Archive for category: Roman Catholicism

A while back I was reading Jimmy Akin’s comments about my being a Christian on his blog. Of course, the idea was “White was validly baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, therefore he is a Christian.” And this has been the basis many RC apologists have used for saying that I am an anti-Catholic but

  As one very familiar with the work of James White, and having been myself involved in a number of discussions with him over the past year specifically arising out of my affiliation with the work in Moscow, this debate will be very interesting to me as well. There may be…many Reformed Baptists who are the friends of Presbyterians. However,

A few weeks ago there was a small chance that maybe, maybe TGE would truly get away from the net long enough to maybe regain a little balance and some perspective. Sadly, that did not end up happening, and lo and behold, “He’s baaaack.” You will note the title of the blog article below: “Theocentric vs. Anthropocentric Religion Illustrated.” It

Over the course of the debates we have done I have often had to point out the difference between theocentric religion and anthropocentric religion. This normally comes up when encountering someone who reads one of the passages in the Bible that can be read prescriptively (“do this so as to be saved”) or descriptively (“this is what a saved person

Just got back from a most enjoyable morning exercising my 2nd Amendment rights and launching model rockets, all at the same time (ah, the smell of gunpowder in the morning!). When I popped into my office to watch an AVI I shot of one of my old, old rockets CATOing on the launch pad (engine mounts gave way…I’m still laughing

Just a couple of items. First, I tracked down the Dividing Line program where I played the phone call where Akin tried to deal with his claims about inceptive aorists in John 6:44. Here’s the link. Fast forward to 33 minutes in, if you wish to only hear the relevant section. I would love to ask Mr. Akin how he

I took a few hours off of writing tonight to sorta de-compress, came back over to the office to do a little more work on an article, and found it necessary to put on my helmet and dodge a flood of incoming fire, both in channel and then in the “blogosphere.” Though I had commented

I grabbed my copy of Jimmy Akin’s book to write my second response (linked immediately below) and as I thumbed through it again I ran across the following argumentation, which is quite similar to the errors Mr. Akin made in our KIXL debate when he mis-identified the aorists in John 6 as inceptives. He writes, One passage

Last year, right after the Great Debate on Long Island, I got in contact with Jimmy Akin again. We had tried to get him involved in the annual debates on Long Island, twice he had agreed, and twice had pulled out. This had led us to be hesitant to even ask, since it is so hard to “fix” things when

After responding to Jimmy Akin’s blog note, I took a moment to read the comments attached to it. I found them fascinating. Some were your standard “ra-ra” kind of comments from folks who obviously are not big on fairly evaluating apologetic material and logical argumentation. One fellow, Brad Haas, was all excited about Dave Armstrong’s “work.” Sorry, but anyone who

A fairly major Vatican document has been released, Redemptionis Sacramentum. It addresses the ‘proper’ celebration of the sacraments in the Roman Catholic Church. It has a number of interesting statements, many of which would be excellent “blog fodder,” but this one was most interesting:  “The celebration of the Eucharist in the Sacrifice of the Mass is truly the origin

DA continues producing record volumes of verbiage, but, thankfully, did learn that stealing Angel’s images is, well, illegal. So, he pulled the new ones someone had produced for him. I guess he’ll have to find a real artist now. Reading the comments section on his blog is simply entertaining, though somewhat frightening. Thankfully, after the necessary response to my comments

Dave Armstrong, upon realizing it was unwise to post Columbine-style pictures of Reformed apologists on the same blog that talks about how he respects Protestants, pointed to a response he wrote to the comparison of his “exegesis” with an example of my own (found here) as a means of providing cover for his mistake.  I had briefly looked at the

Dave Armstrong wrote a nearly 4200 word “response” to Angel’s cartoon, and, of course, it is all my fault. See, Wilson was right: it doesn’t matter what you say. UPDATE: Dave then ignored copyright laws, demonstrated he has no one around him who can do original work, took the caricature below, and proved he is beyond all rational discourse yet

Ah, see? This is called a professional caricature. See how it is accurate to life? How it has a context? A message? Helps you to remember something, makes a point, etc.? So, Dave, in the future: please note that these are copyrighted by Angel (don’t steal them). Find someone on your end of things who actually has the ability to

Proving that reasoning and refutation are but minor irritations, Dave Armstrong has reposted his mauled graphic of me. However, his rather less than talented artist removed the blood from my face this time (as I said, I’m so thankful and feel so much better now). And he has chosen, in his own inimitable style to post it on one of

Amazingly, after posting his horrific image, Armstrong has tried to turn the tables by accusing me of posting something even worse than his blood-stained Charlie-Mansonesque picture. Remember, Armstrong just posted the picture: no context, no words, no application to any particular issue. Just Rome’s arrow (replete with Papal flag) sticking out of my forehead with blood flowing from the wound.

I’ve taken a great deal of heat for having *any* humor on this blog, and especially for the cartoons Angel was so kind to provide. No matter how accurate his commentary, or how perfectly on-target the satire, there are some who just don’t believe there is any room at all for the use of sarcasm, satire, or humor in apologetics.

It is good to know that even on weekends the ever-vigilant Dave Armstrong is reading my blog. Seriously, only a few hours after posting my response to TGE below, DA (as he is so affectionately known by so many) posted a long, rambling response that, to be honest, has almost nothing whatsoever to do with what I said. I normally

It has seemed of late that TGE is back into the “shoot at my former comrades-in-arms” mode (he goes through phases like that), despite his stated intention, having “won” the last round, to move on to higher ground. Seems someone is still rather…agitated. Regular listeners to the DL and readers of this blog know that I often have rather strong

For both the writings of holy fathers, the acts of councils, and all history, make it plain that this height of power, which the Roman pontiff has now possessed for about four hundred years, was attained gradually, or rather was either craftily crept into, or violently seized. But let us forgive them this, and let them take for granted that

Angel must have listened to the Madrid debate on the veneration of saints and images, because I well remember making with my words the point he here makes with his art. And, as usual, it is more memorable when Angel does it:

It has been a while since I heard from you, Alexander. I knew you were still lurking, waiting for your next opportunity to continue your crusade. Your opposition to those who seek to promote the gospel, especially in apologetic contexts, is well known, though, of course, you are constantly working to keep up that “image” behind which you hide your

Didn’t get a chance to do much today…meetings and traffic But I was sent this utterly odd thing about the music for the Passion. I’m starting to think working on the set of that film must have been very, very strange.  From MSNBC: John Debney, who composed the music for “The Passion of the Christ,” says he did battle with

Well, the book arrived. I refer to A Guide to the Passion: 100 Questions About The Passion of the Christ, a book designed especially to be given out by Catholics to folks who have seen The Passion of the Christ from Ascension Press, written by the Catholic Exchange. The URL given for the book is: www.evangelization.com. Notice that there are

DA, A Biblical Defense of Catholicism, pp. 69-70: The theme of the Epistle to the Hebrews is Christ as our High Priest. As such, the “priestly” verses are very numerous (for example, 2:17, 3:1, 4:14-16, 5:1-10, 6:20, 7:1-28, 8:1-6, 9:11-15, 24-28, 10:19-22). The teaching here acquires much more meaning within Catholic Eucharistic theology, whereas, in evangelical, non-sacramental Protestant interpretation, it is

Evidently some folks think a quick listing of “random thoughts” upon seeing the Passion movie is a “review.” Please. Take a blog for what it is: a blog. It is amazing to me how folks will look at two paragraphs here and ignore four hours of commentary on the Dividing Line, including the playing of clips, etc., and jump to

OK, saw it. Random thoughts time. Hopefully something more coherent will develop by the time of the Dividing Line tomorrow morning. 1) When Jesus said “I AM” to the soldiers, they fell back upon the ground. Why on EARTH delete that even when Jesus says “I am”?                                                                               2) “It is accomplished” and “It is finished” are not, in the context

The flood of Passion discussion is overwhelming. You can’t even keep up with it anymore. I’m glad I got started on it months ago. 🙂 Please note the article posted below; for Reformed Baptists you may wish to listen to Pastor A.N. Martin’s sermon from Trinity Baptist on this topic as well. There is stuff coming out now that is