Wednesday, March 07, 2007

"Credit Where It Is Due": Great and Helpful Christian Apologetic Articles by James White

Recently, I published a similar compendium of articles by anti-Catholic Protestant apologist Jason Engwer, defending the orthodox Christian outlook on Christmas and various Christological issues. In the same vein, I thought it would be appropriate to do the same for James White: one of the leading anti-Catholic apologists. To paraphrase the other paper:

James White is an anti-Catholic. James White thinks Catholics aren't Christians. James White has made some of the most atrocious, ridiculous, utterly incoherent, illogical, factually-bankrupt, and sophistical arguments in the history of mankind, when he is dealing with Catholicism. His huge bias against the Catholic Church apparently clouds his otherwise often cogent mind. This is shown, I think, in the debates he and I have had on several subjects, and in my other papers documenting his manifold errors.

James White is also a Christian apologist (Reformed Baptist), and Christian apologists (even anti-Catholic ones) also write about subjects upon which virtually all Christians agree. And when they do so, I rejoice, because I am very happy whenever I see Christian truth promulgated and ably defended. This is part of the mystery of the larger Body of Christ, which includes Protestants. A person like White can be so dead wrong on some things, and blind to the spiritual status of Catholics, yet God grants him the grace to continue his apologetics in order to defend some true and very important things. Truth is truth no matter who proclaims it and regardless of how utterly wrong and mistaken they might be on other issues.

I'm delighted about that, because it is a terrible waste of one's mind and energies to oppose the Catholic Church on such ludicrous grounds. It's good to see that minds like White's are also occupied at least part of the time with good and true analyses. The anti-Catholics I come across have rarely seen any value in anything I write, even when my writing is about a subject where we would completely agree with each other. But I have no problem seeing the good things in many of their articles.

James White has written helpfully and insightfully about several Christian doctrines or moral beliefs, which are held in common by all the major branches of Christianity. When he defends these things, he is on the side of the angels. These areas include his papers and research concerning the Holy Trinity, Christology, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, The Da Vinci Code, and Islam (he has also written good material on homosexuality, pro-life, the King James Only folks, and against liberal theology and higher criticism of the Bible). I commend him for this helpful, edifying research (as I have, publicly, many times before, while he continues to totally mock the entire body of my apologetic work as utterly worthless and devoid of any substance or value), and present links to these articles (I shall also make links on various relevant pages of mine):

The Holy Trinity and Christology

A Brief Description of the Trinity

The Trinity, the Definition of Chalcedon, and Oneness Theology

Scripture Index to The Forgotten Trinity

The Pre-existence of Christ

Jesus Christ - the Lamb of Revelation

The Nature of God - The Tri-Unity of God

The Prologue of the Gospel of John

The Theology of God in Isaiah 40-45

Theotetos: Meaning at Colossians 2:9

Islam
(particularly polemics against Christianity)

Islamic Apologetics and New Testament Transmission (Parts 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 / 14 / 15 / 16 / 17 / 18 / 19 / 20 / 21 / 22 / 23 / 24 / 25)

Jeremiah 8:8: Abused and Misused

Another Shabir Ally Biblical Error

The Qur'an in the Light of God-breathed Scripture: Surah 5:116

The Qur'an in the Light of God-breathed Scripture: Shirk, Trinity, Christ, in Surah 5

The Qur'an in the Light of God-breathed Scripture: Shirk, Surah 4:48

Mormonism

Min is Not God!

FARMS Strikes Again!

Psalm 82 and John 10 (James White vs. Mormon William Hamblin)

Of Cities and Swords:The Impossible Task of Mormon Apologetics

Did the Early Church Believe in the LDS Doctrine of God?

Does Mormonism Teach that God the Father Physically Begat the Son?

Why Do You Do This? An Online Tract Answering the Question, "Why Do You Evangelize Mormons?"

Many Gods, Many Lords

The Evolution of Mormon Theology

Jehovah's Witnesses

On Defending the NWT [New World Translation] (Parts Two / Three)

A Memorization Suggestion [Colossians 2:9]

Discussion with a Jehovah's Witness on John 15

Purpose and Meaning of Ego Eimi in the Gospel of John

Germans, JWs, and John 1:1

Granville Sharp's Rule: Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1

John 1:1 - Meaning and Translation

Historical Dishonesty and the Watchtower Society: Ignatius and the Deity of Christ

Various False Prophecies of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society

John 15, the Vine and the Branches

The 1914 Chronology

The Da Vinci Code
(book by Dan Brown)

The Da Vinci Code (Parts 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 / 14 / 15 / 16)

First Objection: It's Fiction, Dummy

Heads Up, Folks. It's Coming [movie]

Compiled by Dave Armstrong on 12-23-05.

4 comments:

pelliondance said...

Hi Dave.

I really think this is the way to go. I linked from your blog to a recent triablogue one, and found a whole page of nastiness. I left a comment there to that effect. I carefully didn't add that I am a Baptist. I think there are serious faults on both sides, but definitely feel you are more sinned against than sinning.

Looked through one of your pages on Calvin's institutes. I don't know that you can fairly lambast him on his non-citing of sources, which is very much a modern pre-occupation. Also, Calvin was not coming from the position of a 21st-century Calvinist, with a perception of Catholicism based purely on a received tradition of anti-Catholic polemic. At least part of his education was in training for the priesthood, and much of his perception of the church must have been based on first-hand experience.

I believe that the path Reformation ultimately took was tragic. I also believe it was God's judgment on a corrupt church. The rebellion of Jeroboam I against Rehoboam in I Kings presents a strong biblical parallel, and we Protestants would do well to take warning from the subsequent history of the northern kingdom of Israel.

Anyway, to return to my original point, can I encourage you to give more emphasis (as in your post here) to the virtues of your opponents? It will seriously annoy the hell out of them.

Blessings
Neil Copeland

Dave Armstrong said...

Hi Neil,

Thanks very much for your comments, and thanks especially for condemning the nastiness at Triablogue. They'll never accept any such statement from a Catholic, but if Protestants start rebuking them, perhaps there is hope that they will start conducting themselves in a Christian manner.

I always try to give credit to my dialogue opponents where it is due. After all, these guys are fellow Christians. I've done it many many times and will continue to do so.

Your suggested approach didn't work with Steve Hays. I communicated to him many instances where I have defended non-Catholics, including Calvin, and Luther. But no matter. I wrote:

"I have defended James White: one of my severest critics on this earth."

Steve Hays shot back with:

"I’m supposed to be taken in by your bipolar tactics? You play a double game. 'Defend' your opponents to give you cover so that you can then defame them."

Steve has reiterated that I have "an evil character," so obviously everything I do is with an ill and nefarious motive. He interpreted any defense of others that I made as insincere, and the cynical tactic of a double-minded deceiver.

This is very wicked stuff indeed.

Ben M said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ben M said...
This comment has been removed by the author.