James White misses the mark again

On his Dividing Line podcast James White is still defending himself against criticism that he is a dupe of Islamists.

So he just, rather comically because he did it very dramatically, made his ONE BIG POINT to his critics, and it's as off-the-mark as one can be regarding Christianity vis-a-vis atheism and Islam.

Here is the podcast. His big statement starts at the 45:10 mark (and I'm referring to the audio only link).

His big statement is this: you can't say Christianity and Islam have nothing in common because adherents of both are theists and theists share a common opposition to atheists.

OK. What is wrong with this statement? The problem with the statement is nowhere does the Bible pose atheism as the opposite or antithesis of faith. The Bible very clearly poses idol worship as the antithesis of faith. Atheists are idol worshipers of one kind or another (in our day if not the planet then the centralized, collectivist state and some form of utopian ideology will be their main idol). Muslims also are idol worshipers (a 7th century tribal moon god in the form of a black rock which ultimately is a front for Satan himself). Muslims worship a very big false idol, they worship Satan himself. And Satan has poured his attention into Islam and cultivated Islam to make it his biggest front in this world. Islam and Cultural Marxism, which today are going hand-in-hand in Satan's ultimate putsch to assert dominion over the entire planet.

Again, though, atheism and Islam very much are on one side of a divide against Christianity in that they both involve idol worship.

Thus White's dramatic big point is rather comically wrong. Islam and Christianity do not stand shoulder-to-shoulder against atheism. Islam and Christianity indeed have nothing in common, as White's critics are attempting to explain to him. Unless you want to say being a complete counterfeit of something is equal to having something in common with it, but I think White would only assert that in the most dire last move he might have. Will he concede being wrong? No. He'll pretend he was aware of such distinctions and so forth. All knowledge and wisdom begins with him, after all (see next paragraph)...

A note on White to his recent critics (and I usually send posts like this to individual people involved): narcissism is a feature of our fallen nature. We all have features of narcissism in us. Yet there is something called Narcissistic Personality Disorder. It's humorously called 16 forever. White has it. Arguing with a person who has NPD is like arguing with a know-it-all 16 year old. He will never concede being wrong on anything. He 'learns on the run', meaning, if he is caught being ignorant about something (as White often is) he simply does a cursory googling of it then comes back the next day and pretends he "just got to the matter" because he was "doing a 100 mile bike ride" or "in the Ukraine dodging RPGs in a civil war" or what not, then he states what he got wrong as if he's known about it and been speaking on it since he was "handing out leaflets to Mormons back in the day" and so on and so on. You can't teach a person with NPD, you can't argue with them, you can only be drawn into their vain, small, shallow world.