WATCH AND READ AS JAMES WHITE AND PHIL NAESSENS DEFEND PAYING FALSE TEACHERS FOR THEIR SERVICES

As some of you already know apologist James White of Alpha and Omega attended Fuller Seminary long after just about anyone in any Evangelical church knew Fuller had begun teaching that the Bible can't be trusted. If you're like me, you may have wondered if White did so knowingly and if he has since repented of that sin. And one may ask, if he's unrepentant, does he openly teach that such sin is okay? Those two things make a lot of difference. On the one hand, he may be a totally innocent victim of dishonest people or he may have done so at a time when he wasn't yet saved or when he wasn't yet grounded in biblical doctrine. On the other hand, he may have knowingly helped pay the salary of false teachers, prayed with false teachers, had fellowship with false teachers, all very sinful acts.

For that reason, I've kept my mouth shut until now concerning my doubts about White. In the comment thread of the post I'm going to give you below, he gives no biblical defense. He refuses to admit such behavior is sinful and he excuses it with a touching story and an excuse about not wanting to attend a school out of town, like the rest of us had to do.

Phil Naessens defends White because, supposedly, no one has proven White did these things. Phil does so even though White's educational background is public knowledge and inspite of the fact White admits and defends it in the very comment thread in which Naessens makes his defense of White.

Is Phil Naessens lying or does he not comprehend things so simple as this?

Is James White honest, or is he defending sin?

See what you think by reading here:

http://phillyflash.wordpress.com/2010/07/14/why-hasnt-god-moved-in-the-dr-ergun-caner-situation/

and here:

http://phillyflash.wordpress.com/2010/07/26/new-comment-policy-at-theology-today/

TWO ANSWERS PHIL NAESSENS DOESN'T WANT YOU TO READ--EVIDENTLY
Some of you have warned me about Phil Naessens. You were right. I was wrong. I counted Naessens as a friend and excused his nonsense as simply a result of a somewhat non-logical mind. He has stomped around the net verbally abusing folks who object to false teaching, pretty much as long as the false teachers weren't Word of Faith. He called folks defending the faith harsh, mean, hateful...you know the routine. Until now, whenever he did this and I knew about it, he seemed to take correction from me on the issue. That impressed me and I chalked it up to Phil not being a clear thinker and have defended him to some of you as such. Now, I'm not so sure. Either way, he needs to be called to account.

He actually started making accusations against me and just murdered Deuteronomy 13 in order to do so. Therefore, it seems certain that thought and purposeful intention is involved. And he doesn't want to publish my answers to  his accusations.

Here are two of my answers he has so far refused to publish:

1.
Phil N.,
You said this:
“… you failed to provide us with is any evidence to support your assertions, insinuations and opinions on this thread.”

You’re wrong for two reasons:

1. He (White) admitted attending Fuller with full knowledge. Is he lying? What do you think–does that satisfy Deut. 13 rules of evidence? He confessed it and defended it. Do we need it in writing? Well, he even did that for us.

When you mention the Old Covenant standard of evidence, read just four more chapters. Deuteronomy 17. The standard for proof in a capital case was two or three witnesses. Public knowledge meets that quite nicely. The public has at least two people, right? That’s the biblical standard for proof. But more on that next.

2. James’ education and cruises are public knowledge. All you have to do is check the public record. It’s not done in secret. His education is public knowledge. He publicly advertised the cruise, didn’t he? The idea of the probing in Deut. is to find the truth. If it’s public knowledge, we know it’s true. If you had a question, you could have asked or googled it yourself.

On the “insinuations”, what insinuations? I’ve not been sneaky. I said everything outright. That’s why I’m hated.

Why should White touch on the issue of the cruises? You know the answer to that, Phil, better than most people. He takes the role of a teacher and the attendant authority. As such, he’s accountable to the body of Christ. He’s answerable, just like the rest of us. Galations 1:3, again. (As well as about 40 other passages.) And if we’re to test every spirit, who is he to stonewall and stop us from doing what God has commanded? That alone is sinful.

Is the Scripture on this to be obeyed? Is White an exception?

And that actually wasn’t my point. My point is there’s no good defense of such stuff. As such, it makes sense to divert, instead of answer. It’s good debate strategy. It’s also not very honest. Challenge me on anything and you get an answer because I’m not sneaking.

I missed Katie’s apology about the hypocrisy. Sorry about that, but I’m still not clear on what she meant in that last comment. I was, however, one bringing up these things. It’s pretty natural to understand it as she said it. If these things are hypocrisy, I’m a hypocrite for the simple reason that I did them. She doesn’t need to name me personally. Your objection here seems contrived in order to make a point. Do you really think she didn’t mean me along with others who had some of the same questions?

Now how many times have I repeated that I had never heard White present the gospel, Phil? The first time I brought it up, I framed it that way. Accusing me of lying or stating as fact something I didn’t actually know is wrong. And he does not follow the NT example of either teacher or evangelist in form or character.

As to Paul, he obviously is a supporter, if not a personal friend. That’s what I meant. And the point still stands, whether or not Paul is on White’s side. White knowingly fellowshiped with and helped pay the salary of false teachers who deny God’s Word. He rushes to defend his own reputation, but it’s okay to pay those who spoil the reputation of God’s Word?

Phil N., I asked if he knew about the false teachers, didn’t I? And I defended him if he was innocently ignorant, didn’t I?

You’ve not dealt at all with any of the Scripture I’ve brought up. Is it okay for James, or Boyd, or you, or I to support false teachers? Is false teaching a sin? If so, is sin allowed to continue untouched in the body? If not, is false teaching a special sin that isn’t subject to excommunication like all others are?

And you haven’t dealt at all with the historical position of the church. I’ve brought it up at least once on this thread alone. The Reformers wouldn’t allow White in their assembly unless repentance was demonstrated. Calvin didn’t allow it. Spurgeon didn’t allow it. Read about the Downgrade Controversy. Christians in Evangelical churches before the early 1900′s didn’t allow it. I can give you two histories on my shelves if you wish documentation about the early 1900′s. Jesus didn’t allow it in the churches. Rev. 2 and 3.

Were all these believers before us wrong? Did Carl Henry come up with a special doctrine all these people didn’t see in the Bible? Tell us from the Bible why our spiritual fathers going back to Moses and Joshua were wrong. Tell us why Matthew Henry was wrong on this. Tell us why J. Gresham Machen was wrong.

And don’t say these things are still unknown. James said he attended Fuller. And I googled this for you, though it has long been public knowledge: http://sovereigncruises.org/AO2007/

You DO have to take a side, Phil. In the past you’ve defended John Piper, Rick Warren, and Richard Abanes even though they’ve actively brought false teaching into the body. Everytime I have to defend the Scripture on this issue I lose confidence in you as a brother. How many times (do I have to do this)? On the other hand, you’re so quick to jump on anyone who defends the faith for their tone, their words, or whatever is the diversion of the day. ODM seems a dirty word to you, even though you do the same thing often.

When you told me you were teaching at a Greek Orthodox school, I was highly disappointed and I thought you probably hadn’t understood what they believe or that you hadn’t yet understood the biblical commandment to separate. I’d been so adamant for so long, I just didn’t do my duty, I guess. I didn’t remind you one more time. So, it’s not like I jump all over you at the drop of a hat.

Take this thread for example. You go from one side to another depending on what? For the life of me I don’t know what makes you go back and forth so. Here’s the sad fact: Not everyone will like you. You can’t please everyone.

And now, you’ve said that there is no evidence of the very things White confessed to, those things which were public knowledge long before he admitted them here. Are you kidding me? And now that we all know what he did, you’re still on my case.

Why?

In addition, you make up some sort of standard of knowledge about White I must achieve before I expose the sins he has done publicly. Where do you find that standard? In Scripture? No. It’s not there. If a prophet lies, I don’t have to know all he preaches, only that he lies. Deuteronomy 13 and 18.

Do you find that standard in any legal system? No. I don’t even have to know a man’s name to testify about what I know. I did that in the case of a killing. I didn’t know the name of the defendant or the victim and I still don’t. But I saw what I saw and I testified to what I saw.

Guess what? I saw White’s ad selling a cruise and pretending it was a ministry. And I saw his attendance at Fuller reported. And now we all saw White admit he did these things knowingly.

Did you see that, Phil. Do we need to send you a report in Braille?

And you don’t follow that standard yourself. You don’t know all I’ve preached, do you? Do you know my position on the days of Creation? And you didn’t seem to know a lot of things I brought up here. Did you know about Ockenga? Dan Fuller? Nancey Murphy? How about the first president of Fuller and his obsession with the approval of heretics? Did you know? You would call me ignorant for much the same.

In fact, you did.

You don’t have to answer that. Here’s my point: the “ignorant” excuse doesn’t change anything about the facts of what White stands for (your word, I’ve treated you with more respect than that). It’s just a way of smacking me, Phil. That’s obvious.

I’ll put it the same way August Toplady did long ago, in paraphrase. If I concede for sake of argument that I have ten heads and seven tales, what has that to do with the matter at hand?

I know the pull of what our culture, secular and religious, wants us to do is hard. Nevertheless, obey the Scripture. You aren’t grounded, Phil. You’re pulled by the Scripture and by the culture and by whatever was said last by whomever. That’s why you vascillate.

You will be more comfortable with yourself when you pick a side. For Christ or against Christ. You can’t keep doing what you’re doing. If you wish to follow Christ, it will take a daily conscious decision to ignore the culture and follow only the Scripture (dying daily), come what may. You’ll have a lot fewer readers and listeners. If you wish to follow the world, secular and religious, do what feels good at the time.

That’s my advice.

Finally, on your last post, I see you’ve said, “Opinions about issues are one thing. Opinions about people are another.” Do you know how unbiblical that is? Do you know why? Jesus commanded us to make opinions about people (teachers, to be specific) in Matthew 7 and Paul did the same in Galatians 1:3 and I Corinthians 5. John commanded it in his epistles. Moses did it. Paul warned us to avoid or endorse folks as teachers based on an evaluation of their character. II Timothy 2: 24-26. Proverbs 31 asks us to evaluate whom we marry. Psalm 1 tells us to form an opinion about our potential friends. It’s all over the Scripture, but banned in the world. Paul commanded Timothy to form opinions about teachers. II Timothy 2:2, I Timothy 3:1ff.

And have you stopped to think just how illogical this statement is? If it’s wrong to form and express opinions about folks, what have you just done? (For instance, I’m ignorant so I have to shut up, right?) You’ve just told us how you will form an opinion of folks and how you will decide if they’re allowed on your blog based on those criteria.

And I see we can’t say a lot of words anymore. That disqualifies much of Scripture. John the Baptist called out the Jews at the beginning of his ministry and offered absolutely no documentation other than public knowledge. Or is that okay now? Jesus did the same thing often. So did Paul. And, Phil, honestly I’m not sure you’re logical enough to evaluate that sort of thing. “Paul”, who defends all the false teachers at Fuller, accused me of writing things I didn’t and, when I called him on the deceit, you wanted me to apologize.

HUH?????

Sorry to be so harsh, but you need to pick–God or the religious world we swim in.
Phil Perkins.

2.
Phil N.,
I over stated something. You have dealt with some of the Scripture I’ve mentioned. Sorry. You just quit to applying it to White because I’m ignorant and because I have no proof (other than public knowledge and his admissions right here on this thread). I don’t think those are the real reasons, because they don’t make any sense.
Phil Perkins.

I added three explanatory parentheses, corrected some spellings, and may not have broken the paragraphs at the points I did when I submitted these answers.

AN IMPORTANT CORRECTION
Finally, I need to take some responsibility for my own lack of diligence. I removed White from my blogroll about the time I saw he was promoting a "Christian" cruise. Naessens has been on my blogroll for a long time. I considered removing him for some time, too, because of some of the nutty things he's written. I didn't want to hurt a friend, and he has been a good friend. That is a wrong priority on my part. Friendship is no excuse.

After this episode, I can no longer recommend anyone read or listen to him. If he's innocent and simply not a very logical guy, it's like the old saw about the anvil. Drop on anvil on my toe on purpose, my toe is broken. Drop it by accident, and my toe is still broken.

Deuteronomy 13:6-9 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

This is a sad thing.

Be holy, because God told us to--no excuses for any of us,
Phil Perkins.

FRIDAY IS CORRECTIONS DAY

A lot has been said, done, and controverted on this blog this week and four corrections have to be made.

1. Solameanie, aka Joel Griffith, over at Seventh Sola, brought something to my attention. In Part III of THE SECRET SINS OF THE ODMs and Part IV of AMERICAN EVANGELICALISM IS A MENTAL GHETTO, I mentioned Moody Bible Institute in a very negative light. Moody Church isn't connected to Moody Bible Institute either through funding or governance. So, whatever is done or not done at MBI, it shouldn't reflect at all on Moody Church. (Lessinacorse sumbuddy knows sumpin I don't. Majun that.)

2. I mentioned Paul Washer without saying two things that need to be said. He's great. And you can hear his sermons at sermonaudio.com. Washer is definitely worth a listen--okay, lots of listens. Enjoy.

3. Unfortunately, due to my failure to correct an ongoing accusation, some have asked if I believe that anything but a word-for-word translation is a sin or incorrect. No, I don't. In fact, some of my readers are multi-lingual, so I know that they know there is no such thing as a word-for-word translation unless the document is very short. No two languages have vocabulary with a one-to-one correlation and no two languages have identical grammar and syntax. Literal, word-for-word translation is preferred, but never possible in all situations.

4. Frank Turk said he doesn't google himself. I said he did. I'll let you decide. Here's my evidence: a. He showed up here within hours of his name being mentioned. b. This is a pattern among some bloggers, using search engines or friends to monitor the net to keep tabs of all us and what we say about them. c. Frank is a very dishonest fellow. In fact, I had to cut him off after he repeatedly pretended to be able to judge translations, but refused to say whether or not he even knew the languages. d. He is soooo obsessed that he actually sent FOUR COMMENTS in LESS THAN 30 MINUTES------AFTER HE WAS CUT OFF. e. Even before I cut him off, he answered every comment I posted within very few minutes, so he does monitor things pretty closely, at least after he knows where to look.

On the other hand, he has evidence, too: He SAYS he doesn't.

See you all next week,
Phil Perkins.