Archive for category: Roman Catholicism

I wondered when those not involved in the issue would chime in, and I didn’t have long to wait. But in what is probably one of the saddest comments I’ve read in a while we read from Kevin Johnson: Imputation, the merit of Christ’s active obedience, and forensic justification–one wonders why they are so important for Reformed people to adhere

(more…)

Presbyterian scholar and professor at Montreat College Paul Owen continues bearing false witness in his public writings. After writing to Roman Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong that he would indeed be able to worship alongside a Roman Catholic “much more easily than with James White or David King” (Owen has said before he would rather see someone in a Catholic Church

Try to read past the acidic tone (a commonality of rC’s these days); step back, listen, consider, and come to understand the capacity of the modern scholar to turn the most obvious statements on their head. But remember, through it all, I’m just a dumb Baptist, and it is probably my fault, too. 🙂 Prepare to enter the theological spin

The question which is raised in sacerdotalism, in a word, is just whether it is God the Lord who saves us, or it is men, acting in the name and clothed with the powers of God, to whom we are to look for salvation. This is the issue which divides sacerdotalism and evangelical religion. (B.B. Warfield, The Plan of Salvation,

Presbyterian Scholar of Today:  In other words, I believe Roman Catholics and Protestants both agree that the sole OBJECT of faith is Christ. Anyone who believes in someone or something OTHER than Christ for justification does not have genuine faith. Faith is a whole-hearted commitment of oneself to, and trust in the person of Christ. The Roman Catholic who trusts

Someone came in channel last night and gave me the URL to a brief article by Jimmy Akin where, finally, after many years, he addresses the error he made in attempting to explain away John 6:37-44 in our debate. I had noted this, yet again, in my blog entries for 5/1 and 5/2/04. Here it is. I quote the most

In the comments section on l0g0s’ blog a number of folks (including Roman Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong) have taken him to task for asserting the citations offered above are “out of context.” l0g0s has been utterly unable to back up his claims outside of saying Bahnsen and I would not have agreed on other subjects, a glowing canard to anyone

Within a few hours after posting these words from Greg Bahnsen, l0g0s came unglued on his blog. How dare I quote Bahnsen’s own words directly on the subject of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who would prefer “a spirit of detente rather than antithesis”! How dare I post his own voice taking the opposite position of the rC’s, or

I was rummaging through some old—and I do mean OLD—files yesterday looking for a letter, when I ran across some old Penpoints. Penpoint was the monthly update from Dr. Greg Bahnsen of the SCCCS (Southern California Center for Christian Studies). My eyes happened to fall upon the issue from just over a decade ago, June, 1994, which carried the title,

Lessons learned this AM:  Respond to one rC, and another will say you are misrepresenting him. Lesson: rC’s are allowed to differ, but you aren’t allowed to criticize. rC’s can go ballistic and lose all balance on rC blogs, without rebuke (at least, public rebuke).  If you say, “This position trumps soteriology with sacramentalism” rC’s will say, “No, you are

Don’t blame me. I didn’t write it.

If you are one of those who thought that the self-glorifying work of the Trinity, the Father, Son, and Spirit, in redeeming a people to the praise of His glorious grace through the gospel, was part of the truth of God that He has promised to safe-guard to His people throughout the pilgrimage of the church on earth, you have

I was forwarded a commentary from T.A. McMahon (Dave Hunt’s co-laborer) in which he wrote,  Mary has played a key role in the conversion to Catholicism of some of that Church’s leading apologists such as former Reformed theologian Tim Staples and Scott Hahn, a graduate of the evangelical Gordon-Conwell Seminary and former Presbyterian minister.  Just a correction for brother McMahon:

Upon reading l0g0s’ denial that the gospel itself is included in the truth vouchsafed to the Church and protected by the Spirit on his blog, my comments on today’s DL, and the blog entry below, I knew an in-depth response would be forthcoming. Well, here it is:  Listen to the latest Dividing Line by James White of Alpha and Omega

Here is a glowing example of “common sense reading of the language” trumps “I’m a scholar and I decree it to be so” on the topic of sola gratia. If you can read Warfield’s full presentation and say, “Oh, yeah, he was surely affirming that Rome believes in sola gratia” then once again we prove that for some

For some reason l0g0s hopped back on the “rip and shred on Reformed folks” bandwagon today (I haven’t the foggiest what prompted it this time—perhaps the fractal below looks too…Calvinistic or something? Maybe it is “promote your local Anglican Day”?). In any case, he launched off:  The reason I ask is because C.S. Lewis–that master writer and theologian among the

I have suggested often over the past nearly decade and a half that whenever you hear a starry-eyed Protestant talking about Rome’s high view of grace, that the single best means of bringing them back down to earth and reality (if they are open to truth, anyway) is to get them to read Indulgentiarum Doctrina, the Apostolic Constitution on the

Pro-Abortion Catholics Seek Mary’s Intercession

David King provided the following citation this evening:  If those who profess to return to the right way feel hurt by these requirements, they are greatly mistaken. For it is impossible to accept them as Christian pastors if they have not renounced the papal priesthood in which they were ordained to sacrifice Jesus Christ, which is a blasphemy worthy of

This interaction is simply one of the clearest the “blog wars” has produced on the vast difference between rCism and a vision based upon biblical teaching concerning the centrality of the gospel. A must read. Update: In responding to a Roman Catholic correspondent, Mr. Johnson wrote, “The only thing I would say in response to your comment is that hopefully

For those who have never been in the midst of a debate on what Augustine meant in Sermon 131, those words may not be familiar. But they were suggested by the PlaidMan, and I thought they fit very well. As Alexander continues his crazed rampage, the picture he paints of me becomes ever more distorted, so that all who actually

For years I’ve heard about him. Tan Book Publishers (super conservative Roman Catholic publisher) still prints his book, The Catholic Controversy (Bethany House named my book, hence, no, there is no connection), a series of tracts he wrote that are specifically aimed at converting Calvinists to Roman Catholicism. Many a modern Roman Catholic has referred me to de Sales’ work

In the realm of the theological blogosphere today the conjunction of the great luminaries of reformed Catholicism collided in what observers called a “near black hole incident” wherein TGE and Alexander the Coppersmith piled laud and congratulations upon l0g0s for his stunning ability to take a comment about my consistency in holding to one particular view, ignore that context, and

This audio from a Q&A session was sent to me recently, and it is quite interesting to hear Bahnsen defend the Southern Presbyterian view, and specifically to defend the concept of offering baptism to a person who has come to Christ out of Roman Catholicism, for Rome, Bahnsen well knew, is not a true church. I wonder if the “reformed

On the papacy, Reformed Catholics have not automatically ruled out the continuing historical institution of the papacy. Many of us see it as a providential tool of God through the centuries designed to aid in protecting and guiding the Church.

1) I do not know if Mr. Johnson is just being difficult or just does not understand much of what I am saying, but it would be a great exercise in futility to go back over each of the many “no, you completely missed the entire point of what I just said” portions of his response.  2) As someone in

I am such a horrible person. Or so Jimmy Akin says, and hence, it must be true. I mean, my horrible attitude must be the reason for his constant mocking tone and derogatory statements. Has to be. What other reason could there be? Well, I guess he might be so very snippy because he’s so busy. His current blog makes

So how did Akin respond to being provided with the refutation of his errors on Greek grammar? Well, “it’s all misdirection, I tell you! Sure I put this out in a debate, and sure I put it in writing, and sure I defended it on the air, and no, I can’t defend it because I don’t know what I’m talking

Dave Armstrong is trumpeting NT Wright and Andrew Sandlin on his blog today. Shouldn’t surprise anyone. Note these two statements from Wright and Sandlin and ponder them well:  They need not know “theology” to be saved; they do need to know that Jesus and His redemptive work is their only hope and that in trusting Him, they are abandoning themselves

Below I noted, very briefly and mainly in passing for those who have no earthly idea what terms like “canonization” and “beatification” and the like mean, what is going on regarding Anne Catherine Emmerich. I was just doing a quick “blog run” and discovered that Akin invested a major size chunk of his blog today to what I call the