A few days ago I began presenting clips from the cross-examination section of the sola scriptura debate from 1997 on Long Island. I did so because Phil Porvaznik, a Roman Catholic apologist of sorts, has posted, on the site I believe is maintained by Apolonio Latar, an 18 second clip which he calls my “concession of defeat.” That anyone would think a serious minded person would be influenced by an 18 second clip is hard to believe, but, that’s the kind of apologetics that exists in defense of the “infallible church” on the net.
   This next section is a bit shorter, but I found it interesting. Gerry Matatics was claiming, based upon his assertions regarding 2 Thessalonians 2:15, that I, and the Protestants in the audience, were not obeying the command to hold to the traditions. Obviously, the only way that could be the case is if what is contained in the “oral” component is not, in fact, found in the written, which is the heart of his entire use of that text. Therefore, it would be incumbent upon the defender of the Roman position, in light of his assertions about this text, to be able to demonstrate that the “traditions” he claims are apostolic were, in fact, delivered to the Thessalonians, as per his own claims. But notice especially what he says at the end. He says that this is a debate on sola scriptura, and that I should not ask him, at the drop of a hat, to defend indulgences. First, I did not ask him to defend indulgences. I asked him to defend his own assertion, made in his opening statements, concerning the exegesis of 2 Thess. 2:15, and I gave him a single example, indulgences, of a doctrine based upon the tradition he claims I am ignoring.
   But most importantly, keep this in mind. In every debate I have ever been in (unless my recollection is incorrect, it will even happen in a later portion of the cross-examination) on the subject of sola scriptura with the possible exception of the Pacwa debate on that topic, I have been asked, in cross-examination, to define and defend the specifics of the entire doctrine of the canon of Scripture, and that in less than sixty seconds! Matatics had already done so in two preceding debates on this topic, Madrid had pulled the same stunt as well. It is part of their template. “So, how do you know Matthew wrote Matthew?!” So on the one hand Matatics says it is unfair to ask him, at the “drop of a hat,” to address indulgences (which I wasn’t asking him to do anyway), but he will turn around and ask me to make an entire presentation on the issue of the canon “at the drop of a hat”! The double-standard is, again, striking.

©2021 Alpha and Omega Ministries. All Rights Reserved.

Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?