Archive for category: Reformed Apologetics

Different site, same stuff. ReformedCatholicism.com is gone, now we have in its place, www.communiosanctorum.com (Latin is so much more classy than English could ever be, of course). OK, the good things: love the template. I want one like that. Nay, I demand it! OK, so I don’t have much control over that. But I do like it, though, if you

I read this sermon over dinner last night, and was so blessed I had to invite others to re-read it. Yes, it’s the one Hunt and O’Guinn and others didn’t bother to read before slaughtering it, which only makes it worth the read all the more. Follow the link for the whole thing, but for those without a lot of

For those of you who get Bob Ross’ e-mail updates, yes, I know he’s still on the warpath. I feel for him, but decided last year that he is beyond correction, and in light of his encouragement of Wilkin’s efforts, and his manifest ignorance of Wilkin’s views, and his continued comments about a debate he did not see or hear

First, we note the phrase “no one is able.” The verb “to come” (evlqei/n) is filling out the verb dunatai, which is what you always expect: even in English when we say “able” we follow it with an infinitival phrase, “to do something.” In this case, it is a negation, “no one is able to come to Me.” Is there

This picture sort of sums up the end of the debate: I’m listening to the moderator who is trying to make some serious closing remarks, and Wilkin is…well, I guess only he knows. At one point he was taking pictures of the audience. All I can say is that Dr. Wilkin evidently is not interested in convincing serious Calvinists of

Well, if I had written out how I expected the debate to go…I would have been wrong. I never expected legions of straw-men, enough ignorance of Reformed theology to make Dave Hunt proud, and a nasty, cutting presentation aimed not at the thesis but at me, in particular. But hey, I can roll with the punches, and once again, as

I am not at all certain of Bob Wilkin’s view on this matter, but I do understand that he does NOT hold that one can be a “regenerated unbeliever.” To that extent, at least, we can agree with him. On the other hand, if he holds to the “unregenerated believer” view espoused by Dave Hunt in his debate with White,

For those in the area, you are invited to attend the debate this coming Friday evening between myself and Dr. Robert Wilkin of the Grace Evangelical Society (Ph.D., Dallas Seminary). Here are the details as to location, time, directions, contact info, etc. I do not believe the debate will impact the Thursday DL, for those interested, as I fly over

OK, I made a mistake. I was completely unaware Mr. Spencer is a ticking emotional time-bomb, waiting for any slight motion to set him off. I would have avoided him like the plague if someone had just said, “Yeah, he’s taken shots at you by name on important topics, but please, realize, if you respond, even if you do so

Last evening I spent a lot of time–way too much time, especially given how far behind I am on a number of things, to respond to the “Internet Monk” and his essay about why he is “different” than “us Calvinists.” Now, I interacted with him, even told some of my own personal stories, all to point out that us “Calvinists”

I cannot comfortably say that the reformation of the church needs to remake it into the image of what I saw in the conservative resurgence in the SBC. I support much of that reformation, but where is the humility? The generosity of Jesus? The flavor and aroma of grace? I have had enough of war metaphors, because I have seen

Michael Spencer, aka “Internet Monk,” wrote an article that has been linked to by a number of folks today, so I felt compelled to respond. Just to do something different, my responses are in blue. I’m Not Like You: An Apologia to My Readers (Calvinists especially) Michael: No, you aren’t. Though we have never spoken, at least to my knowledge,

My personal Alexander the Coppersmith, Paul Owen of Montreat College, has offered his views of my various heresies today. I note that the best that has come out of my bearing his animosity and constant vociferous hostility over the years is that he has been forced, for various reasons, to become ever clearer in revealing his theological positions, and for

Mr. Enloe just commented on the article I noted yesterday, and in so doing, demonstrated that I completely, and utterly, wasted my time in the recent discussion (well—at least as far as communicating with rC’s, anyway). When someone has decided that they know what you believe, despite your repeated corrections, there really is nothing more you can do. Here is

The title should have warned me, “This article ought to make us yearn for unity…we are not as separated as some would have us be.” Yeah, that non-perfecting, repetitive sacrifice of the Mass is just real close to the Reformed doctrine of atonement. Right next door. Anyway, the article is “more of the same,” but the paragraph chosen for posting

Evidently there is no “tolerance” amongst the uber-tolerant “Reformed Catholics” for believing that the gospel is what defines the Christian faith. One of their number, who has moved a very, very long way away from where he once stood and from what he once professed, taught, and even preached, recently wrote an article titled “Noisy Gongs and Clanging Cymbals.” In

I close with some questions to Dr. White. If he denies that he practices nuda / solo Scriptura, why do his apologetics against Roman Catholics and other Protestants denigrate all authorities except Scripture? Answer: If saying all other authorities are not theopneustos equals denigration, then I guess I’m guilty. But as I have noted, Mr. Enloe simply has no idea

Tim Enloe writes on Dave Armstrong’s blog:    I also as a Reformed Christian want to say to my Catholic brothers that I strongly disagree with the views of my Baptist brothers Drs. White and Svendsen, and all their like-minded friends from other denominations. Nobody on either side of the divide needs to be “reminded” that the issues that separate us

If you have time, you might wish to listen to the late Greg Bahnsen’s sermon on Roman Catholicism, available here.

1) Did Hebrews 8 have a meaning when it was penned originally under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God? Yes. (But that meaning isn’t necessarily identifiable with the assured results of the distinctly Modern and scientific type of hermeneutics that Dr. White practices.) What is “modern” about the examination of the text in its original context? Isn’t the

   In Dr. White’s latest reply to me he says that I provided only one example of his misconstrual of sola Scriptura: his position on paedobaptism. He claims that his exegetical work on Hebrews 8 and 10 in the Reformed Baptist Theological Review proves that my accusation is false. It may be that he didn’t argue that way in the particular

I confess I would rather not write this, solely because I know that it is somewhat like throwing a match into a gas can, but I said I would speak to the issue of the meaning of mercy in the Scripture in response to Mr. Holding’s very odd, way-out-of-center, and simply errant assertions on the subject. And so I shall,

Mr. Enloe has asserted on his blog that I do not hold to a Reformational understanding of sola scriptura. I believe him to be in error, of course, and have asked for examples to substantiate his position. I have spent some time studying the subject, and, in fact, defending the Reformational viewpoint, over the years, so it would be very

Despite feeling like I have one foot in the grave and one foot on a banana peel, I wanted to very, very quickly respond to Mr. Enloe. I had asked him to provide me with what should be fairly easily provided if, in fact, his assertions carry water. Specifically, should he not be able to provide clear examples from my

Tim Enloe has written on his blog for March 16: Especially as I read some of White’s recent blog posts, I find it exceedingly difficult to imagine having to retract many things I have said about his views on this point. I believe that James White is defending what he honestly believes to be true on this point, but at

I mentioned I would provide the link by which you can obtain the sermons from the Midwest Founders Conference, and here it is.

We’ve done a few things like this in the past, and probably need to do them more often. If you glance over to the right you’ll see a link that says “The Defending Calvinism Value Pack” (sounds a bit like something you would buy at a hardware store to apply to your lawn to keep Calvinists off). It consists of

I have often noted the fact that most Christian’s theology, as reflected by their prayers, is a lot better than their theology reflected in their words. When one bows in humble worship and focuses upon the Triune Majesty of God, one’s mouth will not, normally, be filled with the praises of the creature. Calvin well said in the Institutes, III:1.4,

Tim Berends called right toward the end of the DL today and from what Rich tells me, he wasn’t a happy camper about the article I posted about the interview aka debate on KJSL last week. Evidently, he feels I need to retract the piece because 1) Jerry Thornburgh was not on the hour after I was on unopposed, and

I sorta stumbled into my office this morning, doing my best to get the brain working before a 7:15am radio program. I’ve become a bit of a night-owl, as I can get a lot more done in the late hours than in the morning hours, seemingly (fewer distractions, and the phone goes silent!). Anyway, I was on with Tim and

After sending out his “response” (the one I responded to a little earlier) to the same folks he sent out his “White isn’t a Christian anyway” e-mail (and posting it on a yahoo discussion group), Carpenter finally got around to sending it to me, prefaced with the following: On your web site, you have a post entitled “Hyper Calvinism Revisited”