James White and RossphobiaThe blogosphere is abuzz about "Dr." James White's debate challenge to Dr. Ergun Caner. Caner has not accepted which has caused some Calvinists to question his courage. Caner is the dean of Liberty Seminary and is a converted Muslim who debates Muslims. Let me repeat that: Caner is a converted Muslim who debates Muslims. Whatever his reasons for not accepting White's debate challenge, a lack of courage is not one of them. Others have also refused White's challenges for good reasons.
In the meantime, "Dr." White, who loves to challenge others, has refused to take up a challenge from another Calvinist, Bob Ross. White seems to have a severe case of Rossphobia, or the fear of Bob Ross. In case you have not heard of Bob, he is the owner of Pilgrim Publications, the company that publishes all of Charles H. Spurgeon's sermons. Bob is an accomplished debater and on more than one occasion has debated those of the "Church of Christ" persuasion.
Bob Ross is a Calvinist but has some problems with James White's view of regeneration before faith. Ross has also taken on The Founders a time or two. He is also no fan of Dave Hunt; you might say he's an equal opportunity Calvinist. You can read some of Bob's articles on his web site,
Selected Writings of Bob Ross.
Bob recently wrote an article, WHITE SMOKE AGAIN, which I am reprinting here in full.
Subject: WHITE SMOKE AGAIN [02/25--2005]
FROM HIS ARIZONA TEEPEE, CHIEF JAMES SENDS UP MORE OF HIS CONFUSING SMOKE SIGNALS [02/25--2005]
Today is my birthday -- the 71st. One of my readers sent me some humorous stuff this morning -- I suppose it was for a Birthday Greeting (?).
It consisted of more confusing smoke signals from the Arizona Reservation of Big Chief Tangle-Tongue Exegete (James White), the foremost Tomahawker and Smoke-Stoker of the "We Were Born Again Before Faith" tribe of "Super-Sized" Hybrid Calvinists.
Chief James has a daily Smokesite called a Blog from which he often stokes confused theological smoke signals, and today's smoke signal involves yours truly, as follows:
>>And I guess there is some fellow named "Charles" running about every single blog he can find posting something about Bob Ross (go figure--have to feel sorry for someone who invests their lives in such pursuits). I just checked Steve Camp's blog and read some of "Charles'"comments. Evidently whoever he is he's upset that at some time, years and years ago, I defended John MacArthur against Bob Ross' less-than-fair attacks. That would explain why Ross has since then attacked me on the ordo salutis. Despite Ross' behavior, and his unwillingness to even accept my own profession based upon the LBCF, I have refused to argue with the man. He did a great work many decades ago in printing Spurgeon's materials, and for that past work I have simply said, "Lord bless you, Bob," and left him to rail if he chooses to do so. There is no arguing with someone who says, "Well, you say you believe that, but you really don't."
The situation with Chief James is, it seems that in his own noggin he is simply "never wrong" -- at least, not on anything of substance -- not even when he puts his foot into his mouth.
In the case of John MacArthur and the Sonship of Christ view, James scolded me right roundly for my critiquing of MacArthur's former "incarnational sonship" view, and when MacArthur later saw the error of his way and came out publicly for the Confessional view of Eternal Sonship for which we stood, it left poor James "in a pickle." He had "egg on his face."
Now, in retrospect, instead of simply acknowledging the error of his way, James tries to "explain away" the fact that he put his foot in his mouth in trying to defend MacArthur. Someday we hope he will be conscientious enough to simply say, "Sorry, Bob, I was wrong to say what I did," and James' mind about me will be much more at ease.
As for the idea that we have ever "attacked" Chief James, we have never attacked anything related to him but what we believe to be his confusing smoke signals, and we believe we have dispelled his smoke in various articles.
As for James' ongoing crusade in behalf of Hybrid Calvinism on the matter of the New Birth --
For the benefit of my own readers who may wish to refresh your mind about this Hybrid Calvinism -- which consists of a mixture of Hardshellism and Presbyterianism on the New Birth -- advocated by James White, I refer you to the following website for a few of my smoke-repelling articles about the Big Chief's Hybridism:
Selected Writings of Bob Ross
>>http://writingsofbobross.tripod.com/1toc1.html<<>James White and the "pre-faith regeneration" Hybrid Calvinist heterodoxy:
ABRAHAM BOOTH VS. PRE-FAITH REGENERATION THEORY OF "HYPER" AND "HYBRID CALVINISTS"
AN ALLY OF WHITE
BACKDOOR PELAGIANISM OF THE REFORMED
BRO. JAMES IN SALT LIKE CITY
CHARNOCK vs SHEDD BERKHOF and Followers
DEBATE JAMES WHITE
FAITH AND REGENERATION
GETTING THRU TO BROTHER WHITE
HUNT-WHITE DEBATE A SUMMARY
JAMES WHITE REVISITED
JAMES WHITE'S LATEST COMMENT
JAMES WHITE'S SENSE OF HUMOR
MONERGISM AND INSTRUMENTALITY
MORE ON JAMES WHITE'S BLOG
OTHERS CONTRASTED TO WHITE ON LAZARUS
REFORMED or CALVINIST
REGENERATION -- A MAJOR ISSUE
REPLY ABOUT JAMES WHITE'S COMMENT
THIEF ON CROSS vs HYBRIDISM
WHITE FAILS TO EMPHASIZE MEANS
WHITE PERPETUATES WEBSITE ERROR
WHITE RE-HASHES DEBATE
WHITE'S BLOG FOGS THE AIR
WHITE'S FAULTY TEACHING
WHY THE CONTROVERSY