Poor Mr James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries.

I wonder if you have seen any video of debates by Mr White. He has probably taken some communication course which he apples its techniques quite mechanistically. It is rather similar to the way Senator Marco Rubio delivered his artificial-sounding oratory, forged command of policy and flimsy unflappability in the presidential debates, which Governor Chris Christie so effectively confronted and destroyed by calling the senator nothing more than a programmed deliverer of polished-sounding lines. Mr White technique consists of making a disgusted face gesture, accusing his debaters of engaging in "scholarly game of semantics". He often mischaracterizes a legitimately posed argument as being “intellectually inconsistent” and lamenting that it is taken from liberal biblical scholars or atheists. Instead of focusing on a question he spends a lot of time trying to point out that it is inconsistent to try to use liberal scholarship like those of EP Sanders, Rudolf Bultmann, or Raymond Brown to try to make supernatural claims. Of course, in his own debate with Catholics like with Robert Sungenis, and Fr. Peter Stravinskas he freely quotes liberal scholars. He usually deceptively misrepresents the position of his opponent as Dave Hunt writes to him:

"The readers of your “open letter” would think that I had relied solely upon him (Ruckman) – a gross misrepresentation. I merely cited him as one of many who so labeled Augustine. In the very same sentence I quote Philip Schaff (...) I quote numerous others to the same effect – W.H.C. Frend (...) and Frederic W. Farrar (...) I quote from the Pope’s special remembrance of Augustine (...) I quote others, from Sir Robert Anderson to Warfield (...) And you say that “the source” of my information is Ruckman?! You even bring up Gail Riplinger, whom I don’t mention at all.(...) Repeatedly you put words into my mouth, building a straw man easily knocked down, such as the following: “You conclude the section with a paragraph that basically says, ‘Hey, I’ve already refuted this stuff. Don’t sweat this. I know this passage sounds like Calvinism, but trust me, it isn’t.” Those are your words, James, not mine. Is that fair? Why don’t you quote me and let readers come to their own conclusions? "

Virtually in all his debates White continually misrepresents the position of his debaters, and repeatedly falsely accusing them of ad hominem attacks upon himself. As Sonny Hernandez has written:

Several friends and colleagues have warned me not to respond to Mr. White because they feel he craves opportunities to: habitually post comments on his social media accounts to play either victim, mock, or accuse of wrong doing, so he can receive consolation likes, defend his pride, protect his popularity, or to incite his fan-base because he knows that they will bombast anyone that he decries on social media.

This is perhaps why Bart Ehrman writs

"I normally do not have an aversion to the people I debate. But James White is that kind of fundamentalist who gets under my skin."

White always dismisses the facts, like the the ones in the following video, arguing these people are not Calvinist Christians!

Notice the empty rhetoric  of White against the clear logic of Tassi that argues human freewill (free moral agency) and divine election/predestination appear to be mutually exclusive.  White cannot understand this and thus his  whole argument  is based on irrationally constructed  categories such as "autonomous will," but humans do not have freedom of choice!!. To prove this idiotic theory White uses John 6:44, which says, ‘No one can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him!!’ White does not understand that this makes the mockery of Jesus Crucifixion to save Christians.   

White's  god is so stupid that calls people to come to Jesus and then condemn them for not doing that because  he himself  made it impossible for us to come to Jesus through predestination.  White cannot see the logic of this argument,  He sometimes states why he believes that human freewill is irreconcilable with sovereign election and divine predestination.and then uses his artificial categories to argue  against it!! 

It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.

  

As the following debate shows  White's god is a mentally  disturbed  god that although can save all the people he won't and in a bizarre and arbitrary way only choose a few! Those people who are saved  have not done anything special, they are dead in their sins like those that are not being saved. This he calls "Irresistible Grace!". Surely,  a voodoo god of shamanism is more intelligent and more graceful than his god.    In short, White believes in
1. the Shamanistic concept god's sovereignty and decrees a la  Calvin
2. the  Calvin doctrine of the total depravity of man and his enslavement to sin, in which will, according to the New Testament, is now in bondage. We are enslaved to the evil impulses and desires of our hearts. The body, the mind, the will, the spirit—indeed, the whole person—have been infected by the power of sin.
3.  the fascist god has, before the creation of the world, selected a portion of humanity to be saved. This election is irrespective of any foreseen merits or faith. It is only according to the good pleasure of His will.
4.  Jesus on Calvary bore the full punishment due his elect, ensuring their final salvation. He did not die for the non-elect, who are excluded and hopelessly reprobated.
5. this primitive god moves upon the helpless sinner before he has a single thought of responding to the good news. Grace renews the spiritually dead will, imparts a new nature and infallibly draws the sinner to Christ. Regeneration, or the new birth, occurs before belief in Christ. Faith, in fact, is a gift imparted to the sinner, who is entirely passive in this act.

Here is David Hunt's logical rebuttal of Calvinists in two debates:

Notice that White does not understand the concept of "free will". For him human being always decides or choose a path against God!! For him this is the autonomous  will!! He support his beliefs with verses from gospels without reflecting for a moment  on the notion that since these ideas are so absurd then it may be the evidence that those biblical verses are forgery -- and we have so much facts at our disposals that show many of the of the verses in various bools of the bible are fake.  This is why a sovereign God of perfect justice and love permits the entire human race to become totally depraved via original sin!! And this is why did a God of perfect love and justice does not make Jesus the Saviour of the entire human race, and makes him the saviour of only  the elect  few.  

White does not understand that the Jesus of his corrupted bible is a construct of Romans. He alleges  that the author of Qur'an was unaware the biblical Jesus, and is unaware of the fact that Qur'an is talking about the real historical  Jesus of the Jesus Gospel, and not the mythical Jesus forged by Paul, and other Roman pseudo disciples.  He is not aware of Ovid’s story of Perseus who was the son of god and conceived by a virgin, and this is why the second-century   philosopher Celsius thought that the Christians unjustifiably mirrored this Greek hero, child of Zeus, in their depiction  of Jesus.

White is unaware of  the Greek writer Diodorus Siculus who tells the story of an empty tomb of Herakles, a Greek hero who also had a divine conception and an ascension to heaven.    Zeus  adopted  him is god-the-son, which Roman writers of gospels modeled their fake stories based on his narrative.  

White is also unaware of the story of Hercules’ divine conception and his adoption as child of god-the-father, Zeus narrated by the Roman writer Seneca, who was a contemporary of Paul of  the New Testament.  Paul expression of  “adoption to become God’s child” is well known, and   his   metaphor “Son of God” which he attributed to Jesus was exactly  the dictate of his Roman masters.

White uses all sorts of sophistry to explain why Jesus in the New Testament  has never clearly claimed  to be Yahweh.  He refers to  Mark 14:61.  

Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ Χριστὸς, the Son of the Blessed ὁ Υἱὸς  τοῦ Εὐλογητοῦ?" And Jesus said, "I am,  Ἐγώ εἰμι , and you will see the Son of Man Υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου seated at the right hand of Power, δυνάμεωςa, and coming with the clouds of heaven." And the high priest tore his garments and said, "What further witnesses do we need? You have heard his blasphemy. What is your decision?" And they all condemned him as deserving death.

White, adopting a phony dramatized gesture,  acts this part and cries why the high priest tears  his garment? Apparently, he takes this  as the evidence that Jesus was Yahweh!! He is totally unaware of how ridiculous this claim is.  

White is unaware that  in the old Prussian Empire, Martin Kähler (1835-1912) distinguished between the “historical Jesus,”  “real Christ” (“der historische Jesus,” “der wirkliche Christus”) who is the Qur'an's Jesus  and the “geschichtliche,” “biblical,” in other words, “proclaimed Christ” (“der biblische Christus,” “der gepredigte Christus”).  

White does not understand that the first written record of  the New Testament   was written twenty-five years after Jesus’ death, by Paul who had never met him personally (according to Acts 9:11 [cf. Acts 11:25].  He was from the town Tarsus in the region of Cilicia in Asia Minor, today’s Turkey. The Gospel according to Mark,  was written circa 70  AD.,  Luke used Mark  as his source  15 years later and   Matthew  used it close to a century after the Jesus death . The Gospel of John originated independently of the three synoptic gospels, Mark, Luke and Matthew, about two centuries after the death of Jesus. 

White does not understand that  the original  manuscripts of Jesus gospel is lost. Even the original  manuscripts  of the forged New Testament are perished. The surviving small fragments of the forged manuscripts date from the period after 125 AD. and the larger fragments from circa 200  AD. The earliest surviving complete manuscript of the forged New Testament dates from circa 300  AD. No two manuscripts of the forged  New Testament dating from before circa 1454 AD. agree with each other . Numerous mistakes” crept in during the process of copying and translating the forged manuscripts. White wonders why the author of Qur'an does not use these forged documents! 

Finally, white is utterly unaware of the fact that  it was under the auspices of  Emperor Constantine in the fourth century  AD that the  classical ontological Christology using a mixture of  complicated Greco-philosophtical metaphysics and Roman legal terminology with terminologies such as “persona” and  "substantia” that allowed a number of   individuals to share some substance  among themselves while retaining their personalities created the grotesque notion of the  Triune  God, or the   Three-headed-Jesus . White goes into a lengthy and extremely funny explanation of the difference between a being and a person, according to which God like  a chair is a being , but not a person. However sharing the same substance of being, three persons feature different aspects of God-head. It never occurs to him that why non of the three persons are  a female god or a black, or Asiatic god?!!  He never explains why this god is so stupid that cannot find a better way to save people other than violently sacrificing his ow son, which according to White is he himself.