View Full Version : Tongues - Dr. James White vs David Bernard
oneinkhorn
04-01-2014, 12:50 PM
Is Speaking in Tongues Necessary for Salvation? Dr. James White vs David Bernard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yY6mDSaWis
Pressing-On
04-01-2014, 01:02 PM
Thanks for the link. Have some things to do and will listen to it while I am working. :thumbsup
Praxeas
04-01-2014, 02:38 PM
I heard this a long time ago.
I thought the dialog was very one sided,. the "moderator" was biased and refused to allow Bernard to introduce other verses as evidence.
Pressing-On
04-01-2014, 06:43 PM
I heard this a long time ago.
I thought the dialog was very one sided,. the "moderator" was biased and refused to allow Bernard to introduce other verses as evidence.
Yes, I realized I had heard it already as well. And you are right, the Moderator was biased. James White said a couple of snippy little things. He wasn't as patient as Bro. Bernard.
FlamingZword
04-01-2014, 10:31 PM
Yes, I realized I had heard it already as well. And you are right, the Moderator was biased. James White said a couple of snippy little things. He wasn't as patient as Bro. Bernard.
That is the problem with debates, unless the moderator is a person completely fair there is always going to be a bias.
Why do Oneness go to Trinitarian conducted debates, let the Trinitarians come to Oneness conducted debates.
Timmy
04-01-2014, 11:04 PM
That is the problem with debates, unless the moderator is a person completely fair there is always going to be a bias.
Why do Oneness go to Trinitarian conducted debates, let the Trinitarians come to Oneness conducted debates.
Better yet, have an agnostic moderator! :D
justlookin
04-02-2014, 06:42 AM
That is the problem with debates, unless the moderator is a person completely fair there is always going to be a bias.
Why do Oneness go to Trinitarian conducted debates, let the Trinitarians come to Oneness conducted debates.
In the past couple of weeks I listened to a oneness-trinity debate between White and a oneness minister that I don't remember the name of (I could look it up if anyone is interested). White was mostly courteous while the oneness minister was mostly discourteous. His behavior was embarrassing to say the least and far far from the courtesy shown my Bernard in the debates in which he was a participant. So, during debates one or both of the participants have ample opportunity to behave poorly, be it oneness or trinitarian.
Abiding Now
04-02-2014, 07:28 AM
Hmmmmm............. speaking of bias, DOCTOR James White vs David Bernard.
David Bernard is the founder and bishop of New Life Church. He is also the superintendent of the United Pentecostal Church International and president of Urshan Graduate School of Theology. He has earned a doctor of jurisprudence with honors from the University of Texas, a master of theology from the University of South Africa, and a bachelor of arts in mathematical sciences and managerial studies with high honors from Rice University. He is currently a doctor of theology candidate in New Testament at the University of South Africa. http://www.newlifeupc.org/about/bishop-david-bernard
Jermyn Davidson
04-02-2014, 04:36 PM
Hmmmmm............. speaking of bias, DOCTOR James White vs David Bernard.
David Bernard is the founder and bishop of New Life Church. He is also the superintendent of the United Pentecostal Church International and president of Urshan Graduate School of Theology. He has earned a doctor of jurisprudence with honors from the University of Texas, a master of theology from the University of South Africa, and a bachelor of arts in mathematical sciences and managerial studies with high honors from Rice University. He is currently a doctor of theology candidate in New Testament at the University of South Africa. http://www.newlifeupc.org/about/bishop-david-bernard
Let's not automatically assume bias.
Maybe Dr. Bernard didn't want his education mentioned. Maybe it wasn't mentioned because it's not relevant to the discussion. They didn't mention that he is the GS of the UPCI either.
Oh whoa are us-- forever the victim, forever marginalized, boo-hoo!
:thumbsup
Jermyn Davidson
04-02-2014, 04:40 PM
I heard this a long time ago.
I thought the dialog was very one sided,. the "moderator" was biased and refused to allow Bernard to introduce other verses as evidence.
Yes, I realized I had heard it already as well. And you are right, the Moderator was biased. James White said a couple of snippy little things. He wasn't as patient as Bro. Bernard.
Biased?
Refused to let him introduce verses?
Dr. Bernard gave the moderator the choice and they agreed to let the discussion flow and the scriptural points would be made as the discussion evolved.
My word!
There wasn't any bias displayed by the moderator!
Jermyn Davidson
04-02-2014, 09:16 PM
Let's not automatically assume bias.
Maybe Dr. Bernard didn't want his education mentioned. Maybe it wasn't mentioned because it's not relevant to the discussion. They didn't mention that he is the GS of the UPCI either.
Oh whoa are us-- forever the victim, forever marginalized, boo-hoo!
:thumbsup
It's "WOE" not "WHOA". I am corrected.
n david
04-02-2014, 10:58 PM
I really don't get the point of these debates. Futile, IMO.
justlookin
04-02-2014, 11:25 PM
I really don't get the point of these debates. Futile, IMO.
I agree. I think most of the time it only solidifies the position one had before the debate. Seldom do they change anyone's mind.
kclee4jc
04-03-2014, 06:40 AM
In the past couple of weeks I listened to a oneness-trinity debate between White and a oneness minister that I don't remember the name of (I could look it up if anyone is interested). White was mostly courteous while the oneness minister was mostly discourteous. His behavior was embarrassing to say the least and far far from the courtesy shown my Bernard in the debates in which he was a participant. So, during debates one or both of the participants have ample opportunity to behave poorly, be it oneness or trinitarian.
that oneness minister is a member of this forum
justlookin
04-03-2014, 12:07 PM
that oneness minister is a member of this forum
Oh really? Well, he needs to learn some manners and how to respectfully interact with those with whom he debates. He's very jerky. As in jerk.
Just my personal opinion after viewing the debate of course.
Pressing-On
04-03-2014, 12:26 PM
Oh really? Well, he needs to learn some manners and how to respectfully interact with those with whom he debates. He's very jerky. As in jerk.
Just my personal opinion after viewing the debate of course.
Do you have the link to post here for our review?
justlookin
04-03-2014, 12:39 PM
Do you have the link to post here for our review?
Let me see if I can find it.
justlookin
04-03-2014, 12:45 PM
Ok, here we go. I figured Rev. Roger Perkins would have known where to find it though. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvxF7Js9mw8
Pressing-On
04-03-2014, 12:55 PM
Three hours!!!! Ugh! LOL! Okay, have some other things to do, but will give it a go in segments. Thanks. :thumbsup
kclee4jc
04-03-2014, 12:58 PM
Oh really? Well, he needs to learn some manners and how to respectfully interact with those with whom he debates. He's very jerky. As in jerk.
Just my personal opinion after viewing the debate of course.
Well that wasn't nice!
I've not listened to the debate to form an opinion for myself.
justlookin
04-03-2014, 01:00 PM
Three hours!!!! Ugh! LOL! Okay, have some other things to do, but will give it a go in segments. Thanks. :thumbsup
You're welcome. I had to watch it in segments too, now that I think about it. :)
Both Perkins and White made great points, I just thought that Perkins was a little snippy, jerky, in his mannerisms. If I had to spend a day with either of them discussing theology, I'd much rather it be with White though. I probably couldn't stand more than a day with him either. :chat
Pressing-On
04-03-2014, 02:13 PM
You're welcome. I had to watch it in segments too, now that I think about it. :)
Both Perkins and White made great points, I just thought that Perkins was a little snippy, jerky, in his mannerisms. If I had to spend a day with either of them discussing theology, I'd much rather it be with White though. I probably couldn't stand more than a day with him either. :chat
I'm in about 1 hours, doing stuff while I am listening. Their voice tones sound the same thus far. Won't be able to listen past 4:00. Will finish it later, if I can.
Pressing-On
04-03-2014, 02:54 PM
The Moderator at the 1:41 mark says, "The affirmative (White) is arguing truth can be discovered by a close exegesis of the NT with the knowledge of NT grammar and Lexicon. The negative (Perkins) team is arguing that the truth can be found in 4,000 years of Hebrew revelation and all of those personal pronouns." lol
Okay, have to hang it up for a while.
justlookin
04-03-2014, 02:59 PM
The Moderator at the 1:41 mark says, "The affirmative (White) is arguing truth can be discovered by a close exegesis of the NT with the knowledge of NT grammar and Lexicon. The negative (Perkins) team is arguing that the truth can be found in 4,000 years of Hebrew revelation and all of those personal pronouns." lol
Okay, have to hang it up for a while.
Yep, both sides make great points. I'm biased against trinitarianism though so I don't think White makes a case for it. Perkins on the other hand comes accross as the less cordial, less knowledgeable in my opinion. Of course I agree with much of what he's saying.
Pressing-On
04-03-2014, 03:37 PM
Yep, both sides make great points. I'm biased against trinitarianism though so I don't think White makes a case for it. Perkins on the other hand comes accross as the less cordial, less knowledgeable in my opinion. Of course I agree with much of what he's saying.
The Moderator's statement I posted sounded very condescending and biased -"All of those personal pronouns." LOL! Like Perkins is a hick or something.
Praxeas
04-03-2014, 04:59 PM
Let's not automatically assume bias.
Maybe Dr. Bernard didn't want his education mentioned. Maybe it wasn't mentioned because it's not relevant to the discussion. They didn't mention that he is the GS of the UPCI either.
Oh whoa are us-- forever the victim, forever marginalized, boo-hoo!
That's sad. If it was in reverse you'd be blasting the UPC as being biased.
Did you listen to the debate? You tell me the moderator seemed fair to you...
Victim? Hardly, it's not about being victims. It's about THEM trying to pull the wool over your eyes (and apparently it worked)
Praxeas
04-03-2014, 05:02 PM
Biased?
Refused to let him introduce verses?
Dr. Bernard gave the moderator the choice and they agreed to let the discussion flow and the scriptural points would be made as the discussion evolved.
My word!
There wasn't any bias displayed by the moderator!
No Several times David Bernard tried to move the discussion along to other verses that speak on tongues and the moderator would not allow him to do that. You either did not listen or you are being biased yourself...Im not surprised. the Moderator forced them to stick to one point White made about Acts 2 and after Bernard answered it and tried to bring other tongues scriptures into the mix *(because that was the topic after all), the moderator stopped him and redirected him back to the same point despite being addressed already
I doubt you listened to it
Praxeas
04-03-2014, 05:03 PM
Oh really? Well, he needs to learn some manners and how to respectfully interact with those with whom he debates. He's very jerky. As in jerk.
Just my personal opinion after viewing the debate of course.
If so, has to make you wonder how he behaves here
Praxeas
04-03-2014, 05:06 PM
You're welcome. I had to watch it in segments too, now that I think about it. :)
Both Perkins and White made great points, I just thought that Perkins was a little snippy, jerky, in his mannerisms. If I had to spend a day with either of them discussing theology, I'd much rather it be with White though. I probably couldn't stand more than a day with him either. :chat
People need to realize that their mannerism's deter people from really getting the message
Pressing-On
04-03-2014, 09:57 PM
Yep, both sides make great points. I'm biased against trinitarianism though so I don't think White makes a case for it. Perkins on the other hand comes accross as the less cordial, less knowledgeable in my opinion. Of course I agree with much of what he's saying.
After listening to the whole debate, I didn't feel that anyone was more or less cordial than the other. It appeared even to me. I didn't think anyone said anything really rude at all.
My impression of White is that he felt he had the upper hand by speaking the Greek and Hebrew words and droning on. I wasn't impressed with his self-congratulatory intelligence.
Another thing I noticed from the Moderator is that he termed White as the "Affirmative" case and Perkins as the "Negative". I especially noted that the Moderator chose the word "negative" instead of more properly using the term "Dissenting" case.
Yes, you can very well use negative, but I think he did that on purpose. The reason I feel that way is because the Moderator goes on to say this, "Thank you to Dr. White for opening the case for the affirmative which is the Orthodox position and it's the status quo. With a less popular and possibly a more difficult argument, we are now going to invite Mr. Roger Perkins to the stand to open the negative case."
Anyway, I would have used "Dissenting" voice. It is more professional and much more polite. I might be a little nit-picky about that, but that is something I would make sure was voiced as professional and as respectfully as possible if I was hosting and Dr. White was giving the "dissenting" case.
justlookin
04-03-2014, 10:07 PM
After listening to the whole debate, I didn't feel that anyone was more or less cordial than the other. It appeared even to me. I didn't think anyone said anything really rude at all.
My impression of White is that he felt he had the upper hand by speaking the Greek and Hebrew words and droning on. I wasn't impressed with his self-congratulatory intelligence.
Another thing I noticed from the Moderator is that he termed White as the "Affirmative" case and Perkins as the "Negative". I especially noted that the Moderator chose the word "negative" instead of more properly using the term "Dissenting" case.
Yes, you can very well use negative, but I think he did that on purpose. The reason I feel that way is because the Moderator goes on to say this, "Thank you to Dr. White for opening the case for the affirmative which is the Orthodox position and it's the status quo. With a less popular and possibly a more difficult argument, we are now going to invite Mr. Roger Perkins to the stand to open the negative case."
Anyway, I would have used "Dissenting" voice. It is more professional and much more polite. I might be a little nit-picky about that, but that is something I would make sure was voiced as professional and as respectfully as possible if I was hosting and Dr. White was giving the "dissenting" case.
I guess it was just personal preference then on my part. I watched a debate between White and a Jehovah Witness and it seemed more cordial to me.
Pressing-On
04-03-2014, 10:32 PM
I guess it was just personal preference then on my part. I watched a debate between White and a Jehovah Witness and it seemed more cordial to me.
I was going to listen to that, but I opted for Greg Gutfeld speaking at the Regan Library Forum. :heeheehee
SiblingRevelry
07-05-2014, 09:26 AM
Hmmmmm............. speaking of bias, DOCTOR James White vs David Bernard.
David Bernard is the founder and bishop of New Life Church. He is also the superintendent of the United Pentecostal Church International and president of Urshan Graduate School of Theology. He has earned a doctor of jurisprudence with honors from the University of Texas, a master of theology from the University of South Africa, and a bachelor of arts in mathematical sciences and managerial studies with high honors from Rice University. He is currently a doctor of theology candidate in New Testament at the University of South Africa. http://www.newlifeupc.org/about/bishop-david-bernard
I hold the same degree (Juris Doctor) as David Bernard. It's a law degree and in the U.S. it is inappropriate to use Dr. as a title. If I was still practicing law, I'd be SiblingRevelry, Esq. I'm not, so it's just Miss SiblingRevelry.
Praxeas
07-05-2014, 02:24 PM
He wasn't being called Dr
Michael The Disciple
07-05-2014, 07:09 PM
My impression of White is that he felt he had the upper hand by speaking the Greek and Hebrew words and droning on. I wasn't impressed with his self-congratulatory intelligence.
Their main hope is always that they can deceive the people into believing the Hebrew word for one (echad) does not mean an absolute one. If they succeed as far as Trins think the debate is over.
The strength of Oneness doctrine is the word ONE.
SiblingRevelry
07-05-2014, 07:19 PM
He wasn't being called Dr
I understand that. Someone was offended that DB having a Juris Doctor wasn't being called Dr. and James White was being called Dr. I was just explaining that people with a Juris Doctor aren't usually (wait, NEVER) called Dr. here in the USA. It wasn't anything worth taking offense over.
That said, DB is a very smart guy. He went to a top-flight undergrad (Rice) and then to UT Law.
Abiding Now
07-05-2014, 07:26 PM
I liked it, Perkins is a good debater.
Michael The Disciple
07-05-2014, 07:34 PM
The poster on the Forum called "Cilat" is a friend and associate of Roger Perkins. Im not sure Perkins is on here.
Jason B
07-06-2014, 02:15 PM
I thought Perkins presented a good case and was cordial while doing it. James White comes across to me as an intellectual snob and someone who overestimates his debate skills. Bi think James White got the better of DKB on the tongues day debate but DKB got better of him on the debate on that same radio show about oneness as well as a debate with Robert Moorey about whether or not the UPC is a cult.
I'd tend to agree with James Whites positions on several topics but he is weak as far as debating, but thinks he's the cream of the crop. I thought he made a weak case against the Jehovah's Witness and did even worse in the snippets I've heard of him debating Shabir Ally.
On the other hand if you watch David Bernard debate Shabir Ally, he makes the strongest counter arguments I've seen any Christian make.
Shabir Ally tends to make Christian debaters look foolish. So cudos to DKB for boldly proclaiming truth while answering Ally's points.
That's a multiple debate analysis. :)
Steve Epley
07-06-2014, 02:23 PM
I liked it, Perkins is a good debater.
He is an excellent debater.
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.