A cult teacher by any other name
Puffed up with knowledge and shallow understanding James White is a typical cult teacher. He refuses to debate people who can show him up, then sends his followers to robotically repeat his warmed-over Counter-Reformation Satanic assault on God's Word pure and whole.
Currently at the PuritanBoard White's followers are making another concerted assault, and few of the Christians over there are able to see what is going on.
The few who one suspects are capable of discerning what is going on are not explaining it to the others or just pointing it out. This is because they know they'll be banned if they do.
Why be on a forum that bans you if you tell the truth, Christian?
By the way, a note to Steve Rafalsky: you're being a respecter of persons in your rebukes of defenders of God's Word, pure and whole (the Masoretic and Received Text) and your indefensible defense of a wicked sophist and corrupter of the Word of God like James White (you know better, Steve), and you are doing it under a guise of pious, holier-than-thou lecturing that is sickening. Wake up to this in yourself.
2 Comments:
Hello c.t.,
Came across your blog googling my name. Although I do effectively defend the TR and KJV against detractors, I differ with you re James White. Do you have some history with him — or with the PuritanBoard over him — that moves you to speak of him so? If one who is a genuine brother in Christ holds a view I deem erroneous and destructive, I go after the view to demolish it, but I spare the brother, for Christ's sake, and in His love.
There are godly men — preachers and teachers — who use the Critical Text, and the Lord anoints their ministries notwithstanding.
I have taken on White (at PB) and one of his followers, but it takes text critical work to go after his errors. Do you attack the man instead of his errors? Can you not take down his errors?
What the admins at PB did in "banning" some discussions (per your post above) was come down on ungodly rhetoric — reviling / railing as in 1 Cor 5:11 and 6:10 — which both the CT and TR/KJV camps were using. Paul says that sin is so wicked that those who regularly practice it are to be "put away" from people of God.
The sword I wield — "a right Jerusalem blade" — I seek to keep clean of the satanic filth of reviling, so that it may cut clean, even as the Spirit of God empowers it. A filthy sword cuts only its wielder.
When I go after the detractors of the TR/KJV I seek to do it effectively, and win others to the truth of the matter by both cogent defense/offense and winsome conduct, even in the heat of battle.
When I see a brother sinking into wisdom that is not from above, but is "earthly, sensual, devilish" (James 3:15), I'll call him on it, as I did in the thread I gather you're referring to:
http://www.puritanboard.com/f63/wcf-1-8-ct-40915/
If a man purports to defend God's Word, but does it unlawfully — with reviling — yes, I'll rebuke him. For all the damage he does with his defense of the CT, White is still a brother, unless you would place a view of Scripture — however correct or incorrect it be — above faith in the Savior and His blood shed for the likes of us. I could fellowship with White over a meal while discussing our differences, in the spirit of love.
Am I "holier than thou" in taking this approach? Or just plain holy, which is commanded us?
Steve Rafalsky (at PuritanBoard, Jerusalem Blade)
Pretty hard for me to accuse you of anything untoward in debate (me being a bit bi-polar on my soapbox, anonymous over here). I regret my language all the time. But at the time I am using it I am usually coming out of environments where the atmosphere has been jacked up to such levels by the other side. White for instance very much enjoys mocking us who hold to the texts received by the Church of which Christ is King and not constructed by man.
I notice some Christian internet apologists take on a similar - if not so wildly bad language - tone because they spend so much time in the environment of atheists who mock them and faith relentlessly. It's hard to shake that off. I must say I find White to be similar to such atheists when he is being his usual dishonest and sophistical self on the manuscripts issues. He likes to yank chains. Muslims and atheists do the same.
Post a Comment
<< Home