Vatican In Kansas?

I am afraid we have all been mistaken. All that news was clouding my judgment. All of that pomp and circumstance led me astray. It is all so clear to me now. I cannot believe I didn't see it before. The Pope is not in Rome. He's in Kansas!

Yes, that's right. The duly elected by 6 Roman Catholics including three of his own family members (including himself), Pope Michael I, has been watching over the flock since 1990. Perhaps you didn't realize that the Bishop of Rome is...well...in Belvue (not to be confused with Crazy people hospital in NY), Kansas. That's ok. Nobody else knows about him either. Being elected in a store owned by your parents in a small western town tends not to get too much news coverage.

After reading his material, I have come to see, he must be the true Pope. After all, who could question the six Roman Catholics that voted for him. There were also no dissenting votes. That surely beats the filibuster of Bolton by a long shot.

I'm not Roman Catholic, but I feel the tug in my heart to go receive the Mass from him. After all, if he is the true Vicar of Christ, he'll have the keys to heaven and he will excommunicate the other popes. When he does that we'll know for sure.

The Infallible interpreter of Scripture in my own backyard. The man, who can tell all Roman Catholics in the whole world to say a hundred Hail Marys or else, is just a few hours east on I-70. The man who could actually tell us Protestants we are doomed to hell without concern for Vattican II. It is quite refreshing. Don't you think?

Do This In Rememberance....

Going to the cemetery is a family tradition on Memorial Day. We pack flowers and visit the graves of our loved ones that have gone on before us. This is not a practice that is secretly done by only us. It is something millions of Americans do.

Until I met my wife and married into her family it was not something I did. I was a lost sinner, who had no foundation and no sense of belonging. It is strange to look back on those years and see myself, then to look at so many young people today. The sense of "life has no meaning" is all too strong in our nation's life.

I pray that we parents give our children their past. To teach them diligently the history of our nation and the beliefs of our founders is essential. I believe in so doing we will give them a sense for who they are and a purpose in this life. They will be able to identify themselves with God's purposes for this nation. Perhaps even a sense of patriotism?

Great aunt Ella is 97 years old. My children just love her. She lives just around the block from us, and the kids drop in to visit her once in a while. A few years ago, her husband Howard Long passed away. My children remember him. They remember that he was a believer in Christ and lived a quiet godly life. They remember the funeral and how Aunt Ella just wept and said, "This is the worst day in my whole life." Steven especially remembers that moment of tears and sadness.

Yesterday, as we have done every year since his death, we go to his graveside and put flowers by his gravestone. I then gather my two children together and explain how one day there will be a loud command of God and a shout of the Arch angel and the trumpet of God. This event will be so loud and overpowering that the dead will rise. Uncle Howard will rise right in the spot of his grave and be gathered together with all of God's people to Christ.

My son while somewhat sad is heartened to be able to trust in a powerful Savior, who is able to raise the dead with His voice. My daughter in her 5 year old voice says she will enjoy meeting her grandmothers who are also buried in the same area. It will truly be a time to rejoice.

For now, it is good enough that my children learn and remember the purposes of God in our family's past, in our nations past and in Christianity's past. For now, I pray they would gain a sense of belonging in God's family. May the Spirit speak to our children's hearts as He has done for so many other previous generations.

Time To Plant and Maybe Harvest Too?

First Baptist Church of Scott City is sending a mission team to encourage believers in the Ukraine. Assuming the Ukranian mission team has their paperwork done, they leave tomorrow the 25th. They will be spending time in the Ukraine sharing the Gospel and doing many other things. We pray that God will bless His people as they seek to honor His Word and proclaim the Gospel faithfully.

Hopefully we'll get some interviews when the team gets back. There are several High School age youths going.

GOD SPEED!

They Lose Even When They Win

Once again, the losers win. Republicans had nothing to lose and the Democrats had everything to lose. So it was really a win win for the Republicans. Apparently conservative D.C. politicians watch too much TV. They really think they should cowtow to the liberal establishment.

I have yet to figure this out. Adams, a Federalist, got his judges appointed. When the people of the country wanted Jefferson, an anti-Federalist, anti-Federalist judges were nominated, and they were appointed. So the President who is elected by the people of this country should nominate who he wants.

Not if you are a conservative are you allowed to do that. Conservatives are wacko and too extreme for this country. Never mind that the majority of people in this country (by 4 million votes) elected Bush. One of the main reasons was for judicial nominees who would be faithful to the Constitution and not the piece of wax Liberals have turned it into. I guess if being an originalist is extreme, then I am an extremist galore.

When are the republicans going to figure it out? Conservatives like myself don't care about the liberal media or the liberal establishment or Washington D.C. for that matter. In fact, I do not even watch TV anymore. I watch Fox news and go to the conservative bloggers. Those who share my worldview are the ones I want to hear commentary from, not some secularist who hates Christianity. I can get that from my local New York Times editor right here in Scott City, KS.

Just goes to show, only put your faith in God and not politicians.

Absolutely Certain Are You?

Many years ago I had discussions with a Kings James Only advocate. The King James is THE Word of God and all other translations and even Greek manuscripts are either not accurate or of the devil. The argumentation is circular at best. The real problem was the desire to have absolute certainty, much like Muslims, Roman Catholic apologists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons and others claim to have.

I still see many Christians today who have the same overall view of Scripture. They may use different translations, but they assume certain things about how the Bible has come to us. And when confronted with arguments from Jesus Seminar people to Muslim apologists, they tend to bury their heads in the sand.

Although I understand somewhat how the Bible has been transmitted to us, I still "feel" the desire to have absolute certainty about my religion. A certainty that is infallible and God-like. This desire can never be met, but all of man's religions seem to promise this.

The question itself and the powerful desire within us to be like God ultimately looks to man's wisdom, all the while claiming to have come from God. It is circular reasoning and begging the question.

To give an excellent example of this, read today's Blog at AOMin.org.

I do not mean to say we can not have reasonable certainty. I just do not believe Christians should ignore evidence but should examine ALL of the evidence and learn how God has miraculously preserved the Scriptures.

Why Do the Losers Rule the Day?

"Filibuster, filibuster, we call Judge Priscilla Owens right over."..."Sorry guys, it takes 60 votes to get us to send her right over." But wait a second, why does it take a super majority to get a judge into a position that she deserves, but only a simple majority to strike down amendments to state constitutions?

I have an idea. Conservative Supreme Court Judges should cry, "That's not fair. What about minority rights? This decision is only five to four in the majority favor. If we had a filibuster rule, we could protect the minority rights of this court."

So let's get congress to pass a Constitutional Amendment that all social issues must have a super majority of the court in their decisions. Say.....9-0? Remember, we must preserve the rights of that one offended person.

Time To Journey

I have been reading through Judges with my kids before bed and came across an interesting passage. Chapter 17:7-13:

Now there was a young man from Bethlehem in Judah, of the family of Judah, who was a Levite; and he was staying there. Then the man departed from the city, from Bethlehem in Judah, to stay wherever he might find a place; and as he made his journey, he came to the hill country of Ephraim to the house of Micah. Micah said to him, "Where do you come from?" And he said to him, "I am a Levite from Bethlehem in Judah, and I am going to stay wherever I may find a place." Micah then said to him, "Dwell with me and be a father and a priest to me, and I will give you ten pieces of silver a year, a suit of clothes, and your maintenance." So the Levite went in. The Levite agreed to live with the man, and the young man became to him like one of his sons. So Micah consecrated the Levite, and the young man became his priest and lived in the house of Micah. Then Micah said, "Now I know that the LORD will prosper me, seeing I have a Levite as priest."

This is the time of year when many young graduates are moving on into the world like the young man in this passage. Like the world around us, the young man lives in an idolatrous age. Because he is a levite (a priest) Micah decides to hire him.

There is a time of looking for a new place. The text does not record how long this man journeyed before he found a household to live in. Some of you may feel "lost" in this world looking for your place. I pray that by your godly character, someone will recognize you for the blessings that God will do through you. Their intentions may be that of Jacob's father-in-law or as in this passage, Micah.

God calls us to be righteous in a godless age. Remain faithful to your calling. You will be surprised at what God will do in your life.

Due Process Seems To Mean...Anything

One thing I can't stand about judicial decisions is their language which means nothing. If words have no meaning, or they can be so easily redefined, why do we need to listen to their meaning? Can we not just say, "Hey judges, we heard your "no", but we have decided to interpret it to mean yes." But then I'd be advocating lawlessness and, I can't do that.

Citizen Link has reported that a judge struck down Nebraska's Marriage Amendment (DOMA). They state, "Nebraska Family First Executive Director Dave Bydalek said the judge held that the DOMA law violated the due process rights of homosexuals because it bars them from seeking gay marriage or civil unions. The ruling effectively voids the protection of marriage in Nebraska."

What is "due process rights"? It is a term I have heard used so often, it seems to mean that all persons have certain rights in which the government can not violate when charging a person with a crime. One site defines Due Process as, "A law must be clear, fair, and have a presumption of innocence to comply with procedural due process."

Or a summary would be:

# Right to a fair and public trial conducted in a competent manner
# Right to be present at the trial
# Right to an impartial jury
# Right to be heard in one's own defense
# Laws must be written so that a reasonable person can understand what is criminal behavior
# Taxes may only be taken for public purposes
# Property may be taken by the government only for public purposes
# Owners of taken property must be fairly compensated

Now I must ask, what does this have to do with homosexuals? Terms like Due Process have become so vague that a judge can make it mean anything he wants. If this judge is going to be consistent, why pass any law? Everyone can say my "Due Process" rights were violated.

Recently Congress passed Campaign Finance Reform laws. Is this not a violation of free speech and the First Amendment? Yet I hear of no judge siding with people like me who might say Due Process Rights are being violated. Or better yet, are creationists like myself having their Due Process rights violated because laws against creationism prevent us from teaching it in the public skrewls? Where does this kind of thinking end?

How about public debate on this subject? How about persuading your fellow man and electing representatives to pass laws we agree with? How about doing things Constitutionally? Oh, WAIT! Leftists hate the Constitution. Filibuster judges that can read and put in judges that legislate. Now what is all the hub-bub about judges again?

Believe Or Believing?

My Sunday school class discussed the nature of Saving faith last week. A good discussion after the debate to have. Is it possible to have a false faith? Is it possible for people to say they believe when in fact they are deceived?

An argument Dr. White used in the debate was from John's Gospel chapter 2:23-25:

Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in His name, observing His signs which He was doing. But Jesus, on His part, was not entrusting Himself to them, for He knew all men, and because He did not need anyone to testify concerning man, for He Himself knew what was in man.

Notice that men supposedly believed in Jesus, but Jesus would not "entrust" Himself to them. The Greek word is the same for entrust and believe. But one connotes a full entrusting oneself, and one gives the idea of a past action with no real present ongoing condition.

So is believing just being "convinced that something is true" or is it more than that? Is it without works? Can one truly believe in John's gospel and not have works as a fruit? Is believing something man does of his own free-will, or is it a work of the Holy Spirit of God within a man?

So many today think they can believe for a moment at a service where the preacher has made them "sermon sick". They were shown their sins, therefore they are convinced of certain facts of death and hell as a punishment for their sins. But as James says, "For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his natural face in a mirror; for once he has looked at himself and gone away, he has immediately forgotten what kind of person he was."

Is this not what may be a major problem in Evanjellyism today? So many think they have been saved. Perhaps this is why James spends much of the first chapter of his letter on trials and tribulations. So many people consider suffering simply of the devil. Perhaps God is conforming His own to the image of His Son.

Islam, Rome and Freedom?

After a little heavy handed persuasion (ie: sit down and watch this or else...), my son decided it would be to his benefit to watch the movie "Luther". Steven simply did not want to see a "history" movie about some dead guy who lived centuries ago. "Dad, can we watch that again?" was the response at the end of the movie.

The movie was great. A must see movie for anyone who desires to know why we have the freedoms we have today. My son could not believe the religious bondage that people used to be enslaved to. He could not believe that people were not allowed to read the Bible. I certainly hope my son learns his history (a topic he does well in school by the way).

Today on World Net Daily, a catholic web site was hacked by muslims (see story here). Muslims claim they are for freedom. Why the left in this country has sided with muslims is simply to complicated for a Red Stater like myself. If it were not for Christianity, we might be living under the oppression of Islam, and if it were not for the Reformers, we would be living under the oppression of Rome.

I pray that God would have mercy on our children. I pray as a parent, that we would give our children a knowledge of true history and Scriptural wisdom.

Last Report On The Debate

After reading AOMin's Blog today, I was reminded that I had not finished reporting on the Wilkin debate. In the rebuttal period Dr. White brought up a great question, "IS faith just propositional? What about coming, drinking and obeying?" Dr. White clearly thought that a man who is in union with Christ is a "big thing". He also rebutted the Ordo Salutis argument given by Dr. Wilkin. What I found ironic is that Dr. White had to explain the same thing I had to explain to my professor at SWBTS. Why do these people with doctorates not know these things?

In Dr. Wilkin's rebuttal, he misquotes Dr. White's accusation of Wilkin's position, saying faith is "uni-directional", when in fact Dr. White said Uni-dimensional. This may seem like a small point, but I simply got the feeling that Dr. Wilkin did not even show up to the debate at times.

He kept asking Dr. White if he was saved and if he would persevere. It was as if Dr. Wilkin did not hear a word White had said. But, Dr. Wilkin had some great pictures. During the debate, both men were to use power point presentations. During Wilkin's time, he showed a shack that was falling down, a plane crash and a road sign that gave directions to the state prison. Pretty funny guy, but he never demonstrated that he even attempted to understand his opponent's position. I thought this was simply rude for someone who has a doctorate and chooses to participate in public debate. It was insulting to Dr. White and the audience..

Wilkin in the second part of the debate attempted to show that faith needs no works. He stated, "Faulty faith axes assurance, if the basis of faith is works, then you can not have it." I am not sure what books he has been reading. Perhaps he isn't reading at all. Why assuming one is a true believer because he says so is beyond me.

During his presentation of certain passages that all one has to do is believe (I would agree if it is saving faith) and produce no works of repentance, my wife followed along in her bible. She showed me passage after passage of how works are an integral part of salvation. For example, Wilkin disputed the John 5:25 passage as referring to regeneration as reformed people understand it. Yet in verse 29 Jesus specifically tells us that our works will be the basis of the judgment to see if we are the true people of faith. The New Testament is so full of these passages I am not sure why it is even a point of contention, but it is. Please understand, Dr. White did not argue that our salvation depended on our works, but that our faith is seen in our works.

Dr. White then went through certain passage explaining the purpose of God saving a people, who are zealous for good deeds. He used Ephesians and 1 John to show this. Dr. White also showed that the Reformers condemned the belief Wilkin describes and teaches. Wilkin took great offense at this and demanded that the debate focus only upon the Scriptures. I am still waiting for Wilkin to do just that.

In the end, it seemed to me that Dr. Wilkin's assumption is that man has a libertarian free-will. Perhaps the debate should have focused more on that. Perhaps the debate would have been better if Wilkin had showed up prepared. It is my understanding Dr. White was very apologetic and embarrased for suggesting Dr. Wilkin for this debate. There are probably far better reviews of the debate on the internet. These were just some observations for a first timer.

Praying at Breakfast Is Way Too Early

Six-thirty AM. Phone rings. Oh no. Prayer breakfast started 15 minutes ago. This week has been going at a million miles per hour. I knew I had to be there, so there was simply no excuse. I quickly got dressed, brushed my teeth and combed my hair. In ten minutes I was there.

Remember that feeling when you have taken too many painkillers, and you just can't get your bearings? Well, I was there. Lack of sleep and sudden wake up calls seem to do that to me anymore. I was immediately shown where the food was. I said "thank you Lord", for I still had plenty of time. After eating biscuits and gravy and a glass of juice, my nerves seemed to have calmed down.I was ready to go.

Pastor Lynne started by giving a short message about the founding of our Nation. Then we went to prayer time. I was blessed that so many people had come out to seek the Lord's blessing and mercy on our nation.

What really impressed me, was the number of high school students that came. Granted some were there because they had to be. But I am sure that many were there because they have a love for God and country. Quite often we older people think the world is coming to an end. We tend to think modern times are the worst ever. Perhaps so. There seems to be signs of hope. Perhaps evil men, doing evil things against our nation and within, brings the best out of good Patriotic Americans.

Remember Jesus' parables. Both good and evil must struggle with one another until the harvest. Let us be ever vigilant for the faith once delivered unto the Saints and the truths of God Word.

Are The Scriptures Sufficient?

Somehow I get on e-mail lists that I just don't want. I decided to read one e-mail from a Christian website. The author clearly takes a common stand that is being taken among evanjellyists. Here is an e-mail exhange between Rob (from www.christiancounterculture.com) and myself.

[To Rob]

"reading a book by an Open Theist or (God-forbid!) someone who is suggesting that perhaps the 17th-century "Westminster Divines" didn't get it exactly right in every single instance." [quote from internet site]

Do you really think warning someone of the anti-Biblical definition of God is trivial? Amazing! It is true that much on the internet is junk, but you need to be careful when you paint with a broad brush.

The undershepherds of God's flock will have to give an account. Warning people of false doctrine and false teachers is the job of the Elders in the local body. If you really think the nature of God is trivial then I guess evanjellyism is truly on the wide path.

I just assume not receive email from Christians leaders who have no discernment.

God Bless

Howard



[From Rob]

Thanks for the note, Howard. But I am afraid it was just the sort of thing I was writing about. Not only was it "less than brotherly" but you chose to put your own ridiculous "spin" on it ? and I mean "ridiculous" quite literally. I said nothing of the sort you suggest. Forgive me, but you are being a bit ridiculous. [Hear that with warm smiles!]

It suggests to me that you are part of the larger "Reformed" world which is more interested in waging war than walking in love. My prayer is that God will give you the maturity to exercise true godly discernment, recognizing that the body of Christ includes people and theologies that don't set well with our own understanding of Scripture. or perhaps you think no one was saved prior to the Protestant Reformation?

May God's grace fill your lives, Howard & Stephanie.

Warmly,

rob


[To Rob]

"perhaps you think no one was saved prior to the Protestant Reformation?"

I agree that there is much that is just sniping on the internet. This sort
of thing has happened since the beginning of Christianity. But to think that
the nature of God was settled at the reformation is absurd. Disputing over
what time Sunday services should be is one thing. Saying that God could be
like the Mormon God is another. The nature of God has been defended long
before the reformers. I just wish God would grant us some of the great
defenders of the past.

"My prayer is that God will give you the maturity to exercise true godly
discernment, recognizing that the body of Christ includes people and
theologies that don't set well with our own understanding of Scripture"

There are lots of people who don't have perfect knowledge, especially me.
But your claim is clearly going outside the boundary lines. You are actually
denying the sufficiency of Scripture to speak to us clearly. In other words,
God has not spoken clearly enough for us to understand who He is and what
the gospel is. All of this in the name of the Word of God.

Remember, you and I will give an account and will be held to a higher
standard, which is why not many of us should seek to be teachers.

When evanjellyism can not even define God according to the plain teaching of
Scripture, then I know we are in trouble. I am not sure what "spin" I put on
"it", but if defending the faith once delivered to the Saints (long before
the Reformation by the way) is not the job of the overseers of the church, I
do not know what is.

God Bless

Howard

[From Rob]

I think you are having an argument with yourself, Howard.

:-)

rob


[from Rob]

"according to the plain teaching of Scripture"

The debates I am speaking of involve taking sides on matters that go far beyond "the plain teaching of Scipture." In my humble opinion, the real problem in the debate over "openness" is that BOTH sides go to far in trying to define the character of God. There is much more philosophical reasoning going on; it certainly isn't about the "plain teaching of scripture." Same with other debates ? like the 5 Points of Calvinism, Imputation and Federal Theology.

Read Martyn Lloyd-Jones, for example, on how the Westminster "Devines" went far beyond scripture in defining the faith. As did their heirs, especially Hodge and Warfield.

There are some things that we should probably say less about.

(BTW ? I am opposed to open theism.)

:-) rob


--Don't you find this kind of thinking typical in our feel good, let's not offend anyone with the clear teaching of Scripture day? Why is it not "sniping" when this website puts out its views and everyone else is? Are they simply not taking a position and defending it, but if anyone else does that, they are simply being intolerant?

Also, if evangelicalism continues to go down this road, they will only give aid and comfort to those who deny the sufficiency of the Bible. I wonder if we are not already there.

For My Pastor, Who Labors Day & Night

I am reading through The Founders Journal from the summer of 2004. This issue mainly focuses on "The Kind of Man God Uses." For those of you who preach, I think you will enjoy these quotes by Nehemiah Cox and Samuel Pearce.

"Remember that the duty of your place is, not to preach yourselves but Christ Jesus the Lord; His Glory must be the Mark aimed at by all your labors, and His grace the principal Subject of all your Discources; It is not a Philosophic Harangue that will save the souls of men, but the preaching of Christ crucified."

"Give me the preacher who opens the folds of my heart; who accuses me, convicts me and condemns me before God; who loves my soul too well to suffer me to go on in sin, unreproved, through fear of giving me offense; who draws the line with accuracy, between the delusions of fancy, and the impressions of grace; who pursues me from one hiding place to another, until I am driven from every refuge of lies; who gives me no rest until he sees me, with unfeigned penitence, trembling at the feet of Jesus; and then, and not till then, sooths my anguish, wipes away my tears, and comforts me with cordials of grace. Give me the preacher 'who constantly affirms that they who have believed, be careful to maintain good works,' who insists, that a life of peace and communion with God, is utterly abhorrent to the practice of iniquity; and faithfully reminds me, that 'if I sin, that grace may abound, my damnation is just.' Give me a preacher who pants not for my safety only, but also for my increase in grace; who cautions me, 'reproves me, rebukes me, exhorts me with all longsuffering and doctrine;' who charges me 'to give all diligence to add to my faith, virtue; and to virtue, knowledge; and to knowledge, temperance; and to temperance, patience; and to patience, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, charity.' Brethren, if Christ have given you such a man as this, receive him as an angel from heaven; and prize such a pastor as one of the most valuable gifts that can be imparted to the church."

Just Read A Snoozer

I recently finished a book entitled Perspectives On Church Government: Five Views Of Church Polity. There were three congregational models, a presbysterian model and an episcopal model. The book has much to offer anyone wanting to know what are some of the current and historic views of church government. I know. This is not exactly an exciting topic. I mainly bought the book because a scholar I am an acquaintance with wrote a chapter in it. I was simply dying to know the different Scriptural reason people use to support their positions.

The chapter on the Single-Elder-Led/Congregational church by Daniel Akin had a lot of scholarly information. He demonstrated from Matthew 18 and the passage on the Priesthood of all believers why congregational polity was important. He showed how the entire congregation should be involved in the decision-making of the church.

It was a good chapter but insufficient on showing how the church is to be "set in order" when pastors may come and go at will. He overlooked key passages that deal with Elders shepherding the flock of God.

The chapter on pure Congregationalism just seemed to be a chapter that asked for trouble. Pure democracies never stand. I failed to see how new believers who bring in their carnality into decision making benefits the church. The pastor/CEO and board of whatever model was rightly criticised, but I didn't see an explanation to fix this problem.

The Bishop-Led (Episcopal) church chapter was a complete joke. Dr. Paul F. M. Zahl seemed to argue that the Anglican church history era is just too important to allow it to disappear into history. A church that supposedly unifies liberals/conservatives and whatever else has just got to be the true church. When someone explains to me how light fellowships with darkness, then maybe it will make sense.

A challenging chapter on Presbyterianism was written by Robert Reymond. He made a strong case for churches to be accountable to one another. He attempted to show that the Apostles left for us a hierarchical government in which disputes among churches could be settled in councils. In the end, the argument seemed circular to me. It also suffered problems on exegetical grounds. But he did manage to challenge some of the assumptions Congregationalists make.

Personally, I favored Dr. Whites chapter on the Plurality of Elders/Congregationalism. Mainly because I firmly hold to the Baptist doctrines of local independency and autonomy. But I enjoyed the fact that he did go to the other passages that the others ignored. He dealt with a very important part of the New Testament, "the setting in order of the church". Having been through the three ring circus of a pastor retiring, I know the many problems this causes. I see this form of government to be a little wiser, for the church does not necessarily rise or fall with a pastor.

Although the book is not exactly a Perreti novel, it is informative overall.

Illegal Immigration Into Christianity Unnoticed

Apparently, Mexicans are not the only ones crossing the Border. I have been following Dr. White's Blog on the new "Eerdmans LDS apologetics book...A Different Jesus". This morning shocked me when I read that Craig Blomberg has endorsed a book that proselytizes Christians. A book that has been published by a so-called Christian publisher. Then (not to my surprise) Christianity Today also endorsed the book.

I guess believing in the one true God is irrelevant anymore. Never mind the gospel.

Here is the link to Dr. White's current Blog article.