Thursday, May 15, 2008

White-Out On The Trinity

Let's hear Brother "Dr." James White on why he didn't correct Gail Riplinger on the doctrine of the eternal sonship of Christ:

Why did I not harp on Riplinger's error on the matter? Because Gail Riplinger doesn't even understand what the issues are. Anyone who listened to my radio debate with her knows she could not even follow a discussion of Edwin Palmer's words relating to the inner relations of the Trinity in contrast with the incarnation. She is not a theologian, and her grasp of the most
fundamental doctrines of the faith is highly questionable.

So according to James, the doctrine of the Trinity which includes the eternal sonship of Christ is one "of the most fundamental doctrines of the faith."

A fundamental doctrine of the faith? Amen, James!

So back when John MacArthur also denied the eternal sonship doctrine, why did you attack Brother Bob Ross when Brother Bob merely pointed out JohnnyMac's deficient view on the matter, a view which MacArthur later recanted.

James White: Color him White-Out on a "fundamental doctrine of the faith."



At Thursday, May 15, 2008 7:09:00 PM, Blogger Bob L. Ross said...


Charles said:

The "funny thing," Charles, is that James deemed my critique of JMac's view of "incarnational sonship" to be worthy of his critical remarks, whereas he did not deal with Riplinger's denial of Eternal Sonship because, he says, she did not "understand" the issue!

When did anyone's lack of "understanding" ever hinder James White from dealing with their heresies, if he felt he could do so?

I did not mention it before, but even in the John Ankerberg Show program on "King James Onlyism," James did not do a very credible job in regard to Eternal Sonship which was brought up by Joe Chambers. It seems that James did not think Chambers "understood," either! If James will run that video, you can see what I mean.


Post a Comment

<< Home