Home » Posts tagged 'debate' (Page 4)
Tag Archives: debate
James White / Thomas Ross debate format: King James Version vs. LSB
I am looking forward to my upcoming debate with Dr. James White. Please note the planned format below for the debate. Thank you very much for your fervent prayers and possible fasting for me and for the debate.
Debate Topic: “The Legacy Standard Bible, as a representative of modern English translations based upon the UBS/NA text, is superior to the KJV, as a representative of TR-based Bible translations.”
Affirm: James White
Deny: Thomas Ross
How the time will go:
Brief introduction to the speakers and an explanation of the character of the debate.
Opening presentation: 25/25
Second presentation/rebuttal: 12/12
Cross-examination #1: 10/10
Cross-examination #2: 10/10
Third presentation/rebuttal: 8/8
Concluding statement: 5/5
Very short break to gather any additional questions from the audience
Questions from audience the rest of the time.
For more information, see the James White / Thomas Ross debate page here.
Gail Riplinger & Acrostic Algebra-an Update for the LSB / KJV James White Debate
As many blog readers may know, I should have the privilege, Lord willing, this upcoming February of debating Dr. James White of Alpha & Omega Ministries on the topic “The Legacy Standard Bible, as a representative of modern English translations based upon the UBS/NA text, is superior to the KJV, as a representative of TR-based Bible translations.” Dr. White has debated or discussed the King James Only position with people like Gail Riplinger, author of New Age Bible Versions and leading New Age conspiracy theorist, and Steven Anderson, the acclaimed Holocaust denier and promoter of “1-2-3, pray after me, 4-5-6, hope it sticks” evangelism.
I have found a great argument to use against the Legacy Standard Bible which will be defended by James White. Rather than using arguments from my resources on Bibliology or from Thou Shalt Keep Them: A Biblical Theology of the Perfect Preservation of Scripture (also here; Amazon affiliate link), I have an update to Dr. Gail Riplinger’s argument from Acrostic Algebra.
Dr. Riplinger, as you may know, wrote the book New Age Bible Versions. David Cloud has a review of her book. She has also written a large volume about why Christians should not study Greek and Hebrew. Ms. Riplinger herself is highly qualified in the Biblical languages-as a little girl she took Latin in school, and she taught English to immigrants from Greece. She received an honorary doctorate from Hyles-Anderson College, indicative of the scholarship of New Age Bible Versions, with which Hyles-Anderson wishes to identify. (I am reminded of the honorary doctorates that my first year Greek class received-all the students formed their own school one day, and we gave everyone an honorary PhD, ThD, DD, or comparable honorary doctoral degree-except for one student, to whom we gave an honorary GED.) While many Hyles graduates are not known in the scholarly world, they do excel at gathering crowds of children with candy, leading them to repeat the sinner’s prayer, and then baptizing millions of them on the backs of church buses, often baptizing the same children many times, thus creating more sinner’s-prayer-repeaters by far than the number of converts gathered on the day of Pentecost, when Peter, not having read Hyles’s church manual, told the lost to repent instead of telling them to ask Jesus into their hearts (although the converts at Pentecost seemed to stick around a lot longer, even without gifts of soda pop and candy, Acts 2:41-47). Dr. Riplinger also has earned degrees in home economics, which help her to be qualified not only to be a keeper at home, but also to write scholarly works on textual criticism and Bible versions. Among many other fine arguments by Mrs. Riplinger, her Acrostic Alegbra stands out, proving the New American Standard Version and New International Version are inferior to the Authorized Version:
- Step 1: (NASV – NIV) – AV = X
- Step 2: (NASV –
NIV) – AV = X - Step 3: (ASI + NV) – AV = X
- Step 4:
ASI + NV– AV = X - Step 5: SIN = X
Clearly, the fact that one can get to the letters “SIN” from the NASV and NIV in this fashion proves the inferiority of these Bible versions.
Since I am supposed to debate James White on the LSB, or Legacy Standard Bible, which is an update to the NASV, it is appropriate that I also update Dr. Riplinger’s Acrostic Algebra. Note:
The LSB leaves things out, as do other modern versions. If one leaves out the middle line of the “B” in “LSB,” one is left with “LSD,” a dangerous drug which is a SIN. Thus, just like the NASV and NIV, through acrostic algebra, lead to SIN, so does the LSB.
-QED
My discovery of this argument reminded me of the quality argumentation of leading atheist Dan Barker, who, employed Dorothy Murdock’s great mythicist scholarship in my debate with him. Ms. Murdock argued that Moses is borrowed from pagan mythology because of a 16th century AD Michelangelo painting displaying horns on Moses’ head, which represent psychedelic mushrooms or LSD. Barker also employed the weighty arguments of Barbara Walker, an author of books about tarot cards and knitting, in our two debates over the Old Testament.
I think that this update to Dr. Riplinger’s Acrostic Algebra should prove very convincing. James White, get ready!
Note: Wishing to be fair, I tried to reach out to Ms. Riplinger by means of the website where she sells her books. I asked her about the acrostic algebra. I would have liked to reproduce the response I received, which both asked about whether those who questioned her use of it had taken a class in symbolic logic at Harvard (which I assume she believes would somehow support her use of acrostic algebra-indicating she never took a class in symbolic logic at Harvard) and also said that the acrostic algebra was simply rhetorical rather than a substantive argument. However, I was not given permission to reproduce the email. So I wanted to give Ms. Riplinger a chance to defend the Acrostic Algebra in her own words, out of fairness, but I was not allowed to do so.
–TDR
Go-To Page for the James White / Thomas Ross Bible Text and Version Debate
Thank you to all readers who are praying and/or fasting for me and for God’s kingdom and truth to be glorified and advanced in my upcoming debate with James White.
I have created a go-to page with information about the debate. Links to the video should be posted there when it becomes available, as well as being accessible on the KJB1611 YouTube and KJBIBLE1611 Rumble channels. The go-to page should be updated with specific debate times in case you wish to attend in person, as well as the debate livestream link which we are hoping to make available. So:
Click here to visit the go-to page for the James White / Thomas Ross Bible Text and Version Debate
–TDR
The Peter Van Kleeck/James White Debate on the Textus Receptus Being Equal to the New Testament Autographa
I’m happy to say that the biblical and historical position on the preservation of scripture is making headway across the world. Today people refer to this viewpoint or doctrine by different names, including providential preservation view, standard sacred text view, confessional bibliology view, verbal plenary preservation view, and the perfection preservation of scripture view. I think some even use a different label than those. Over twenty years ago now, our church published Thou Shalt Keep Them: A Biblical Theology of the Perfect Preservation of Scripture to provide an exposition of this position from scripture.
About a month or so ago, Chris Arnzen of Iron Sharpens Iron Radio contacted me to debate James White in Pennsylvania. I was glad he asked. This debate, I told him, I wanted to do, would probably do it, but I wasn’t sure if his date would work out for me. I asked him a follow-up about the costs of lodging and travel The next day he told me he needed to know right away so he asked Peter Van Kleeck, who agreed to the debate. I believe it was God’s will. I still want to debate White and wish I could have then, but I was happy that Van Kleeck would be the man to do it.
Along with his dad, Peter Van Kleeck Sr. (Brother Van Kleeck is Jr.), he helps the cause of this doctrine online and many various ways. Several men right now are writing excellent material to read along with what Thomas Ross and I write here and then in our book on preservation. I believe Van Kleeck easily won the debate against James White. I watched it all and have not been able to make the time to critique what occurred, but I don’t want to keep waiting to post the debate, which is right below here.
Every one of the primary defenders of this doctrine, who have contributed much to the defense of the biblical and historical doctrine, would probably do a little bit different in his approach, strategy, or tactics. James White did not answer Van Kleeck’s arguments. His arguments stood and since he took the affirmative, he won. I’m not going to say anymore except that I wish to include below this paragraph the takeaway of Jeff Riddle over the debate. What he said was so close to what I would have said or written about the debate that it could be identical. I don’t think I need to write more than what he said. I might say or write more in the future, but this is good for now.
After having completed this post, I began to listen to the Van Kleecks, dad and son, analyze the debate, starting and stopping and commenting. It is a very helpful exercise, so I’m going to include their videos so far here. They so far have spent two parts on Dr. Van Kleeck’s opening statement and then two parts on White’s opening. Here they are in order.
Objections to the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: Are there answers?
The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is at the core of the Christian faith. Without the resurrection, the gospel is not “good news,” but absurd deceit. As 1 Corinthians 15 explains:
1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. … 12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: 14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. 16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: 17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. 20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
What are the Major Objections to Christ’s Resurrection?
How would you respond to someone who denies the resurrection of Christ, making one or more of the following arguments:
1.) “The disciples stole Christ’s body.”
2.) “Christ did not die, but only swooned/passed out on the cross and appeared to be dead. Then He came out of the grave after the cool tomb revived Him, and so appeared to have risen from the dead, when in fact He never died.”
3.) “The post-resurrection appearances of Christ were just hallucinations or visions.”
4.) “Christ did not rise from the dead because it is a miracle. ANY explanation is more likely than a miracle, because David Hume has proven miracles are impossible when he wrote:
A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined.… Nothing is esteemed a miracle, if it ever happen in the common course of nature.… [I]t is a miracle, that a dead man should come to life; because that has never been observed, in any age or country. There must, therefore, be a uniform experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the event would not merit that appellation. And as a uniform experience amounts to a proof, there is here a direct and full proof, from the nature of the fact, against the existence of any miracle; nor can such a proof be destroyed, or the miracle rendered credible, but by an opposite proof, which is superior. (David Hume, Of Miracles)
A version of argument number four came up in my PATAS debate with the president of the Philippines ATheist/Agnosticism, and Secularism organization in the Philippines (also on Rumble here).
The atheist argued that aliens stole the body of Christ and made it look like Christ really rose from the dead. His point was that anything is more likely than a miracle–making David Hume’s argument above, albeit in a less sophisticated and even more problematic way than Hume made it. (We posted about the PATAS debate on the blog here, while Shabir Ally also attacked the gospel accounts as discussed here.)
How would you answer these objections?
In my series on how to teach an evangelistic Bible study, we discuss these objections in the class sessions starting with 4.8, the eighth study on how to teach Bible study #4, on the gospel–the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. So if you would like answers, please click here to check out the teaching sessions starting with section 4.8. Written material dealing with the resurrection can also be found here.
Baptism & Salvation Debate Page, Douglas Jacoby
I have created a page for resources on the Douglas Jacoby-Thomas Ross debate on baptism. Both parts of the debate video, as well as links to the places where the debate is live on Rumble and on YouTube, the blog posts where the speakers answered questions from the audience that were not discussed in the debate proper, and further resources, are all on this page. I would, therefore, recommend that you visit this page in the future and make it your point of reference if you share the debate with others.
Click Here For the Page on the Douglas Jacoby / Thomas Ross Debate, “We Are Born Again Before Baptism” (part 1) and “We Are Born Again In Baptism” (part 2)
–TDR
Shabir Ally / Thomas Ross Debate over Jesus and the New Testament with Reviews now on Rumble
The videos of my debate with Shabir Ally, and the reviews of the arguments made, are now on my new channel, KJBIBLE1611, on the video sharing platform Rumble. I created the channel on Rumble because I am concerned that YouTube might be censoring or reducing the viewership of the debate now, and if that is not taking place now that it might do so in the future. Please feel free to subscribe to my Rumble channel, which will help other people to see the video. It also helps if you subscribe to my YouTube channel. I intend, at this point, to keep posting content on both the KJB1611 YouTube channel and on the KJBIBLE1611 Rumble channel, Lord willing; Rumble because it does not censor Biblical or conservative content, the way YouTube tends to do, and also YouTube because so many more people watch YouTube at this point. I have also added links to the Rumble videos on the Shabir Ally debate post at FaithSaves. The evangelistic Bible studies are also going up on Rumble.
–TDR
PATAS, Philippine Atheism, Agnosticism, and Secularism (Society) Debate live: Does History Validate the Accuracy of the New Testament Gospels? Ross / Maisonet
I am pleased to inform What is Truth? readers that the Thomas Ross – Benjamin Maisonet debate, “Does History Validate the Accuracy of the New Testament Gospels?” is now live and can be watched on YouTube.
Click here to watch the Ross-Maisonet debate, “Does History Validate the Accuracy of the New Testament Gospels?”
The debate took place in Manila, Philippines, in 2019, where I was teaching a class on the preservation of Scripture and preaching for Bro Billy Hardecker of Mt. Zion Baptist Mission in Manila, but issues with the audio and video lining up kept the debate from going live until now. The quality is still not absolutely amazing, but considering the non-first-world setting and the equipment used, I am thankful for the quality that is present. Mr. Maisonet was (and I assume still is) the president of the Philippine Atheism, Agnosticism, and Secularism (Society), or PATAS. He told me that he replaced the previous president because that person had been stealing money from the organization. Atheism and agnosticism are much less common in the Philippines than they are in the United States, which may be one reason that the president of PATAS was born in the United States and moved to the Philippines. In any case, Mr. Maisonet, as the president of PATAS, was a good representative of atheism in the Philippines. He made the sort of popular-level arguments that one will run across in personal evangelism, rather than the more scholarly type of arguments against the accuracy of the New Testament made by Islamic apologists such as Shabir Ally. I confess that I did not find his argumentation particularly convincing, but he seems to have thought he made a good case, and I will allow those who watch the debate to evaluate what was said based on facts and logic in God’s world.
The PATAS debate was set up at short notice, so I employed a lot of the material from my debate with Dr. Ally on “The New Testament Picture of Jesus: Is It Accurate?” which is also in my study on evidence for the New Testament from archaeology, prophecy, and history. In my view, which is admittedly biased in favor of God and His Word, the arguments made for the historicity of the New Testament have now stood up well against both Muslim and atheist apologists.
Feel free to subscribe to my KJB1611 YouTube channel,”like” and comment on the debate, and share it with others, if you believe it deserves it. Also, if you would be interested in sponsoring a debate with a non-Christian philosophy or a pseudo-Christian cult, please contact my church.
–TDR
Recent Comments