Apprising Ministries brings you the sad details of more syncretism within evangelicalism. View article →

Apprising Ministries has the details and offers this as yet another example of evangelical charismania fueling apostasy. View article →

Apprising Ministries gives you a well-documented look at the actual legacy of this revered evangelical. View article →

Over at Fighting for the Faith Chris Rosebrough offers his take on Janet Mefferd’s sudden decision to remove her materials concerning Driscoll, whom she had previously stated was guilty of plagiarism.

In this important piece Rosebrough writes, “Late yesterday the story hit the media like a thunder clap that Janet Mefferd was silenced by the Evangelical Industrial Complex…” View article →

Apprising Ministries offers further background, including exclusive video of Caner’s claims, and gives you the link to the latest Dividing Line program of Dr. James White where he again addresses Caner’s comments in question. View article →

More background and the details over at Apprising Ministries. View article →

The latest on a physical setback as I try and recover from my health issues for those who may be interested. View article →

Chris Rosebrough, this morning on his Facebook announced that Chris Pinto had publicly apologized to Alan Kurschner and Dr. James White during yesterday’s Noise of Thunder radio program. After listening to Pinto’s apology, I am convinced that it was clearly a step in the right direction but that it was vague, unspecific and didn’t address what Pinto had done wrong.

Here is the audio:

Here is the transcript of Pinto’s apology:

“I want to address an issue that has occupied a certain amount of controversy in recent weeks that many of our listeners are familiar with. On august 28th, during the show in which I spoke about the faith of Andrew Jackson, that was the topic, certain comments were made after the break, and I discussed the education background of Alan Kurschner. And the fact that he has contributed to the research of Dr James White. Now without going into too many details, details which many of you are familiar with already, my comments had an inflammatory impact on some. And were taken to mean something other than what I intended and for this I sincerely apologize both to Alan Kurschner and to Dr. James White. And I want to apologize to our audience for any confusion or discord that came about as a result. Just so you know I have sent private apologies to both men, before making this announcement today. My desire is to encourage from this point forward, I hope, a God fearing approach to our discussions and I apologize for any comments that I’ve made at any point that fail to uphold that standard.”

My greatest concern after hearing Mr. Pinto’s apology is that he hasn’t specifically confessed the sinfulness of his statements but has apologized that they were “taken to mean something other than what” he intended and “caused confusion”. Rather than being a true, from the heart apology, Pinto’s words sound more like a rationalization. He didn’t apologize for what he said, which was truly slanderous. Instead, he apologized that people misunderstood him. In other words, he’s apologizing for the reaction of the people who heard his statements rather than apologizing for making them. That’s not a sincere apology but a rationalization.

To help explain the difference between true apologies and insincere apologies I would point you to an excellent blog post written by Tim Challies in February of last year entitled, Lessons in Forgiveness. In that post Challies addresses the lack of sincerity in apologies that attempt to rationalize sins. Said Challies,

Don’t Rationalize Your Sin

I try to teach my children that an apology does not include the words but or if. We do not say, “I’m sorry if I offended you.” We do not say, “I’m sorry I did it, but if you hadn’t…” We apologize sincerely and from the heart (or we try, anyway). If we cannot apologize without rationalizing our own sin, we are not truly apologizing. It is a good discipline to examine your heart before attempting to make a true and sincere apology. Do not allow yourself to make an apology that is actually an attempt to rationalize the wrongs you’ve committed. Rather, apologize sincerely and apologize from the heart, not as an attempt to clear your own record but as a step of love and obedience.

Although I think Pinto’s apology is a step in the right direction. He needs to take responsibility for what he said.

One of the darkest chapters in American history occurred in the opening years of the Cold war. From 1950 to 1956 Senator Joseph McCarthy conducted what would later to become known as “the Communist Witch Hunts.”  McCarthy and those on his committee were experts in the art of accusation. Their tactics included guilt by association, broad brushing, the use of the most superficial and flimsy of evidence against those whom he suspected of being Communists. McCarthy recklessly defamed his victims’ characters and destroyed the reputations, careers and lives of many. So notorious were McCarthy’s tactics that a new word was added to the English language. That word is McCarthyism and it means 1) the practice of making accusations of disloyalty in many instances unsupported by proof or based on slight, doubtful, or irrelevant evidence. 2) the practice of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or criticism.

A prime example of McCarthy’s malicious use of guilt by association is his ruining of the reputation and career of American diplomat, John Service. The details of his case are as follows:

“Foreign Service Officer John S. Service was dismissed from the Department of State on Dec 13, 1951 following a determination by the Civil Service Commission’s Loyalty Board that there was “reasonable doubt” concerning his loyalty to the United States. Service was one of a number of so-called “China hands”—State Department officials who were experts on China and the Far East—who saw their careers ruined during the 1950s by Senator Joseph McCarthy and his cohorts. McCarthy targeted Service and several of his coworkers… for criticism and investigation. McCarthy charged that Service and other State Department officials had effectively “lost” China to the communists, either through incompetence or, more ominously, through sympathy with the communist cause…McCarthy singled out Service as one of what he called “the 205 known communists” in the Department of State. In short order, Service’s case was reviewed once again, and this time he was dismissed.

Service fought the dismissal, and was eventually reinstated in 1957, but his career never recovered from the damage.”[1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB_CBb6zhaA

Chris Pinto Master of the McCarthyistic Arts of Accusation & Guilt by Association

In this portion of my article I will provide three examples of Chris Pinto employing the use of McCarthyism. One of the examples will be from his documentary, Tares Among the Wheat and two will be in response to critics. In each example Pinto casts suspicion and doubt on his victim through the use of accusation and/or guilt by association. Sadly, I could provide literally dozens more examples than these.

Exhibit #1 – Tischendorf’s Mysterious Audience with the Pope

In the documentary, Tares Among the Wheat, Pinto attempts to build a case that Codex Sinaiticus is not an authentic 4th century manuscript but is instead a 19th century text penned by Constantine Simonides. The film itself spends an inordinate amount of time discussing the sins of the Vatican and the Roman Catholic church. The reason for this is that Pinto believes that this provides the historical context that must be understood in order to properly interpret the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus by Tischendorf in 1859.

One of the “interesting” pieces of evidence that Pinto believes is critically important information regarding Sinaiticus’ authenticity is the fact that Tischendorf had an audience with the Pope and other prominent Papal leaders during one of his trips to Egypt. The relevant scene begins at the 58:26 mark and continues until 1:09:18

.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e1CS9blOtg&feature=youtu.be&t=58m35s

Note that Pinto believes that Tischendorf’s audience with the Pope is vital evidence pertaining to Codex Sinaiticus authenticity. Yet, all he has done is cast suspicion on Tischendorf by documenting that he is guilty of associating with the Pope. In Pinto’s mind this is proof that something sinister is a foot and that something ominous is in the air. But, this is not relevant evidence. This is McCarthyism!



The authenticity of Sinaiticus in no way hinges on whether or not Tischendorf met with the Pope, shook the hand of Stalin or had lunch with Hitler. There are no textual scholars who are struggling with doubts about the authenticity of Sinaiticus due to the fact that Tischendorf met with the Pope.

Exhibit #2 – Dr. James White Attended Fuller Theological Seminary

Recently, on Facebook, a fan of Chris Pinto alerted him to an episode of Dr. James White’s radio program in which he offered criticism of Pinto. In predictable McCarthyistic fashion, Pinto responded by associating Dr. White with that notoriously liberal, Fuller Theological Seminary as if that somehow actually proved something about Dr. White. Here is Pinto’s response.


Ironically, Dr. White who was unaware of Pinto’s comment at the time, actually anticipated this tactic and commented about it on his radio program. Here’s the audio.

Anyone familiar with the ministry of James White would never believe that Pinto had actually proved anything about Dr. White’s theology, reliability or fidelity to the truth by merely pointing out that he graduated from Fuller. In Pinto’s mind, however, just the mere mention of Dr. White’s association with Fuller is sufficient enough to cast doubt and suspicion on him. This is not evidence this is McCarthyism!

Exhibit #3 – Alan Kurschner Attended Pro-Homosexual Harvard Divinity School

This last exhibit speaks for itself. In the audio below you will hear a quintessential example of McCarthyism being employed by Pinto in order to cast suspicion and doubt on Alan Kurshner and Dr. James White.




Rather than comment on Pinto’s unsubstantiated allegations, let me instead remind you of the definition of McCarthyism which is 1) the practice of making accusations of disloyalty in many instances unsupported by proof or based on slight, doubtful, or irrelevant evidence. 2) the practice of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or criticism.

What Pinto needs to explain to everyone is if Alan Kurschner has been somehow compromised by exposure to pro-homosexual liberalism by taking a course on textual criticism at Harvard, why does he publicly write and speak out against the pro-homosexual agenda?

Concluding Thoughts

McCarthyism is not scholarship nor is it honest journalism. Instead it is a smear tactic that slanders its victims without regard for the truth. It is employed by conspiratorialists and witch hunters but should never be employed in the service of Christ, His Kingdom or His Gospel. As Jesus Himself taught us, it is satan who “does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” (John 8:44)

McCarthyism is a tool of the devil.



I pray that Chris Pinto repents.


Yesterday, Dr. James White wrote a blog post that gave us a peak into the thinking of one who possesses a conspiratorial mindset. Aside from being a fascinating read, the post demonstrates how conspiratorialists will not – or maybe a better way to say it is, cannot – view evidence objectively and rationally. This then causes them to interpret every shred of evidence through the lens of conspiracy. On the one hand, the conspiratorialist will always accept proof that supports his conspiracy theory, no matter how flimsy the source. On the other, the conspiratorialist will automatically reject any evidence that challenges or disproves the conspiracy and, oftentimes, the conspiratorialist will retaliate against those who challenge his theory by casting suspicion on them and associating them with those whom the conspiratorialist believes are plotting the conspiracy.

A textbook example of this type of conspiratorialist retaliation was documented by Chris Rosebrough on the 29 August 2013 episode of the Fighting for the Faith radio program. In that episode, Rosebrough played audio from Chris Pinto’s Noise of Thunder Radio program, in which Pinto put forward a series of guilt by association (GBA) arguments against two of his critics, Alan Kurschner and Dr. James White. Because the conspiratorialist mindset always interprets data through the lens of conspiracy, the only plausible explanation in Pinto’s mind for Kurschner and White’s having criticized him is that they are theologically compromised and, either knowingly or unwittingly, working to promote liberal gay-affirming ecumenical apostasy. What was most fascinating about that program was that Rosebrough documented the fact that, more than a month prior to Pinto’s retaliation, he had engaged in an identical GBA argument against Alan Kurschner. At that time, Kurschner personally responded to Pinto’s allegations and answered every one of them by giving primary source testimony demonstrating conclusively that Pinto’s claims were patently false. However, conspiratorialists always reject evidence that does not fit the conspiracy. True to form, Pinto dismissed Kurschner’s evidence out of hand and re-employed the same GBA attacks one month later, expanding them to implicate Dr. James White and to cast doubt on his scholarship.

Noise of Thunder: The Lost Episode – A.K.A. Pinto’s Papal Pickle

Another fascinating piece of evidence that gives us a peak into the conspiratorialist mindset of Chris Pinto involves the missing 5 August 2013 episode of Noise of Thunder. In that episode, Pinto led off his program by reading and commenting on a news story that he believed was real, but which was in fact a satirical story from Newslo.com, a competitor to The Onion.

The satirical news story is entitled Pope Criminalizes the Reporting of Sex Crimes, and there are many offhandedly silly, off-color and outrageous statements within the piece that are clearly designed to elicit a chuckle from the reader. What is striking is the fact that these jokes were not seen as jokes by Chris Pinto, but instead as real news! Here is the audio of Chris Pinto reading this satirical story as if it were real:

Why would Chris Pinto fail to see that this was satire? Why didn’t he take the time to vet his news source and corroborate the story before going on air? If the jokes within the story weren’t obvious enough to identify the piece as satire, a simple glance at the right column of Newslo’s website reveals links to their most popular stories, including headlines such as Pat Robertson Unveils Gay-Repelling Necklace and Syrians Enjoy Day Off from Gas Attacks to Enjoy Miley Cyrus Twerk. The reason Pinto thought it was a real news story is because it fits his conspiracy. It was just one more piece of proof to add to his growing pile of carefully screened and highly selective evidence. It fit his conspiracy template, therefore it had to be true!

After Pinto posted this program, a listener alerted him to his error. As far as I’ve been able to gather, it looks as if Pinto – rather than issue a formal retraction and apologize to the Vatican for his false reporting – chose simply to delete the program.

More to come in my next article.

Postscript: Because it is highly unlikely that Chris Pinto will acknowledge his conspiratorialist mindset to be the driving force behind the slips and follies that I’m reporting, and because Pinto is most likely trying to figure out how to link me to the Roman Catholic ecumenical apostasy conspiracy, I feel compelled to inform my readers that I am not a Roman Catholic, a Jesuit, a homosexual, a pedophile, or a Mason. Neither am I a member of the Iluminati, the Democratic Party, the Teamsters, or the Council on Foreign Relations. I have never attended Harvard or any other liberal university. I am a dog lover, don’t trust cats, and have never been a vegan.