Gal_4:1, seqq.) But there was a revelation of the Messiah in connection with these two states  of infancy and of manhood. And the development of the word of righteousness, of the true practical relationships of the soul to God according to His character and ways, was in proportion to the revelation of Christ, who is the manifestation of that character, and the center of all those ways. Therefore it is that, in Heb_5:12-13 the epistle speaks of the elements, the beginning , of the oracles of God, and of the work of righteousness; in Heb_6:1, of the word of the beginning, or of the first principles, of Christ.
John Darby
 
I, too, own The Forgotten Trinity by James White. I quite enjoy it and use it often. I find his reasoning and use of Scripture to be pretty solid. On his site I particularly like his responses to KJVO people, such as Gail Ripplinger (sp?).
 
Jason asked:
Hey Dave, are you a Mormon like God's Army?

No. I'm not a Mormon (Didn't realize God's Army was Mormon). But I do like Mormon's and enjoy talking with them very much . . .

In that sense, you're right to point out that I should have refrained from my phrase, "Your true brother in the faith" . . . since Mormon's [doctrinally] would by default exclude me from the category of being "truly saved". Likewise, I ultimately don't have anything spiritually in common with a Mormon - since they depend on factors beyond faith in Jesus Christ as the means of salvation. (I still think they're some of the nicest people one could ever meet).

As for my previous post - I just think James White can come off as somewhat presumptuous with his statements. (Of course, we're all capable of such).

Adios from beautiful New Mexico.
Peace in Him,
David
 
Free said:
I, too, own The Forgotten Trinity by James White. I quite enjoy it and use it often. I find his reasoning and use of Scripture to be pretty solid. On his site I particularly like his responses to KJVO people, such as Gail Ripplinger (sp?).

I love Dr. White's work and I'm a KJVOist!
 
Jason said:
If I'm not mistaken, God's Army is a Mormon. James White does a good job of attacking the Mormon church which maybe the cause of the bias in his post.

Dr. James White is solid.

True, but where is the bias? I didn't even say anything about him. I just said that he likes to jab my faith, which he does, but he also has a lot to say about Catholics. Most Christians I talk to are accepting, for the most part, of Catholics and I just wondered what everyone thought. The guy brings up some interesting points that to me are not compelling, but interesting. It's just a question. Answer if you like in as much detail as you like.
 
I do not believe that mr white has anything against catholics-persay, like many of us his argument is with the institution of the Roman Catholic Church, its hierarchy and leadership.

just as Jesus was not against the common Jewish folk, He was very outspoken against the Pharisses, Sadducees and religious leaders of His day. The hypocricy and falsehood of the Judaism of His day.
 
evanman said:
I do not believe that mr white has anything against catholics-persay, like many of us his argument is with the institution of the Roman Catholic Church, its hierarchy and leadership.

just as Jesus was not against the common Jewish folk, He was very outspoken against the Pharisses, Sadducees and religious leaders of His day. The hypocricy and falsehood of the Judaism of His day.

**********
If only a person reading this TRUTH could understand what you are saying!

It SEEMS SIMPLE, but man has become such a Laodicean brainwashed :robot: that they just do not comprehend, at least for long.

---Elijah
 
evanman said:
I do not believe that mr white has anything against catholics-persay, like many of us his argument is with the institution of the Roman Catholic Church, its hierarchy and leadership.

just as Jesus was not against the common Jewish folk, He was very outspoken against the Pharisses, Sadducees and religious leaders of His day. The hypocricy and falsehood of the Judaism of His day.

Fair enough, and a good explanation. Thanks
 
GOD'S ARMY said:
Jason said:
If I'm not mistaken, God's Army is a Mormon. James White does a good job of attacking the Mormon church which maybe the cause of the bias in his post.

Dr. James White is solid.

True, but where is the bias? I didn't even say anything about him. I just said that he likes to jab my faith, which he does, but he also has a lot to say about Catholics. Most Christians I talk to are accepting, for the most part, of Catholics and I just wondered what everyone thought. The guy brings up some interesting points that to me are not compelling, but interesting. It's just a question. Answer if you like in as much detail as you like.

We all jab your faith friend, we have to contend for 'the' faith.
 
Jason said:
We all jab your faith friend,

Really? I hadn't noticed.

we have to contend for 'the' faith.

There are a few things that followers of Christ are required to do. Contention is not one of them.
 
Jude 3, "Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.
 
Back
Top