The Great Debate II – Sola Scriptura is posted

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

When it comes to Martin Luther, there are a number of Roman Catholic apologists that become expert pop-psychologists. I don’t recall Dr. Sippo being either a psychologist or a psychiatrist, yet he recently was able to make a clinical evaluation on a man who died hundreds of years ago, living in a different culture and country: My charge that Luther

   What do all false religions share in common? While a number of answers suggest themselves, in our context, I am referring to their united attack upon the inspiration, consistency, and sufficiency, of the Bible as the Word of God. In particular, false religions that wish to make some room for Jesus in their teaching while fundamentally altering the truth about

   More from the cross-examination of Peter Stravinskas on vital issues of apologetic import.    DVD available here (#520). For details on Stravinskas’ error regarding Sermon 131, see here.

Two passages are cited by Armstrong under the subtitle of “Carrying Christ’s Afflictions in our Bodies,” 2 Cor. 4:10 and Col. 1:24. Colossians 1:24 is very commonly cited by RC theologians and apologists in reference to the doctrine of penance, purgatory, and indulgences, all related to the idea that our sufferings can be meritorious (when they meet certain conditions) and

Bill Rutland has provided a “response” that is again instructive to examine, though briefly, as I have limited time before heading back to Phoenix in a matter of hours. I would like to address some of James’ comments on my comments. But, before I do, I would like to thank Pat for allowing James to post from this forum so