Archive for category: Roman Catholicism

In scanning a recent article by Mark Bonocore I noted an interesting example of the constant presence of anachronism in Roman Catholic apologetic treatments of both the Bible and patristic sources.  In this case, he is responding to an un-named Protestant who wrote the following: Clement wrote only a little earlier than Ignatius and clearly didn’t share Ignatius’ ecclesiastical view.

The following exchange took place on a Roman Catholic list in 1997 over the course of a couple of weeks.  As you will see at the end of this exchange, Mr. Mark Shea, author of By What Authority?, threatened legal action if I posted this material.  However, in February of 2002, Mr. Shea himself posted an entire section of this

Over the past number of months we have received a number of requests for information concerning the claims of Mrs. Patty Bonds, my older sister.  Though I have not seen Mrs. Bonds for a number of years, and have had no serious interaction with her in half a dozen years, her recent decision to join the Roman Catholic Church has

10     According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it. 11     For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12     Now if any man builds

On Thursday evening, January 3, 2002, James White was to engage in an in-channel debate with a Roman Catholic from Australia who went by the nick of “velleity.”  Velleity had challenged James in the chat channel on December 30th.  Here is the log of the challenge: <velleity> het NA27 how about you an me have a debate sometime in

(Part I) In October of 1981, while visiting a friend in the hospital, I was confronted with the question, “Are you a born again believer in the Lord Jesus Christ according to the Word at God?” I was also asked, “Would you like to invite the Lord Jesus in your heart to save you and to give you eternal life?”

Over the course of the past few months a very lengthy exchange took place between James White and Robert Sungenis on the topic of John 6. We believe the facts have been established with more than sufficient certainty for anyone who is willing to fairly observe them. Mr. Sungenis has responded with a very lengthy article, but to be perfectly

Over the years I have often surprised people by asserting that there is one passage of Scripture that is so clear, so perspicuous, that I have never seen a meaningful, coherent, contextually-based interpretation of it that does not teach with clarity the glorious freedom of God in the salvation of His elect people.  That passage is John 6:35-45. This passage formed

The Council of Florence, the 17th Ecumenical (and hence “infallible”) Council of the Roman Catholic Church, said the following: It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the

Perhaps this is why Catholic Answers, while claiming to be in the “forefront” of Catholic Apologetics, refuses to engage in public debate against those they know are prepared and ready.  Who knows?  But one thing is for sure: the new article by Steven O’Reilly in the October, 2000 This Rock magazine rivals the sad attempts of the Watchtower Society to

I have seen my opponents use many tactics to cover over poor performances in debates.  You will find documented on this website at least one imaginative approach taken by Catholic Answers back in 1993 when Patrick Madrid attempted to do damage control after our sola scriptura debate in San Diego by writing “The White Man’s Burden” in This Rock magazine

In February of 2000, Catholic writer Stephen O’Reilly attempted to provide a response to a small section of my book, The Roman Catholic Controversy. We responded to this attempt (click here) and demonstrated the fundamental circularity of Roman Catholic apologetics: that is, any person who reads widely in their attempts to substantiate Papal primacy know that they must begin with

There was a time when Catholic Answers tried to put forward a serious face of scholarship.  They sought to utilize at least semi-scholarly sources (though even then without much serious effort to use them in context, see this example).  But over the past few years it seems the bottom of the barrel has come into clear view, and the pretense