James White does something almost unheard of: in under 4 minutes, he manages to give us a quick primer on how to answer three of the most dangerous heresies of the day: Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Oneness Pentecostals (like T. Dexter Jakes):
Showing posts with label James White. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James White. Show all posts
20 March 2008
25 January 2008
James White on "Justification by Faith"
Romans 5:1-2--Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
Ephesians 1:3-6--Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.
Video of James White debunking the belief that we have to "earn" our salvation by doing good works (HT: Symphony of Scripture):
Ephesians 1:3-6--Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.
Video of James White debunking the belief that we have to "earn" our salvation by doing good works (HT: Symphony of Scripture):
13 November 2007
Is it really "all about unity"?
If I have one pet peeve about the seeker-sensitive, all-tolerant people I converse with, it's this: Whenever you try and lead them to the truth of Scripture, and you try to call sin "sin", and you try to call truth "truth", and you try to call heresy "heresy", they whip out the old "You know, you should really just focus on loving people into the church," or "You should stop that! You should be focusing on unity!" If I hear that tired old tripe one more time, I do believe I'll go mad.
Which brings me to this: What would Doug Pagitt or Brian McClaren or Joel Osteen have to say to Paul about his letter to the Galatians? James White has the answer over at Alpha Omega Ministries, along with a post about the difference between the Gospel of Christ and the gospel of Rome.
Which brings me to this: What would Doug Pagitt or Brian McClaren or Joel Osteen have to say to Paul about his letter to the Galatians? James White has the answer over at Alpha Omega Ministries, along with a post about the difference between the Gospel of Christ and the gospel of Rome.
Dear Paul:
In reviewing your letter to the churches of Galatia, we, the modern men of the 21st century, have come to the conclusion that you truly missed the point in your very pointed and, may we say, unloving comments regarding the faithful brothers with whom you had but a minor theological difference. We are in particular offended that you would identify men who clearly confess faith in Christ and who have risked their lives for their faith "false brethren." Who are you to make such a harsh judgment, in light of their many evidences of faith? These men are Christians, and to call them false brethren is a serious sin! You are bearing false witness against them!
And to dare to read the intentions of their hearts so as to say they were "sneaking" into the fellowship is simply beyond the pale. You should be ashamed of yourself! All you disagree on is a minor point of theology! They believe in Christ! They believe in His resurrection! They simply believe one should be circumcised so as to be a part of the covenant people of God! How narrow of you to exclude them from the fellowship of faith simply on the basis of such a minor thing as this! Why won't you focus upon the areas of agreement you have? Why focus only upon differences, the negatives? Don't you realize you will never win people to your views if you continue to act in this fashion? We seriously request that you apologize to the faithful brothers you anathematized in your ill-advised letter to the churches of Galatia. By this, true peace and unity might be achieved!
24 October 2007
James White on limited atonement
I must say that I have never heard the doctrine of "limited atonement" explained better than this (H/T: Rhett's Rants):
[All emphases mine]
You can read the whole thing at Alpha Omega Ministries.
Christ's atoning death is clearly connected with His advocacy before the Father. Therefore, we can see the following truths:
1) It is impossible that the Son would not intercede for everyone for whom He died. If Christ dies as their Substitute, how could He not present His sacrifice in their stead before the Father? Can we really believe that Christ would die for someone that He did not intend to save?
2) It is impossible that anyone for whom the Son did not die could receive Christ's intercession. If Christ did not die in behalf of a certain individual, how could Christ intercede for that individual, since He would have no grounds upon which to seek the Father's mercy?
3) It is impossible that anyone for whom the Son intercedes could be lost. Can we imagine the Son pleading before the Father, presenting His perfect atonement in behalf of an individual that He wishes to save, and the Father rejecting the Son's intercession? The Father always hears the Son (John 11:42). Would He not hear the Son's pleas in behalf of all that the Son desires to save?
Furthermore, if we believe that Christ can intercede for someone that the Father will not save, then we must believe either 1) that there is dissension in the Godhead, the Father desiring one thing, the Son another, or 2) that the Father is incapable of doing what the Son desires Him to do. Both positions are utterly impossible.
That Christ does not act as High Priest for all men is clearly seen in His "High Priestly Prayer" in John 17. The Lord clearly distinguishes between the "world" and those who are His throughout the prayer, and verse 9 makes our point very strongly:I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours.
When Christ prays to the Father, He does not pray for the "world" but for those that have been given to Him by the Father (John 6:37).
For Whom Did Christ Die?
There are a number of Scriptures that teach us that the scope of Christ's death was limited to the elect. Here are a few of them:Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many (Matthew 20:28).
The "many" for whom Christ died are the elect of God, just as Isaiah had said long before,By his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. (Isaiah 53:11)
The Lord Jesus made it clear that His death was for His people when He spoke of the Shepherd and the sheep:I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep....just as the Father knows me and I know the Father---and I lay down my life for the sheep (John 10:11, 15).
The good Shepherd lays down His life in behalf of the sheep. Are all men the sheep of Christ? Certainly not, for most men do not know Christ, and Christ says that His sheep know Him (John 10:14). Further, Jesus specifically told the Jews who did not believe in Him, "but you do not believe because you are not my sheep" (John 10:26). Note that in contrast with the idea that we believe and therefore make ourselves Christ's sheep, Jesus says that they do not believe because they are not His sheep! Whether one is of Christ's sheep is the Father's decision (John 6:37, John 8:47), not the sheep's!
[All emphases mine]
You can read the whole thing at Alpha Omega Ministries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)