Archive for category: Reformed Apologetics

   This book came back into print in December. We ordered it. Took months to get it. But once we got it, it took months to get it listed. Finally, it’s here! One of the best defenses of sola scriptura ever written, William Whitaker’s Disputations on Holy Scripture is not easy reading, but it is important reading. A must for the

   I decided to delve into one of the main arguments Dr. Wright repeated a number of times in Sedalia during the Sunday morning Bible Study at PRBC. For all my many critics I confess to a mistake, well, a couple, in this study, so you won’t want to miss it! I failed to see that Dr. Wright was focusing his

   If a person had done a flow-chart on the debate, and had looked for Jonathan Wright’s refutation of my opening presentation, that portion of the paper would be pretty much blank, as he really did not even try. As with all inconsistent Arminians, Dr. Wright was forced to do the Dave Hunt “it can’t mean that, because there are all

   I am very thankful to report that the debate in Sedalia provided a wonderful time of biblical discussion and presentation. In fact, you can read a surprisingly fair account of the debate here in a local newspaper.    Those who have listened to my response to Dr. Davis’ sermon could have predicted the direction it would go, and it did. There

   I leave early in the morning for Sedalia and the debate tomorrow evening, and I have a lot to get done before trying to get at least a few hours of sleep before heading to the airport. Don’t forget the DL this afternoon! Anyway, I was sent this excellent citation that I intend to use tomorrow evening, and I thought

   You have to be a tremendous communicator for folks to be quoting you a hundred years after you die. Spurgeon was a wordsmith, to be sure. I saw the prayer portion of the following quote on a web board today, so I looked it up. And I really thought merely quoting the prayer portion (esp. in the context of basically

   I could not locate the details for the upcoming debate against Mr. Wright on the subject of Calvinism in Sedalia on the Dividing Line Tuesday, but I have now obtained them. The debate will take place Friday night, the 21st of April, at the Smith-Cotton High School, 312 E. Broadway, Sedalia, MO. Here’s a map. Doors open at 6pm, debate

   Dr. Ergun Caner preached on why he was predestined not to be a “hyper Calvinist” at the Thomas Road Baptist Church this past weekend. A number of folks were kind enough to send me the link to the video, found here. In this sermon you will not hear a meaningful, let alone accurate, definition of “hyper Calvinist,” but you will

You can read the entire sermon here. But here’s the heart of the discussion: “COMING to Christ” is a very common phrase in Holy Scripture. It is used to express those acts of the soul wherein leaving at once our self righteousness, and our sins, we fly unto the Lord Jesus Christ, and receive his righteousness to be our covering,

Tom Ascol has shared his thoughts here. When the Caners asked to make this a two-on-two debate (I prefer a single debate myself, honestly, as it is easier for the audience to follow) the first person I thought of was of course Tom Ascol. Even more so since the issue of Baptist history had been mentioned, and I know Tom

“Amazing” is the term that crosses my mind as I survey some of the articles I’ve seen appear in response to my posting of…a single paragraph regarding a memorization verse a week ago. First, amazing that so many people read this blog (many thanks!). But more amazing is the kinds of replies that have been offered to a single paragraph

Monday, October 16th, 2006, 6pm, at the New Thomas Road Baptist Church in Lynchburg, Virginia. A debate on Calvinism, featuring:     Speaking against “Calvinism” will be the Dean of Liberty Theological Seminary, Dr. Ergun Ehmet Caner. Dr. Caner has been a vocal critic of Reformed theology in Baptist life. He is the author of numerous books and a professor at

John Samson just sent me this article and I thought I would post it as another reminder to those who would follow Dave Hunt’s errors without checking your citations. Every time you hear someone say, “Even Spurgeon denied limited atonement,” kindly pull them aside and say, “You know, you might want to read Spurgeon’s sermons promoting limited atonement before repeating

I listened to both of Dr. Davis’ anti-Calvinism sermons today on my ride (they were worse than I remembered) and since a month from today I am debating an attorney who is a member of his church on this same topic, I would like to go through the sermon and highlight all the straw-man arguments, etc. I will let my

I was just referred to the Berean Call radio program from 2/26 (you can hear it here) where Dave Hunt and T.A. McMahon discussed Calvinism again. There’s really nothing new here—same stuff Hunt has been saying from the start. And that’s the point. There is almost no difference in the falsehoods, errors, straw-men, and simple mind-boggling ignorance that Hunt demonstrated

The e-mail generated by posting the correspondence with Dr. Caner has been most enlightening. The majority have been very supportive and encouraging. Thankfully, my purpose in providing the article was not missed by the ones I am most concerned about. The contrast between the approach and methodology of the two sides has been clearly seen, just as it was in

That’s the description given of Ergun Caner of Liberty University, one which he seems to proudly wear on his own website. Today I read where Dr. Caner said, “Calvinists are much more heinous than Muslims…I assume it is because they are predestined to be….” It just seems to me that if someone is going to promote themselves as fearless and

Some of you may remember a less than encouraging e-mail we received from a Dave Hunt fan last week. You remember…key phrases like “snide and arrogant” “mockery” “pompous contradictions” and the identification of yours truly as a “heretical wolf.” Well, Angelz happened to be passing by the blog and saw the letter, and we all know what happens when you

It doesn’t matter how often he is refuted. It doesn’t matter how often he is challenged. Dave Hunt seems utterly unconcerned about such minor things as truth, accuracy, consistency, or any related issues. When it comes to his most recent crusade, Mr. Hunt’s ears are closed. Evidently, he assumes he has already lost any Reformed readers or supporters he once

Just a quick note before I head off to St. Louis. I was just referred to this on Paul McCain’s blog. I’m sorry, but is the only apologetic offered by these kinds of anti-Calvinistic Lutherans “You need to say Jesus in every other sentence…preferably at the beginning of the sentence”? Rev. McCain (as he asks to be identified) is afraid

I awoke this morning to a veritable explosion of anti-Calvinism, and the relationship of the various sources of these outbursts is somewhat educational.     Last night I was directed to the blog of Paul McCain, a Lutheran who writes for World Magazine. Specifically, I was directed first to a poem he posted, then unposted, then posted again. I likewise read

John 10 is another of the great soteriological passages in Scripture that has encouraged God’s people down through the ages. The Good Shepherd, the perfect Savior who gives His life for His sheep, and who promises the unity of the Godhead itself as surety of the completion of that work—all these themes scream “sovereignty” and, in the constant battle against

While working on the next (and I think, for the moment, final) segment of my response to Paul Owen’s stealth anti-Calvinism, I noted his referring his readers to Calvin’s discussion of election in the Institutes. What I found ironic was that barely a few pages after the section he cited, we read these words, which are not only relevant to

I continue with what I hope is a helpful series exposing the anti-Reformed polemics of pseudo-Calvinist Paul Owen of Montreat College. We have seen how Owen has manhandled the text of John 6, ignoring its own context and flow, inserting a-contextual concepts here and there and coming up with his eisegetical conclusions. We move on to his next section on

It is dangerous to let folks guest blog for you. They get bit by the bug and go and start their own blog and well, then you are left with nobody to guest blog for you anymore! That’s what happened with Alan Kurschner, who has begun a most entertaining blog, www.calvinistgadfly.com. I appreciated his kind words concerning my debate with

I continue reviewing the anti-Reformed interpretation of John 6 and John 10 offered by our pseudo-Calvinist scholar, Paul Owen. Before moving on to his next statement, I would like to briefly note the amusing attempt Owen has posted to provide for himself some cover regarding my previous comments on Romans 11. Though no serious minded individual could possibly be impacted

We now enter into a documentation of the simple exegetical errors made by Dr. Paul Owen, professor at Montreat College, regarding his anti-Reformed readings of these key Johannine texts. 1. Because Baptists do not think in biblical terms about the covenant, they fail to see how Jesus’ allusion to Jeremiah 31:34 in 6:45 enlightens the full scope of 6:37. Some

I continue providing a response to the anti-Calvinistic interpretation of Jesus’ promises to His people in John provided by Paul Owen, a man who claims to be a Calvinist but whose writings and agenda is opposed, clearly, to the proclamation of God’s free and sovereign grace. We continue with Owen’s words: God actually makes promises to people, and gives benefits

The recent Christian Apologetics Journal review of James White’s book The Roman Catholic Controversy has this curious observation made by the reviewer, Ralph MacKenzie: White states that “the doctrine of sola scriptura is based on the nature of the Scriptures as the Word of God” (62). To demonstrate that this doctrine was held in the church prior to the Reformation,

Many believers wonder why it is that they can read their Bibles and see the clear teaching of Scripture, only to go to the voluminous writings of many in academia and find there a muddle of confusion and conflict. Of course, one can find those eagle-eyed men of God who combine a living faith with their academic study and in

Well, I guess nothing coming from John Shelby Spong can be “amazing,” since his entire career has been founded upon the most outrageous claims all arising from his inveterate hatred of “fundamentalism” which, in reality, is simply his way of referring to anything that takes Scripture seriously and proclaims anything even slightly akin to “the gospel.” But you still have