James White and the others

[SEMPEREFORMANDA]

Mickey:

None of it should have been made public. Two wrongs do not make a right. Patty was full of zeal because she had discovered the truth.

Yet Dr. White’s ministry is public. Mrs. Bonds’ conversion, if simply presented in the light in which it has been would seriously call into question the effectiveness of AOM. Perhaps none of it should have been made public. However, Patty did go public. I do not believe that White was trying to “get back at her” or anything (two wrongs making a right). He was just shoring up a potential (and invalid) criticism of his ministry.

Edit: And it seems that you excuse Mrs. Bonds because she was zealous for the truth. I could make the same provision for Dr. White, you know.

Again, I sincerely believe that he does not have the fullness of truth. And what he is vindicating is his wounded ego.

You can believe that Dr. White doesn’t have the fullness of truth (a far more charitable postion than TRENT took. However, it’s an unwarranted leap to go from “Dr. White does not have the fulness of truth” to “therefore he couldn’t be motivated by his ‘mistaken’ idea of truth, but rather is simply vindicating his wounded ego.” You have gone from, “I disagree with Protestantism” to “Protestants are never sincere in their actions and beliefs but are instead motivated by selfish concerns.”

She probably realized that a public forum was no place to continue debating a family rift.

If this is the case, then she should remove her rather personal letter to James from her website. And, BTW, I don’t think Dr. White has mentioned this publically in a few years either.

I’ve read enough my friend. I could never accept JW’s reconstructions. I’ve read too many of his rantings based on misconceptions of the Catholic Church.

That’s certainly your prerogative. Again, I do not see where he has misrepresented Rome (no one has succeeded in documenting this yet). However, it seems that your argument is basically, “White has been wrong about issue(s) x before, therefore he cannot possibly right about this.”

He’s a top notch debater, but I take everything he says with a grain of salt. Good debating does not win me over–the Truth does.

He is a fine debater. And I would expect you, as a Catholic, to take him with a grain of salt. And I would make the same assertion regarding the Truth. I simply believe that in Dr. White’s case (most of the time at least) he combines the two quite well.

God bless you!

And I pray that he bless you too.

 

[J.W.B]

If not for the Catholic Church I believe I would have been lost. I was once a Protestant as well, a Calvinist. I was actually very anti-Catholic too. My conversion was not “emotional” but very serious. I sternly looked into Catholicism to see if it was “Biblical.” It not only IS Biblical but HISTORICAL. You just CAN NOT say that about “reformed theology.” Catholics are ONE and those “Catholics” who differ in dogma’s with their own “opinons” are not TRUE Catholics. Catholicism is ONE UNIFIED FAITH, not thousands of disagreements with one another. That is what almost took me away from God or I would have become a lone ranger Christian. Praise the Lord for His TRUE Church, AMEN!!!

 

[SEMPEREFORMANDA]

If not for the Catholic Church I believe I would have been lost. I was one a Protestant as well, a Calvinist. I was actually very anti-Catholic too. My conversion was not “emotional” but very serious. I sternly looked into Catholicism to see if it was “Biblical.” It not only IS Biblical but HISTORICAL. You just CAN NOT say that about “reformed theology.” Catholics are ONE and those “Catholics” who differ in dogma’s with their own “opinons” are not TRUE Catholics. Catholicism is ONE UNIFIED FAITH, not thousands of disagreement with one another. That is what almost took me away from God or I would have become a lone ranger Christian. Praise the Lord for His TRUE Church, AMEN!!!

:confused:

As far as I know, no one is trying to get anyone to convert to or from Rome in this particular thread. To my knowledge, we are talking about James White and (most recently) more specifically his sister’s conversion to Rome and the quality and character of their interaction prior and subsequent to that event.

In fact, we aren’t even really discussing whether or not it was “right” for her to convert. Simply how and how much she interacted with her brother.

Thus, your post seems to be a bit of a non-sequitor. Adding nothing to the conversation other than your assertion that Catholicism is good and Reformed theology is not good (and quite a few exclamation points).

And, for the record, since I believe Reformed theology is biblical, I would say that it is VERY historical. Having been taught by Christ and his apostles. Just some food for thought.

 

[RyanL]

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

And, for the record, since I believe Reformed theology is biblical, I would say that it is VERY historical. Having been taught by Christ and his apostles. Just some food for thought.

They apparently didn’t do a very good job of teaching it - everyone they taught turned out Catholic!

You may be interested in the following link:
bringyou.to/apologetics/a56.htm

God bless,
RyanL

 

[Mickey]

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

I do not believe that White was trying to “get back at her” or anything.

You are entitled to believe what you like.

SEMPEREFORMANDA:
Edit: And it seems that you excuse Mrs. Bonds because she was zealous for the truth. I could make the same provision for Dr. White, you know.
Most reformed baptists would.

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

You have gone from, “I disagree with Protestantism”.

Yes, I disagree with many aspects of protestantism and, with all due respect, especially the reformed baptist teachings.

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

to “Protestants are never sincere in their actions and beliefs but are instead motivated by selfish concerns.”

You may not care to recognize it, (because you are big fan of JW), but the man does not like to be one upped. This is an issue of pride. (only my opinion). But I have been searching the forum high and low for where I have said, “Protestants are never sincere in their actions and beliefs but are instead motivated by selfish concerns.” I just can’t seem to find it. Please don’t put words in my mouth. That is uncharitable!

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

If this is the case, then she should remove her rather personal letter to James from her website.

I agree.

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

And, BTW, I don’t think Dr. White has mentioned this publically in a few years either.

Good!

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

Again, I do not see where he has misrepresented Rome (no one has succeeded in documenting this yet).

It is truly not worth my time to research all of his misrepresentations. That has been accomplished by many Catholic apologists–and I am not an apologist.

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

However, it seems that your argument is basically, "White has been wrong about issue(s) x before, therefore he cannot possibly right about this.

Nope. What I’m saying is: I disagree with much that he has to say, and I know where and how he stands on many issues.

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

He is a fine debater. And I would expect you, as a Catholic, to take him with a grain of salt. And I would make the same assertion regarding the Truth.

There’s no doubt in my mind.

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

I simply believe that in Dr. White’s case (most of the time at least) he combines the two quite well.

Again, you are surely entitled to that opinion.

Blessings,
Mickey

 

[Mickey]

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

Thus, your post seems to be a bit of a non-sequitor. **Adding nothing to the conversation **other than your assertion that Catholicism is good and Reformed theology is not good (and quite a few exclamation points).

Perhaps you should just ignore the post instead of hurling insults.

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

And, for the record, since I believe Reformed theology is biblical, I would say that it is VERY historical. Having been taught by Christ and his apostles. Just some food for thought.

You just lambasted the poster for “adding nothing to the conversation”, then you responded.

 

[Church_Militant]

I think it is a VERY cool work of the Holy Spirit that Mrs. Bond converted and there really isn’t anything much that needs to be said. Like me, others see the holes and misinformation in the anti-Catholic attacks and either convert like Mrs Bond, or return to the faith like I did.

The Spirit of Truth wins out in the end either way. Misinformation, misrepresentation, and showmanship can’t replace the truth and it will always set people free, just as it did me.
Pax vobiscum,

 

[deb1]

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

Yet Dr. White’s ministry is public. Mrs. Bonds’ conversion, if simply presented in the light in which it has been would seriously call into question the effectiveness of AOM. Perhaps none of it should have been made public. However, Patty did go public. I do not believe that White was trying to “get back at her” or anything (two wrongs making a right). He was just shoring up a potential (and invalid) criticism of his ministry.

Edit: And it seems that you excuse Mrs. Bonds because she was zealous for the truth. I could make the same provision for Dr. White, you know.

He is a fine debater. And I would expect you, as a Catholic, to take him with a grain of salt. And I would make the same assertion regarding the Truth. I simply believe that in Dr. White’s case (most of the time at least) he combines the two quite well.

And I pray that he bless you too.

I suppose that my problem is that I don’t see why it should matter if Patty went public. WOuld you be against say a nephew of Pope Benedict sharing his conversion story, if say this imaginary nephew converted to Reformed Baptist after listening to DR. White?

Actually, I have read many positive things about Dr. WHite’s debating skill, and his intelligence from Catholic apologetics. SO, I don’t think that most Catholics take him “as a grain of salt.”

 

[deb1]

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

Second, Alpha and Omega’s primary purpose is to explain and defend the Reformed (read biblical) conception of the gospel. This does not make Dr. White an anti-Catholic any more than it makes Karl Keating an anti-Protestant. You erect a double standard by asserting that if White disagrees with Rome he is attacking, but if your apologists disagree with Protestants then they are defending.

Third, Alpha and Omega is quite a small ministry. Though White does support himself through this ministry, it is unfair to insinuate that his sole purpose is to make money. He could be much more successful at that if that were his desire. Also, not all of A&O’s attention is given to RC issues. Even if White apostatized to Rome he could still debate Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc. and thus, “make a living.” Your argument is fallacious and deceitful.

SEMPEREFORMANDA

edited to aid in formatting

Good Morning to you.

I wish that I knew how to post different post on the same answer, but because I don’t I have to post twice. Sorry about that.

I notice that you put the word Biblical in ( ) beside the name Reformed. Do you not think that Catholisim is biblical? Which denominations do you consider biblical? You also say that James White is defending the Reformed (read biblical) conception of the gospel. Who is he defending his faith from? Most Catholics believe that Protestants stand every bit as good a chance as getting to heaven as they do. Do Reformed Baptist hold the same view of Catholics?

 

[Mickey]

deb1:

Actually, I have read many positive things about Dr. WHite’s debating skill, and his intelligence from Catholic apologetics. SO, I don’t think that most Catholics take him “as a grain of salt.”

Hi deb,
I don’t take JW’s debating skills with a grain of salt (I said he was top-notch), but I do take his mis-representations regarding the Catholic Church with a grain of salt. Sorry if I was not clear on that.

 

[kaycee]

As a former Roman Catholic I find Jame’s White’s description of Catholic teaching quite accurate.

 

[RyanL]

kaycee:

As a former Roman Catholic I find Jame’s White’s description of Catholic teaching quite accurate.

As a practicing Roman Catholic, I don’t. What’s your point?

Perhaps you should start a new thread taking your favorite subject and questioning it, and we could clear up some misinformation for you.

 

[kaycee]

RyanL:

As a practicing Roman Catholic, I don’t. What’s your point?

Just an honest observation

RyanL:

Perhaps you should start a new thread taking your favorite subject and questioning it, and we could clear up some misinformation for you.

If only i had the time!

 

[MrS]

kaycee:

Just an honest observation

If only i had the time!

we are all called to evangelize… even if we don’t have the time.

Seriously, what caused you to leave?

 

[deb1]

MrS:

we are all called to evangelize… even if we don’t have the time.

Seriously, what caused you to leave?

Yes, if you have disagreements with the Catholic church many of us would like to hear about them. I am converting to Catholisim so I am interested. Start another thread, just do one topic at a time.

 

[kaycee]

MrS:

we are all called to evangelize… even if we don’t have the time.

Taking away time from my employer is not appropriate even to evangelize!

MrS:

Seriously, what caused you to leave?

I was given the Gospel of Grace by a Baptist friend.

 

[deb1]

kaycee:

Taking away time from my employer is not appropriate even to evangelize!

I was given the Gospel of Grace by a Baptist friend.

Wait until the weekend and start a thread. We’d like to hear from you.

 

[RyanL]

kaycee:

I was given the Gospel of Grace by a Baptist friend.

I use the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but whatever…

Seriously, here is what the Catholic Church teaches:
[%between%](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1996.htm’)

[1996](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1996.htm’) Our justification comes from the grace of God. Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life.46

What part of this do you disagree with?

God bless,
RyanL

 

[Mickey]

kaycee:

I was given the Gospel of Grace by a Baptist friend.

That’s intersesting. I have a baptist friend, who by grace, is about to become Catholic!

 

[Eden]

As far as I know, no one is trying to get anyone to convert to or from Rome in this particular thread. To my knowledge, we are talking about James White and (most recently) more specifically his sister’s conversion to Rome and the quality and character of their interaction prior and subsequent to that event.

In fact, we aren’t even really discussing whether or not it was “right” for her to convert. Simply how and how much she interacted with her brother.

Thus, your post seems to be a bit of a non-sequitor. Adding nothing to the conversation other than your assertion that Catholicism is good and Reformed theology is not good (and quite a few exclamation points).

And, for the record, since I believe Reformed theology is biblical, I would say that it is VERY historical. Having been taught by Christ and his apostles. Just some food for thought.
[/quote]

J.W.B.'s post was not a non sequitor. It was a response to the idea that conversion stories are shallow.

I’m curious about your assertion that Reformed theology is biblical and very historical. The history only goes back to the 16th century. What do you mean “having been taught by Christ and His Apostles”? I have a quote for you from someone who was taught by the disciple John and thus received not only revelation from the Apostles but also their interpretation of revelation. His name is Ignatius of Antioch (Bishop of Antioch martyred on his way to Rome):

stthomasirondequoit.com/SaintsAlive/id558.htm

“Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be, even as wherever Christ Jesus appears, there is the Catholic Church.” - Ignatius of Antioch circa 107 A.D. (That’s about 70 years after Christ’s death and resurrection.)

He did not mean “catholic” as universal in the way Protestants use it today when they recite our Creed. He meant “Catholic” as in the Catholic Church we know today. The Church Ignatius described was certainly not Protestant:

**“Ignatius’ seven letters are among the few non-biblical Christian writings of the apostolic period. (St. John the Apostle was still alive when they were written.) They, therefore, bear important witness to the earliest Christian belief and practices. Thus the Bishop of Antioch becomes the first to emphasize Mary’s virginity; to declare the holy Trinity; and to present Jesus as both son of God and son of Mary. He also defends the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist.” **

By the way, he also asserts the primacy of Rome which was not mentioned in the link that I provided.