"I have outlined the issue simply
because most folks have no idea what on earth Ross is seeking to argue about.
Personally, given the battles we face today on all fronts, arguing with Mr.
Ross regarding minute temporal points of the ordo salutis is of
no importance to me. I thank those who have forwarded Mr. Rossí
complaints, but I would like to note I do not need anyone to invest their
time in forwarding any more of his materials. I have confirmed my belief in
the relevant portions of the London Baptist Confession of 1689, and if Mr. Ross
disagrees, he is free to do so. I will allow the fair-minded person to consider
my work and judge it on its merits."
I have always regarded James as
being somewhat substandard when it comes to the principles involved in
polemics, and this statement is another example of his shortcomings. For
instance, his claim to know what "most folks" think about what I have
written is typical of his lack of polemical competence. In Logic, this is known
as a fallacy, that of making a "universal statement," implying
that he has a comprehensive knowledge of the minds of "most folks" on this
It is also a case of the fallacy of "ignoratio elenchi,"
for it is an appeal to an irrelevant matter. What "most folks" know or
don't know has nothing to do with the issue of James' theory on
And more than that, it is evasion.
Furthermore, it is a gratuitous insult to the intelligence those
of you who DO know what I have been writing about, and are aware of White's
unorthodox, unCalvinistic, unSpurgeon view on pre-faith regeneration. I happen
to know that many of those on my email list know exactly what I am writing
about, and they are aware that White's view is not the confessional view
expressed in the Calvinist confessions. I had an email just in the past few
hours from a Baptist preacher who said of White's
"This is one that I gave up a year ago. We left the
hyper-Calvinist church we were going to up in Georgia and are relieved.
James also claims that arguing about "minute temporal
points of the ordo salutis is of no importance" to him.
throughout the debate between James and Dave Hunt there is a large amount of
material devoted to this issue. Hunt literally blistered James with
quotations from C. H. Spurgeon on this issue, and James had "nothing to say"
which could lessen the sting of the blows. Whereas we are in general agreement
with James on the other major points of Calvinism discussed in the debate,
his failure to emphasize and delineate the confessional view of Calvinism on
effectual calling or regeneration makes Dave Hunt look like a veritable
We believe James is wise, however, to draw back from any
confrontational format wherein his views would be brought under further
scrutiny. The less said by him on the subject is probably for the better.
Furthermore, I have been sending these articles to James via his
website's email address, but now he has directed that the address be
"removed" from receiving any further mailings. He evidently does not want
to read any further critiques from anyone who evaluates his view as being
unorthodox. -- Bob L. Ross
List of "Back" Email Articles Available on Request.
Pilgrim Website: http://members.aol.com/pilgrimpub/index.htm
Second Website: BAPTISTS OF TEXAS Committed to the Bible
Spurgeon sermons in SPANISH on the internet:
email@example.com (Bob L. Ross)
request, your name will be added to my Email List, or be
Publishers of C. H.
Spurgeon's Sermons & Other Works
Send your snail-mail address for a
printed Price List, or
Request a Price List via Email.
Publications, Box 66, Pasadena, TX 77501
Phone: (713) 477-4261.
Fax: (713) 477-7561
to Pilgrim Book Store
1609 Preston, Pasadena, TX 77503