NPism, at its heart, atomizes the text of Scripture, begins with a fundamental denial of the relevance of the gospel accounts (and especially their testimony to Second Temple Judaism).
The Reformed faith really does not need 'defenders' like this. This is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard. It does not need to be commented on. Anyone who has read a conservative proponent of the New Perspective will be well aware that precisely the opposite is the case.
Anyway, since when did Baptists become the arbiters of what counts as 'Reformed'? Much as I respect and appreciate Baptist theologians, their right to be on the good ship 'Reformed' is tenuous in a number of respects. If John Calvin would be uncomfortable with N.T. Wright, he would be no less uncomfortable with James White.
If White had done his homework, we might have had a reasonable critique. He hasn't. It is high time that the Reformed camp started to clamp down on shoddy scholarship within its ranks and publically expose it for what it is. There are too many clones of James Whites and John Robbins around. Their fundamental conviction seems to be that when God created the narrow way, He didn't create it half narrrow enough.
