Archive for category: Roman Catholicism

Though I am nearly 6000 miles from home, I still get multiple copies of advertisements sent out from active Roman Catholic apologists (for which I’m grateful, by the way—that is not meant to be a complaint). I guess Patrick Madrid of Envoy Magazine has sent out one of late, for I’ve gotten more than one copy. In it he is

   I forgot to add this to my brief recounting of visiting St. Peter’s in Rome. As I was looking at all of the crypts and memorials, statues and monuments, to dead popes and their alleged accomplishments, I could not help but think of Shebna in Isaiah 22:15-18: Thus says the Lord GOD of hosts, “Come, go to this steward, to

I mentioned on the Dividing Line a few weeks ago the quandry presented by those associated with Robert Sungenis. I have debated Sungenis five times, by my count. Some will recall a period when Sungenis actually attempted to behave in a meaningfully restrained fashion, but that period did not last long. All one has to do is track down the

Liberalism is an odd thing to observe. On the one end, liberalism has led to the ordination of an openly gay “bishop” (Gene Robinson) by the Episcopalian church in the US; but, on the other end, since liberalism has no doctrinal foundation upon which to stand, it has now led to Mary: Hope and Grace in Christ, the paper issuing

It was bought and paid for by the most gross selling of the grace of God in the form of the blasphemous doctrine of indulgences. Maybe that is why I could not even begin to think it was grand, or glorious, or even attractive: it stinks of the deadness of man’s religion and worse, the perversion of the gospel of

It caught my eye—a small booklet, tucked in the fold of a chair in the corner. I normally wouldn’t have seen it, but it was sticking out just enough to be seen. I picked it up. The blue-and-white cover bore the title, Devotions in Honor of Our Mother of Perpetual Help. I thumbed through the booklet, scanning a few of

One of the most common activities of those who defend falsehood goes like this: if you have to twist your sources out of their original contexts, and you know it, then before you do so, accuse your opponent of doing the same thing. If you have to act like a spoiled child, then complain that your opponent was doing it

I was just writing a note to my friend Steve Camp when I saw an article pop up on Dave Armstrong’s blog. He was talking about Dobson appearing on Hannity & Colmes and being asked about Al Mohler’s 2000 statement about Rome being a false church (amen!) with a false gospel (amen again). (Just in case you haven’t noticed, that

You know, I would like to see some of the major figures in Roman Catholicism, the “out front” guys, the ones who promote Rome as infallible, her Pope as the head of the church, etc., just once come out and say, “Look, people, this kind of thing is absurd and ridiculous. Pure superstition, idolatrous, and worthy of at the very

We shall break off at this point, for the chief goal of our considerations has been attained. We have seen that the New Testament as a whole strikingly demonstrates the primacy of Peter; we have seen that the formative development of tradition and of the Church supposed the continuation of Peter’s authority in Rome as an intrinsic condition. The Roman

I monitor nearly 30 blogs these days, thanks to the Sage plug in for Firefox, and some of them are already listing the “Pope-bashing” going on after the election of Benedict XVI. I couldn’t help but be struck by the irony of the situation. I just saw a leftist blog using all kinds of profanity while mocking Ratzinger’s German heritage.

Dave Armstrong has it right: Dr. Paul Owen of Montreat College is, in fact, one of the best friends the Roman Catholic apologetics community has ever come across. It is always good to have folks “inside” the other camp to come to your aid, sort of like a fifth column (“men will arise from your own ranks“). The tactic is

I’m not going to be placing any bets on who the next Pope will be, nor how quickly he will be chosen. I only predict that someone will say “Habemus Papam” and the gathered crowd will cheer and the fellow will bless the crowd in a less-than-perfect fitting papal outfit. How’s that for going out on a limb? In case

Just saw this, wanted to offer a response, and to once again invite “Scholastic” to join us on the Dividing Line. Might not work this Tuesday AM, as we hope to have Marty Minto as our guest, but surely on Thursday. 877-753-3341. Here’s the comment: How many times does James White have to paint caricatures of his Catholic opponents? (As

Ask if Rome’s gospel is biblical and what happens to you on certain radio networks? Well, we’ve found out. I imagine Marty would have gotten away with it if he had done just one program, but as I’ve discovered, in essence, if you believe Romans 1:16 is true; and if you believe Galatians condemns false gospels, and if you think

I sort of expected this would happen, and in fact, I’m happy it has, in a sense. Marty has been swamped with requests for interviews, and is driving to do a television interview even now, so he won’t be able to join us on the DL until next Tuesday morning. Pray for him as he has a unique opportunity to

Some of you will remember the name Marty Minto. I was filling in for Marty when I interviewed Dave Hunt in 2000 regarding Calvinism. I was on Marty’s show many times. In fact, it was a debate on Marty’s show on KPXQ here in Phoenix that eventually led to the writing of The Same Sex Controversy. Marty left the area

I depend a lot on folks out there to send me url’s and notes about who is saying what, and maybe the fact that it was not till today that anyone mentioned the “Internet Monk’s” comments says something, I don’t know. I guess the Internet Monk is a former Baptist, former Calvinist, now in that wonderful world similar to the

So Steve Ray writes to me and asks me to correct my blog since he didn’t “send any troops.” Well, we don’t want anyone confused! Of course, I didn’t say he did, I said the folks who were sending us e-mails came from his board, but he disavows any control over the folks who post there, so, therefore, he didn’t

Sometimes, you just have to shake your head. Remember Doug C. from Houston, who launched into me on Steve Ray’s board? Here’s the original, here’s my reply to his letter, also posted on Ray’s board. Now, if you haven’t ever ventured into Steve Ray’s web-board, let’s just say it is well known for two things: 1) hotheads, 2) massive volume.

One of the first things I said last week regarding the death of John Paul II was, “Sit back and start taking notes. How many, anywhere, even in ‘Christian media,’ will address the only relevant issue regarding the death of John Paul II?” I was such an optimist! I hadn’t yet realized that not only would the gospel be ignored,

My bud Campi (Steve Camp), never one to shy away from controversy (hey, the guy can make me cringe, and that’s not easy to do!), has stepped out front to take a few of the incoming…rotten vegetables aimed the direction of the few of us who have simply refused to compromise the Gospel and jump onto the “I may be

I have had a few folks write to me and ask why I gave Dr. Al Mohler a “pass” in the blog article on the Dobson program. While I did not mention Dr. Mohler’s participation in the program by name (which, given that there were two priests and Dobson, did not amount to a major portion of the show), I

I just read through this thread, and once again, I am simply left speechless. Obviously, what we do in apologetics just isn’t intended for most of these folks. Put on your asbestos gloves prior to clicking this URL, and thanks to the couple of non-Catholics who took the time to say, “Uh, wait a minute, that’s just silly….” BTW, to

You may recall that yesterday I noted the kind words of one Doug C. from Houston:    Second, Tim Staples told me that White got his clocked cleaned by a friend of his in a debate on Peter being the rock. After the debate, White admitted that he had to uphold his anticatholic position or he has no ministry.    White is

James Dobson of Focus on the Family had a program featuring two Roman Catholic priests in memory of Pope John Paul II (4/6/05). The program started out all wrong, as Dobson said, and this is a quote, His impact on people everywhere has been profound, and there are many areas wherein we found common cause with him and the other

    This image expresses what I have been trying to say for a few days now. This image appears in rotating fashion at www.catholic.com, the Catholic Answers website. A number of years ago I wrote the following in my book, Mary–Another Redeemer?: It is general knowledge that Pope John Paul II is highly devoted to the Virgin Mary. He credits

…at least from an “apologist.” This just appeared on Dave Armstrong’s blog. You remember Dave Armstrong. Yes, he’s the fellow who kept stealing Angel’s artwork, having a four-year old butcher it, and posting it on his blog. Same fellow who melted down into a puddle of apologetic goo when I finally invested the time to start working through his book,

The posting of my sermon from yesterday (mp3) has generated an incredible response, both positively and negatively. Combined with the blog entries over the past few days, our incoming e-mail has been hot and heavy. But so also have been the Roman Catholic web boards. While Steve Ray shut his down, the Catholic Answers forums and those at Envoy Magazine

Yesterday morning I chose to “take the risk,” scrap the message I had been prepared to deliver, and speak to the folks at Cornerstone Baptist Church about the gospel and John Paul II. Not knowing the congregation, it truly was a bit of a gamble, but the fine folks I had talked to gave me the confidence to go through

A certain set of folks will surely chalk this up to my innate stupidity, blindness, and general lack of in-depth knowledge of the sewing methods of French nuns in the northwestern corner of France in the year 1219, but I just read Peter Leithart’s comments on the death of John Paul II, and I am once again launched off into