This morning I read Brother Bob Ross's good writing in the Calvinistflyswatter blog on Joel Osteem, on Joel's evanglism versus that of the Hybrids (or "Flounders").
I then went to James White's web blog and read the following that Brother White wrote against what Brother Ross had written. After the citation from White I will make a few comments of my own.
The title to the blog entry was - "Bob Ross Declares Joel Osteen "Closer" to Spurgeon: Arizona Cardinals Go Undefeated and Win Super Bowl"
05/03/2008 - James White
"I suppose it has been pretty obvious for a while now that Bob Ross (not the "pretty flowers" Ross, the other guy) is about as Reformed in his theology as...Joel Osteen, since his blog is titled the "Calvinist Flyswatter." Ross' rambling rants (now coming two or three a day) against anything Calvinistic are spinning so far off into the realm of the absurd that it is probably time to remove his feed from the ol' RSS list out of sheer embarrassment for the poor man. His most recent offering, in which he tries to argue Osteen is more consistent with Spurgeon than Founders churches and other "hybrid Calvinists" (the term he uses for those he has decided to skewer, despite how often he has been corrected on their actual beliefs), pretty well demonstrates Ross' "I see only what I want to see" mentality when it comes to argumentation and logic. And as such, it seems best to close the door on the Bob Ross saga, say "thanks" one last time for all those colorful Spurgeon volumes on the shelf, ask him to try to regain some sense of balance or even honesty, smile, and say "good night."
Oh...the Cardinals thing seemed just as connected to reality as Ross' claims."
http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/
Yes, run White run! You can call names and make accusations, but can you come forth and prove your accusations against Brother Ross?
Bob Ross is a better well "balanced" Calvinist than White, who is a "Hybrid" in his view that "regeneration" precedes faith. Now, true, White may be more "reformed" than Ross, given how that term is used today, but he is certainly not more biblical, confessional, or Baptistic!
Since White loves to debate so much, why does he not debate Brother Ross on the question of whether men are regenerated before they believe?
White would rather everyone follow his lead and "ignore" Brother Ross. Shun Ross! Let's all get "Rossophobia"!
Why does White choose to ignore Ross about his "Hybrid" views on "regeneration"? He is willing to debate (and not ignore) the Catholics, Muslims, Mormons, etc., but he does not want to engage Ross! Isn't that ironic?
Bob is a Calvinist after the order of Spurgeon. He writes for the "Calvinist Flyswatter" to swat the false Calvinists, the Hypers, Hardshells, and others who are promoting this novel view of "regeneration before faith."
Come on Brother White, answer the writings of Brother Ross and quit acting like a child.
Stephen
No comments:
Post a Comment