Thursday, August 21, 2008

Just a few unrelated things....

Patrick Madrid posted an article on the Envoy forums which laments, "Why are people on the Internet so rude?" Of course, this same Catholic forum allows and tolerates the disposition of Art Sippo.

After hearing Gary DeMar's review of the recent Batman movie, I went to see it. Despite Gary's very interesting commentary on the worldview represented by the character of the Joker (The Joker is an example of the Darwinian worldview without the restraints of the Christian worldview), I found the movie peaked with one violent scene after another, reminding me of a nightmare one is thankful for waking up from. I'm not saying it was a bad movie, just not my taste. Maybe if I were 15 years old again...ah, never mind.

16 comments:

rr1213 said...

To be fair, Art has been much better lately...just as stubborn and just as zealous, but more charitable and showing a decent sense of humour.

David Waltz said...

To be "fair" James is quick on the draw to point out the double-standards of Catholics, while ignoring the double-standards of so many of his Reformed brethren.

Trying to keep in real...

David

James Swan said...

To be "fair" James is quick on the draw to point out the double-standards of Catholics, while ignoring the double-standards of so many of his Reformed brethren.

OK David, please let me know which of my "Reformed brethren" refer to people as "Nazis."

I believe that rhetoric cannot entirely be avoided on the Internet between Catholics and Protestants. That is, I can tolerate at least a particualr level of slander or name-calling.

Calling someone a "Nazi" probably goes far beyond whatever name you've been called by someone from my camp. Art has called me many names- for the most part I simply laugh them off.

This word "Nazi" used by Sippo towards me is simialr to calling someone a murderer. I happen to have many Jewish friends.

Defend Sippo is you want David- but rest assured, any Protestant friend of mine calling you a "Nazi" would not be allowed to post such comments on my blog.

Matthew Bellisario said...

You are one to talk. None of you "Reformers" have ever done this sort of thing? Once again this shows how far you have gone into a state of denial. It is all fun and games when you post on here mocking Catholics, the Church and anyone else who doesn't agree with you.

Carrie said...

None of you "Reformers" have ever done this sort of thing? Once again this shows how far you have gone into a state of denial.

Please, quote one of us "Reformers" expressing the same level of vitriol as Sippo.

If you need a definition for vitriol, click here

rr1213 said...

Allow the guy the opportunity to reform his approach to apologetics.

David Waltz said...

Hello James,

You responded to my comments with the following:

>>OK David, please let me know which of my "Reformed brethren" refer to people as "Nazis."…

Defend Sippo is you want David- but rest assured, any Protestant friend of mine calling you a "Nazi" would not be allowed to post such comments on my blog.>>

Me: I have already stated that I do not endorse Sippo’s apologetic style; and to my knowledge, I have never defended his methodology.

For the record, I stand with you in condemning his use of the term “Nazi”, it is deplorable; I also condemn a contemporary Reformed apologist’s use of the phrases “Alexander the Coppersmith” and “wolf in sheep’s clothing” when referring a Christian brother…We can debate over the issue of “degree”, yet I cannot help but believe there exists a tendency to wink at apologetic abuses within one’s own paradigm, while condemning the use of similar tactics by their opponents. Sincerely hope you understand the point I have been trying to make…

Grace and peace,

David

James Swan said...

exists a tendency to wink at apologetic abuses within one’s own paradigm, while condemning the use of similar tactics by their opponents

You must be joking. Calling someone a "Nazi" is far beyond the terms you mention.

the phrases “Alexander the Coppersmith” and “wolf in sheep’s clothing” when referring a Christian brother...

Even Jesus and the New Testament writers used negative terms in describing those opposed to the Gospel- something you should probably know, or at least are ignoring- is that I believe Rome teaches a false Gospel. I do not consider those promoting Romanism as "Christian brothers"

Alexander Greco said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alexander Greco said...

James Swan: I do not consider those promoting Romanism as "Christian brothers"

Me: Then you have deceived yourself and live in a lie. I feel sorry for you. Your form of "christianity" would not be recognized in the ancient church. Like it or not, the ancient church celebrated the liturgy holding its purpose as the Catholic and Orthodox world does today. No wonder James White has avoided responding to Mr. Bellisario's videos regarding this. Lex orandi lex crendi.

http://www.catholicchampion.com/page14/page14.html

Dozie said...

"...something you should probably know, or at least are ignoring- is that I believe Rome teaches a false Gospel. I do not consider those promoting Romanism as "Christian brothers""

Would you say the above represents the stance of your religion (Protestantism)in general or of evangelicals in particar, or are you presenting us with a "magisterium of one" or should we ignore it as a foolish rant? Which one is it?

David Waltz said...

Mornin’ James,

You posted:

>>You must be joking. Calling someone a "Nazi" is far beyond the terms you mention.>>

Me: Only if one removes the spiritual aspect of the terms. Personally, I brush aside secular slurs much easier than religious ones.

>>Even Jesus and the New Testament writers used negative terms in describing those opposed to the Gospel- something you should probably know, or at least are ignoring- is that I believe Rome teaches a false Gospel. I do not consider those promoting Romanism as "Christian brothers">>

Me: First, the Reformed apologists’ barbs were directed at a fellow Prot, not a Catholic. Second, I did not know that you believe that Roman Catholics are not Christians; such narrow-mindedness was rejected by one of the greatest Reformed theologians of all time: Charles Hodge. Dr. Hodge wrote, “it is a matter of devout thankfulness to God that underneath the numerous grievous and destructive errors of the Romish Church, the great truths of the Gospel are preserved.” And again, “Every true worshipper of Christ must in his heart recognize as a Christian brother, wherever he may be found, any one who loves, worships, and trusts the Lord Jesus Christ as God manifest in the flesh and the only Saviour of men.” And third, as one who affirms the teachings laid out in the JDDJ documents (HERE and HERE), and have made this quite clear more than once on this blog, I wonder about MY status in your thoughts; particularly with the following in mind:

>>C) Justification takes place "by grace alone" (JD 15 and 16), by faith alone, the person is justified "apart from works" (Rom 3:28, cf. JD 25). "Grace creates faith not only when faith begins in a person but as long as faith lasts" (Thomas Aquinas, S. Th.II/II 4, 4 ad 3). The working of God's grace does not exclude human action: God effects everything, the willing and the achievement, therefore, we are called to strive (cf. Phil 2:12 ff). "As soon as the Holy Spirit has initiated his work of regeneration and renewal in us through the Word and the holy sacraments, it is certain that we can and must cooperate by the power of the Holy Spirit..." (The Formula of Concord, FC SD II,64f; BSLK 897,37ff).>>

Grace and peace,

David

Alexander Greco said...

Me: Then you have deceived yourself and live in a lie. I feel sorry for you. Your form of "christianity" would not be recognized in the ancient church. Like it or not, the ancient church celebrated the liturgy holding its purpose as the Catholic and Orthodox world does today. No wonder James White has avoided responding to Mr. Bellisario's videos regarding this. Lex orandi lex crendi.

http://www.catholicchampion.com/page14/page14.html



Typical silence continues. James White and company are without argument...how sad.

Turretinfan said...

"Typical silence continues. James White and company are without argument...how sad."

The idea that Dr. White or "company" are known for silence is just silly.

-TurretinFan

Alexander Greco said...

Turretinfan: The idea that Dr. White or "company" are known for silence is just silly.

Me: Then why the silence on this issue? Probably because he (and company) would make utter fools of themselves.

Turretinfan said...

Well, I'm engaged in a long-term debate with Mr. Bellisario, and I took time out to address a contraception excursion he took a while ago. I'm not sure why every issue that Mr. Bellisario raises needs to be addressed, or why Dr. White needs to be answer a relatively unknown guy like Mr. Bellisario rather than the bigger name guys, like Tim Staples, who Dr. White addressed on his radio show today (if I recall correctly).

I watched the videos, and personally I don't recall seeing anything that struck me as particularly outstanding. Perhaps I overlooked something ... I'll take another look sometime, and see if there is something there for which a response would be worthwhile.

-TurretinFan