When I was an instructor at Advanced Jet Training in Undergraduate Strike-Fighter Tactics (fighter jet RADAR tactics in preparation for flying F-14, F/A-18, F-15E, etc.) many of my students would be so focused on learning how to operate the RADAR that their heads would virtually be buried inside that little screen down inside the cockpit that they forgot there was a real world and real jets flying just outside the windscreen. Inevitably they would lose RADAR contact of the bogey (unidentified target aircraft) or bandit (identified adversary or foe aircraft) inside 10 nautical miles (NM) and they would panic, searching frantically with their RADAR controls to re-acquire the target on the small display.
Again, their head buried down inside the cockpit despite having at their disposal with a slight tilt of the head a lovely clear windscreen to the outside world. In order to alert them to this fact, as I was scanning both the RADAR and just as importantly looking outside the aircraft due to years of experience, I would call "tally" (shortened form of "tallyho" meaning I have a visual of the target aircraft). This indicated to the aircrew, and my student, that I had a visual contact of the target aircraft. Now outside of the instructing environment such as when I was flying the F-14 or F/A-18 the tally call would be followed with a clock code and an elevation; e.g. "Tally 2 o'clock, high". However, while instructing I didn't want to give away too much and my call was a nudge to the student to lift their head out of their little safety blanket RADAR display, look outside, and visually acquire the big picture. From there it was a relatively simple task of aligning the RADAR with your eyes and regain a sensor lock in order to employ weapons if warranted. By the way with technological advances it's even easier with helmet mounted sights that sync the weapon systems and RADAR with where you are looking. Frequently it was a hard lesson to teach these future fighter jocks that we can over complicate things and more important than their technological weapon systems was common sense and just looking outside to figure out... what's going on here?
Tallyho! I pray this can be a straightforward, common sense, and simple analysis of what's going on in the aftermath of James White's inter-faith dialogue (IFD) event with jihadi terrorist linked imam Yasir Qadhi that occurred at the beginning of this year (2017) in a suburb of Memphis, TN. In case you missed it you can watch both events on YouTube.
Part 1 occurred in a building designated as a Christian church, although several have endeavored to make the distinction that it was not a church service but a public event held in the church building, like a local gathering of the Free Thinkers atheist group renting out the facility. No harm right? Anywho, that first dialogue can be viewed here:
Part 2 occurred the following night inside a mosque, I'm guessing also not a "worship" service open to the public; HOWEVER, Muslim prayers were offered at the conclusion of this "event" not to be confused with a worship or spiritual service despite prayers and gathering of primarily people of one faith. That second dialogue can be viewed here:
Please watch these! If after watching even just a few minutes of each does not wrench your soul and cause despair at what is happening here then may God have mercy on your soul. Please be objective here and recognize the spiritual significance of these "dialogues."
My radio program, It's NOT Rocket Science, Mission 17-20, covers a review of the second dialogue event which can be heard here:
As I said at the outset, my prayer is that we can take a straightforward, common sense, and simple analysis of what's going on here. Lift our heads out of the cockpit, so to speak, and use our basic faculties, common sense, and God's clear commands to evaluate this situation. First and foremost I intent to present the big picture here and then to break it down. Second, apart from personalities and preferences I pray we can understand the best response from a biblical foundation and worldview.
I would encourage you to do some brief fact checking on your own but when I look at the Facebook and other social media responses, articles and talks, I notice a very significant trend. This trend is twofold: first, a distinct and glaring omission of Scriptural support for their position of defending White while acknowledging they "would not do such a thing"; and second, their responses are full of ad hominem attacks (like Islamaphobe) against anyone who dares question such activities related to IFD without giving any credence to valid concerns raised and associated Biblical support in opposition to their position of wrongly defending White's activities.
It has alarmed me that these men, whom I have had respect for, are ignoring the Scriptures in their endeavor to lend support to their friend while showing favoritism to a person found in error and simultaneously rejecting the Word of the person of the Holy Spirit whom we expect indwells them. They constantly point to his past activities of "faithfulness" which somehow are supposed to give him a pass on all future error? I thought James chapter three warns any man who endeavors to be a leader in the Church that they will bear a stricter judgment or "greater condemnation." If iron truly sharpens iron then a true friend will correct their brother in order to spare them of this greater condemnation and simultaneously protect the flock from confusion and error.
Besides, if we lift our heads out of the cockpit for a second and consider how this works in the real world we see this is a ridiculous defense of White. As an example of a real world situation, what comes to mind at the mention of the name Benedict Arnold? Would it surprise you to know that he was decorated numerous times for valor and that there are several monuments constructed in his honor? In fact his likeness and name have been removed from several monuments to his amazing victories and there is even a monument to his leg that was injured during the battle at Saratoga, NY (known as the boot monument). Did Arnold get a pass despite his significant past heroism? Clearly not! Learn more here if interested: http://www.historynet.com/benedict-arnold-the-hero-before-the-traitor.htm
Am I suggesting that White is some kind of Benedict Arnold? Well, that remains to be seen but similarly he deserves no pass in this treason of IFD.
If there is any doubt of such confusion and error in the wake of this IFD event look around. Pick up your head and look outside the cockpit. On the other hand, if their position is correct and godly then it should be trivial to provide clear biblical support; yet that has not happened. I believe Janet Mefferd did a superb job in demonstrating this fact in her interview with James White here https://youtu.be/oRNo1-r18pY. I chose this particular link intentionally because notice the moniker that is given to Janet: "Islamaphobe". This behavior is characteristic of those defending White where there is no defense so ad hominem attacks are employed in place of reason and logic. This is playing favorites and placing personality above principle. This is sin. Again, lift your head out of the cockpit and see if this is indeed the case. Please give a listen to the Mefferd-White interview and decide who gets schooled on Biblical principles here.
When someone supposedly in your own camp adopts the strategy of the enemy then you need to take notice that the enemy has infiltrated your own camp. Believe me, from my more than 20 years of military experience this is serious! This point will be repeated.
Often times I find that those in error know it and therefore endeavor to come up with twisted and illogical arguments (called logical fallacy) as justification and they ignore the Bible. Could this explain the absence of Biblical citations from White's defenders? Sometimes, they will offer up twisted Scripture as they feign godliness but this too becomes evident as they will use a single verse of Scripture taken out of context or used as a proof-text as they endeavor to explain why that verse doesn't mean what it clearly states or wrongly applying it to justify their own mis-guided position. This is not new. It has occurred from the beginning as we read in Genesis 3.
This is the very case here as those who repeatedly state that they would not actually engage in IFD themselves but doing so is of no consequence despite the clear teaching of 2 John 9-11. They have gone so far as to say that these verses do not apply today. How is this not the same sin of Satan from Genesis chapter 3 when the mere question of "did God really say...?" was posed? How do we then differentiate clear commands of Scripture and determine which apply and which do not? Didn't the Apostle John say in 1 John 2:3-4:
3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
To further accomplish my first goal of presenting the big picture let's fast forward from the January IFD to a recent "conference", that is still going on at the time of this writing, titled "Judge Not". Some of the soundbites coming out of this conference warrant some scrutiny as they demonstrate exactly why the IFD event in January in particular and IFD in general are significant and dangerous. They also reveal what I believe to be a major theological flaw in those who have run to defend the in-defensible. I would also highlight that there have already been and will continue to be more statements coming out of this "Judge Not" conference that reveals these men are on very shaky theological ground and perhaps even double minded, unstable in all their ways (James 1:8). In fact they are directly contradicting the basic principle of Matthew chapter seven, hypocritical judgements based upon favoritism or their own opinion. So with that and in looking at the big picture lets consider a few simple, basic facts in the public responses.
Saying that Islam poses no spiritual threat to the church is on its face fundamentally absurd, misguided, and irresponsible. It is equivalent to saying Satan poses no spiritual threat to the church. After all is not Islam a Satanically inspired false religion with the stated goal of specifically subjugating the other "people of the book"; this is a reference to Christians and Jews as they are directly and specifically targeted in the Koran! Do not many so-called "Christian" leaders already acknowledge that Allah and the God of Israel and the Bible are one in the same?! Do not many so-called "Christian" leaders already acknowledge Islam as another Abrahamic religion?! Has James White not stated in this article (link) that both Christian and Muslim believe in divine inspiration and thereby places the true word of God (the Bible) on the same plane as the word of Satan (the Koran)?! Is this not a clear and present spiritual threat?!
I must ask, what kind of error must our favorite "Christian" celebrity commit to be found at fault? Do they have to commit murder or fornication on live TV to be finally called out? Is not the violation of clear Scriptural command sufficient?
I am astonished that someone I respected so much could make such an ignorant and dangerous statement that Islam poses no spiritual threat while simultaneously invalidating his entire ministry! This demonstrates clearly to anyone willing to lift their heads out of the cockpit for a few seconds that playing favorites will distort judgment and clear thinking. Why not just trust the Bible for what it clearly proclaims? The Bible warns us that the devil "as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour" (1 Peter 5:8) and of the "snare of the devil" (1 Timothy 3:7). All forms of Satanism are the greatest spiritual threat facing the church and we must guard against them. All of them as we employ the whole armor of God. Further it is the sacred duty of a pastor to protect the flock God has entrusted to them yet many of these men who claim the title reject their holy responsibility to their shame (Ezekiel 34:7, John 21:15-17, Acts 20:28-31, 1 John 10:11-13, and more).
From my experience in combat and studying the tactics and strategies of the enemy I have learned how to carefully observe and understand such situations. This is in part what we call "situational awareness". In this regard it is basic common sense if not self-preservation to avoid falling prey to the tactics of my adversary. With this particular point in mind do you realize that it is a stated tactic and goal of Islam to encourage and engage in IFD? Why are they so eager to participate in IFD? The Scripture clearly tells us that the truth has nothing to benefit by partnering with falsehood but error has everything to gain by softening our awareness and criticism of such error. Again, think back to the devil's approach of just dialoguing with Adam and Eve and just bringing into question God's sincerity in His command to them, "do not eat"! So how then are we to combat the devil? Ephesians 6:11-12 tells us clearly:
11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
The Christian soldier's battle with wickedness and error is not directly against the people with whom we are engaging but it is a war of ideas and principles. To allow error or lies to go unabated and unchallenged is to abandon our duty to stand against the wiles of the devil. Islam and all other anti-Christ ideologies are powers and spiritual wickedness in high places. Just look around and see how the rulers of the darkness of this world support Islam over and against an anything else. While it is nearly exclusively Muslim terrorists who intentionally target innocent civilians, we are forbidden to do any kind of profiling for the good of public safety. Apart from focusing on just Islam, this point is also true of every un-godly endeavor of man to include: sodomy, atheism, evolution, globalism, socialism, abortion, and on and on. These have become sacred cows that cannot be called into question otherwise you will appropriately labeled as whatever-a-phobe. If you rightly call out such error your ministry will be labeled as alarmist with the intent to marginalize or isolate. All at the expense of the flock. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't John chapter 10 warn us that it is the hireling that does such a thing?
Is it any wonder that these anti-God/anti-Christ ideologies all employ the same deceitful tactics of Satan? That is because they are of their father. It is alarming in this particular situation of IFD that those from within the conservative evangelical camp rushing in to support White, even though they disagree with IFD, employ these very same tactics. Pick your head up out of the cockpit and look around. Observe this fact for yourself. Note their behavior; the ad hominem attacks, the counter-accusations, the deflections, the confusing and inflammatory rhetoric; all the while admitting they would not participate in IFD but never explaining why or addressing the actual issue at hand. This is diabolically deceitful! This ought not to be! This is not Christ like behavior!
So with all of this in mind is it really necessary to ask if Islam poses both a physical and spiritual threat to the flock? I already noted that using Scripture as a proof text, such as John 10:5, as to why true believers are not spiritually threatened by Islam is dangerous but it also ignores the tearful admonition of Paul in Acts 20:28-30:
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
Paul is calling our attention to a real threat to the flock. This is true believers referenced in John chapter ten, which in context also warns of dangers to the flock. Context, context, context.
So what am I saying here? Am I suggesting that we dump ministries and men at the drop of a hat? Please, I beg you no. I promise you that I will disappoint you and will be found in error as well and I pray you won't dump me upon arrival but will confront me. The key will be in my response. By the way, I pray you will confront me gently and lovingly, patiently (longsuffering as directed in 2 Timothy 4:2) but regardless, it is paramount how I respond to reproof, rebuke, and exhortation. I pray that my example is one of repentance, admitting when I am wrong. I do this when necessary when I have erred and I pray I continue in this humble behavior of dying to self and keeping with fruits of repents. If someone's behavior in confronting my error is unsavory we can always deal with that attitude or approach after I have addressed their valid concerns. In fact, as you read this here and now, I pray you are evaluating the position I am presenting and weighing it against the Word of God.
I pray that I am making a Biblically sound argument and convincing you through the Holy Spirit. First and foremost the confrontation or correction that anyone offers must originate from the Scriptures. How has a command or principle in Scripture been violated and how should it be corrected? I believe in this case of James White and IFD that clear Scriptural principles have been brought to bear and the clear response is simple: repent, acknowledge that such partnerships with terrorists do nothing to further the Gospel or Biblical truth. What fellowship has light with darkness...
This concept of confronting sin is found in Mathew 18:15-20 and if my sin is committed in wide open public spaces such as here on the interwebs or a public forum then by all means email, post a comment, or write your own article detailing my sin, my violation of God's Word, and how I can be reconciled. Incidentally, the specific approach of Matthew 18 is clearly intended to deal with a sin personally committed directly by one toward another and hence the need to go privately or "alone." The larger principle is to provide an opportunity for a born-again (or born from above), blood-bought believer to demonstrate on-going fruits of repentance so that despite a sin you may be reconciled first to God and second to your fellow brother or sister in Christ. Sanctification and repentance are to be an on-going ever-present reality in the life of a true Christian. I have followed White's ministry for well over a decade and have seen his arrogance towards other Christian while giving greater grace to Muslims. Jesus said that this is how we would be known, our love for each other (1 John 3:10-12, in fact read all of 1 John for instruction is this situation)!
So then what would my options be when confronted? I can legitimately engage in a Biblical discussion to endeavor to demonstrate from the Scriptures why my behavior was not a violation of God's Word and perhaps clarify a misunderstanding. In this endeavor it is fundamental that I not engage in eisegesis in a vain attempt to justify myself. I believe the clear meaning of Scripture and correct understanding is apparent in this particular case: mark them, avoid them, having nothing to do with them (apart from and only for sharing the Gospel which did not occur).
Many defending James White want to point to his bold defense and sharing of the Gospel. I have watched both events and there is no such bold defense and there is no clear Gospel of sin, righteousness, judgment, repentance and faith. None. I encourage my reader to watch both events linked above and I challenge anyone to point me to a time stamp on the video where White makes any clear defense or proclamation. As I mentioned previously, I review, in Mission 17-20, the second night at the Mosque as that is when White presumably shared the Gospel. He did not. Regardless, sharing the Gospel is not a magic incantation that justifies the un-godly IFD. God is not impressed by pragmatism; He abhors it. This kind of defense is absurd.
To summarize, those who defend White and IFD deny there has been any wrongdoing though they admit they would not partake in such activity and they insult with name calling anyone who disagrees all the while ignoring or distorting Scripture. This is devilish double speak! In fact devil, from diabolos, means just that! From here they employ the strategy of the liberal, socialist, LGBTQ, Islamic, anti-God, leftist crowd by accusing those who disagree with them of doing the very things they themselves are doing (i.e. name calling, hurling insults, ignoring the clear facts, distorting the situation, obfuscating or confusing the entire discussion, taking comments out of context, deflecting any direct or valid assertions, making counter-accusations that the other party is ungodly for calling attention to such behavior and most egregiously misapplying or denying Scripture).
Keep a watchful eye out for this behavior as I guarantee you it will continue unless or until White and those supporting his partnership with an anti-Christ religion repent and apologize for their un-godly behavior. To claim that interfaith dialogue that strives to find common ground with an anti-Christ is sin and denying this fact is deceptive. I pray the big picture is clear as we lift our heads out of the cockpit to observe what is going on here. What is required here is the repentance of those who have committed or defended such an act. Apart from this repentance there can be no reconciliation only the furtherance of their own sin.
1 John 1:8-10
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
I pray that what I have presented will help you pick your head up to look around and see exactly what is going on here. Notice the tactics employed by the enemy are the same employed by those protecting or defending James White at the expense of the flock. Notice those truly Godly shepherds, pastors, who desire to protect the flock and are calling out this tremendous error. Jesus died for the flock, can we not risk a possible friendship with men to protect that flock? I have endeavored to exemplify that which I criticize those who support White for not doing; namely grounding my position in Scripture and applying a Biblical worldview to this situation so that I may know right from wrong as God directs.Tallyho! Bandit 12 o'clock!
3 John 1:9-10 (KJV Strong's)
9 I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. 10 Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.