Today I started off discussing the launch of “Evangelicals for Marriage Equality,” and given that the phrase “marriage equality” is a lie-phrase, well—that becomes part of the discussion. Wandered about a bit for the first half hour on that topic, then someone on Twitter completely derailed everything. I was about to discuss my Twitter convo with Brian Zahnd (see below) when I was directed to a video posted on YouTube of Steven Anderson identifying me as a “pervert.” So, we fired it up and found that Anderson was doing damage control. Here is the video:
Damage control? Yes, the posting of our conversation showed him to be unable to “trap” the evil, terrible James White, and so he has been doing damage control since then. He goes nuts, literally, yelling and ranting about a “sermon” I preached. He says I was displaying a picture of two men kissing behind me as I preached a wimpy, non-Bible based sermon against gay marriage. And, of course, he used that to rev up his little cult following. Problem is—it’s a lie. During the show folks tracked it down—it was a Sunday School lesson, not a sermon. That was clear to anyone who actually listened to it. It was not a study of a bible passage, it was a useful discussion of how to address the homosexual issue in our society today. There was no display of the picture, I was referencing a blog article I had written, and wrote a URL on the white board. I mean, the level of dishonesty Anderson displayed while pounding his fists on his beleaguered pulpit is astounding—until you remember this man is but a modern version of Joseph Smith, a cult leader who has little concern about issues of truth. But for those who would like to listen to the study (it was quite useful, despite some microphone issues), it can be found here:
Then toward the end of the program I finally got to my Twitter exchange with Brian Zahnd, which I will paste into the bottom of this article. Enjoy!
Here is the YouTube link:
WHITE
ZAHND
“.@McGie84 @DrOakley1689 I just asked Jesus about my salvation. He said not to worry about it, he’s got it covered. Jesus is good like that.”
“@BrianZahnd While talking to Jesus, did you ask Him what this means? τῆς ὀργῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου ? How does Marcionism understand that?”
@DrOakley1689 No.
@BrianZahnd The Jesus who believed the Tanakh was “God speaking” (Mt. 22:31) would understand Rev. 6:16. The Marcionite Jesus—not so much.
@DrOakley1689 It ain’t me, babe, no, no, no, it ain’t me you’re looking for.”
@BrianZahnd No, pretty sure I’ve got the right Zahnd fellow…you are the Olympic Champion Straw Man Builder, as shown last week at IHOP, yes?”
@DrOakley1689 I’m a Christian and a pastor. I confess Jesus is the living Word of the God of Israel. That’s me. (I’m just not a Calvinist.)
@BrianZahnd Yes, and you likewise say the Tanakh is an inspired record of what the Israelites THOUGHT about God—do you not?”
@DrOakley1689 What?
@BrianZahnd You cannot create a Jesus that is comfortable to you, Brian. The Jesus of history was firmly planted in the Tanakh as revelation”
@DrOakley1689 Amen.
@BrianZahnd http://t.co/r0m94tLLi5 Paragraph beginning “The Old Testament is the inspired telling of the story of Israel…”
@DrOakley1689 Yes.
@BrianZahnd Pretending you can *start* with Jesus and relegate the Tanakh to an errant story results in a faux Jesus.
@BrianZahnd Jesus did not teach us to view the OT the way you view the OT, which is why the Lamb has wrath, and your Lamb…well?”
@DrOakley1689 What’s Tanakh?
@BrianZahnd Torah, Nevi’im, Ketuvim—the Law, the Prophets, the Writings. AKA, the Hebrew Scriptures.”
@DrOakley1689 I believe everything John the Poet says about the Lamb. Though I suspect we interpret it differently. Hermeneutics, you know.”
@DrOakley1689 OK.
@BrianZahnd John the Apostle spoke about the wrath of the Lamb. I interpret his words in their original tongue and in their original context
@BrianZahnd A context that more broadly includes the similar picture in the non-poet Paul, 2 Thess 1:7-8.”
@DrOakley1689 I don’t know Greek. But others do. My go to interpreters for Revelation are Richard Bauckham, Mark Gorman, Eugene Peterson.”
@BrianZahnd Sorry to hear that. The best commentary on the New Testament is the New Testament in Greek.
@BrianZahnd I see numerous difference in even those men—but at least I can critique them directly. You seem to just be following. Dangerous.
@DrOakley1689 Should I just follow you?
@BrianZahnd How about doing some serious consideration of why you have to so grossly caricature your opposition, perhaps?”
@BrianZahnd The straw men you lit up in both the “Calvinism” debate and against Michael Brown should have earned you 12 EPA violations.
@BrianZahnd Be that as it may, you told Michael Brown you are not a Marcionite. Have you changed your position on the Tanakh recently?”
@DrOakley1689 Paul cranked out a pretty cool poem that you hear at a lot of weddings. Speaking of poets. The Hebrew prophets were poets.
@DrOakley1689 Richard Bauckham, N.T. Wright, Richard Hayes, Eugene Peterson would agree. Which is why I listen to them.”
@BrianZahnd Since clearly your view of the actual nature of the Tanakh, as noted in the cited article, was worthy of Marcion.”
@DrOakley1689 I’m not a Marcionite. I confess the Abba of Jesus is the God of Israel and that the OT is Xian Scripture. That’s not Marcion!
@BrianZahnd Calling it Scripture and then saying “But that’s just what the Israelites THOUGHT God was saying” is a twisting of language.
@BrianZahnd You know what really concerns me, Brian? You call my God a monster, a pagan deity—I am accustomed to that kind of rhetoric.”
@BrianZahnd But I am an apologist. I take the gospel into mosques and universities. And your teachings leave the gospel without defense.
@BrianZahnd And you know what the real irony is, Brian? Your opening statement against MB was parallel in many ways to the opening made by…”
@BrianZahnd Sheikh Shabir Ally in our debate in the masjid in Erasmia, South Africa, a year ago: https://t.co/lnhT0oYH8K”
@DrOakley1689 But you’re the guy who calls me a Marcionite. Well, as Fleetwood Mac sang, you can go your own way. Blessings to you. Adieu.”
@BrianZahnd Thanks for the convo…I will be continuing my review of your comments on the Dividing Line: http://t.co/rsrn0jNYux.
@bkundrat @DrOakley1689 I participated in the two recent debates because I was asked to and have friendships with people involved….
@bkundrat @DrOakley1689 …But I have no desire to participate in endless quarrels w/Calvinists. It doesn’t help; it’s not good for my soul.
@BrianZahnd @bkundrat “endless quarrels” is hardly what anyone is looking for. But the two brief encounters of late were insufficient.
@BrianZahnd @bkundrat Most importantly, the very nature of God’s revelation needs to be clarified, for that is truly the issue at hand.”
@zhoag @BrianZahnd The Prince of Peace satisfied the justice and holiness of God, which is why He can BRING peace. Skip wrath—justice gone.”
@zhoag @BrianZahnd What do YOU do with Rev. 6:16 and the wrath of the Lamb?
@PerrinsSteve @McGie84 @DrOakley1689 Everything in Revelation is symbol. Every single image. From the seven-eyed lamb to the bejeweled city.
@BrianZahnd (But the symbols of Revelation point us to real things — glorious and terrible realities.)
@PerrinsSteve @BrianZahnd The point of raising the passage is simple: does your view of the Lamb determine what Scripture can say?
@PerrinsSteve @BrianZahnd Or does Scripture determine your view of the Lamb? It’s a major issue.
@PerrinsSteve There is a fundamental divide between those who believe in the perspicuity & authority of the Scriptures, and those who don’t.”
@DrOakley1689 @PerrinsSteve “”Perspicuity of Scripture.”” I LOVE that! What a laugh! As if there aren’t a thousand Baptist denominations…”
@DrOakley1689 @PerrinsSteve …all claiming their interpretation is a “”clear reading”” of Scripture. Pervasive interpretive pluralism. Yep.
@BrianZahnd You sound just like my Muslim debate partners—yes, perspicuity of Scripture, Pastor Zahnd. When you actually believe it…”
@BrianZahnd instead of picking and choosing according to your own predilections.
@DrOakley1689 I do believe in the authority of Scripture. All you have to do is agree with my authoritative interpretation and all is well.
@BrianZahnd When you do not believe in its nature as revelation, the authority you give it can go no higher than your own mind.
@DrOakley1689 But you want me to submit to your predilections. We need to get a Magisterium. We’ll have to become Catholics to settle this!
@DrOakley1689 It goes as high as the church. Authoritative interpretation belongs to the church, not podcasts. A problem for us Protestants.”
@BrianZahnd Oh my…we are sooooo far apart…no wonder you think my God a monster.
@DrOakley1689 Yeah, we’re pretty far apart…for the foreseeable future. In the meantime feel free to keep talking about me. In Christ. -BZ
