tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post4565235894354086846..comments2024-03-22T16:09:48.895-04:00Comments on Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: The Gospel James Swanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comBlogger38125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-82678873795005231942013-01-20T02:27:25.097-05:002013-01-20T02:27:25.097-05:00"he chose to not respond for now on the rebut..."he chose to not respond for now on the rebuttals offered on his views."<br /><br />Interesting!James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-89563246609698573932013-01-17T23:38:57.490-05:002013-01-17T23:38:57.490-05:00Ken, James,
Thank you for linking the article I w...Ken, James,<br /><br />Thank you for linking the article I wrote regarding logizomai and Romans 4 in particular. Just want yo let you know that over Jason's blog discussing the Phinehas account, he chose to not respond for now on the rebuttals offered on his views. He is worried that "miss his arguments" and that he might be "writing with invisible e-ink or something." I'll let the readers decide about that.<br /><br />God bless ,<br />JoeyJoey Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04383054573751843392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-9484103085847405152013-01-16T18:54:23.396-05:002013-01-16T18:54:23.396-05:00I still need to learn how to make it into a link.
...<i>I still need to learn how to make it into a link.</i><br /><br />Yeah, the code is a little tricky. What you can do is make the link in a blog entry, and the go into html mode, and cut (or copy) and paste the code into your blog comment.I do that sometimes.James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-22999450589029181262013-01-16T17:24:43.345-05:002013-01-16T17:24:43.345-05:00I want to write a blog article on it when I get ti...I want to write a blog article on it when I get time; no time right now for a few days. <br /><br />Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17824685809003307918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-65350746513855638162013-01-16T15:05:03.828-05:002013-01-16T15:05:03.828-05:00Here is Joey Henry's link. He gave it above.
...Here is Joey Henry's link. He gave it above.<br />http://thessalonians516.blogspot.com/<br /><br />I still need to learn how to make it into a link. I can do it inside the software for writing articles, cause it does it for me, but never learned the actual things to type, like for italics and bold and blockquote.<br /><br /><br />Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17824685809003307918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-86336963654760430922013-01-16T12:43:07.748-05:002013-01-16T12:43:07.748-05:00Ken, feel free to make a blog post linking to Joey...Ken, feel free to make a blog post linking to Joey's entries. <br /><br />My questions to Nick are epistemological, which is probably why he shuts down.<br /><br />Addendum: I'm still amazed that Stellman has been a Romanist for such a short time, and we're all supposed to run off and visit his blog to see how he interprets the Bible. This sort of thing happened with Francis Beckwith as well. <br /><br />Where's the wisdom with this on behalf of Romanism? Who's running the Rome show? If a new "well-educated" person who recently left Romanism came to my church, we WOULD NOT let him in the pulpit or teach adult Sunday school. We also wouldn't run off to his blog to see what nuggets of wisdom he may (or may not be) mining out of the Scriptures. James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-76635098088962194872013-01-16T10:52:49.957-05:002013-01-16T10:52:49.957-05:00I appreciate the point that James is making about ...I appreciate the point that James is making about the RCC authority structure and that no one can know what the official infallible opinion is and no layperson can ever get it right; since no Romanist layperson is infallible, and even the Pope has only made from 2 to 8 to 16 infallible statements in all of history. (different opinions according to different Romanists)<br /><br />So, in that sense, we shouldn't care what Nick says, because he is not the one speaking for the RCC and he could get it wrong.<br /><br />But I also appreciate Joey Henry's articles also - they are good. Wish I had more time to deal with all the issues and my own work and responsibilities also.<br /><br />Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17824685809003307918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-13708105360150729252013-01-15T19:36:17.263-05:002013-01-15T19:36:17.263-05:00If you think a rational argument can be made one w...If you think a rational argument can be made one way or the other on logizomia, then you should care what I say in so far as it's an area of soteriology that I think anyone involved in apologetics should know about. <br /><br />I live by this quote from Pope Leo XIII: <br />"Most desirable is it, and most essential, that the whole teaching of Theology should be pervaded and animated by the use of the divine Word of God. This is what the Fathers and the greatest theologians of all ages have desired and reduced to practice. It was chiefly out of the Sacred Writings that they endeavoured to proclaim and establish the Articles of Faith and the truths therewith connected, and it was in them, together with divine Tradition, that they found the refutation of heretical error, and the reasonableness, the true meaning, and the mutual relation of the truths of Catholicism."Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-17296701037470395872013-01-15T18:52:27.299-05:002013-01-15T18:52:27.299-05:00Nick said...Because it is an important word for th...<i> Nick said...Because it is an important word for the NT's teaching on soteriology, as important as dikaioo. To say that's not important is to suggest God wasn't concerned about what words were used when inspiring the human author.</i><br /><br />That's not what I'm asking. Once again: why should anyone care what YOU (or any other Internet layman apologist for that matter) think about Logizomai?James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-85462740330680959842013-01-15T17:50:54.583-05:002013-01-15T17:50:54.583-05:00Nick,
You keep saying that the articles didn'...Nick,<br /><br />You keep saying that the articles didn't address it after six post which is not true and the readers know it. Theological concepts and the semantic range of logizomai are not the same which is not addressed in your argument and which should be pointed out. <br /><br />Regards,<br />Joey<br /><br /><br />Joey Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04383054573751843392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-69598564243375258012013-01-15T14:47:58.060-05:002013-01-15T14:47:58.060-05:00Because it is an important word for the NT's t...Because it is an important word for the NT's teaching on soteriology, as important as dikaioo. <br /><br />To say that's not important is to suggest God wasn't concerned about what words were used when inspiring the human author.<br /><br />Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-35036133915078625332013-01-15T14:16:11.987-05:002013-01-15T14:16:11.987-05:00Nick said...
Update, I just now noticed that Joey ...<i>Nick said...<br />Update, I just now noticed that Joey has finally made a post on Logizomai (after 6 posts of not really addressing it), I will take a look at what he has to say.</i><br /><br />And once again, I have one simple question: why should anyone care what you think about Logizomai? James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-45276944382904885262013-01-15T13:42:41.536-05:002013-01-15T13:42:41.536-05:00Update, I just now noticed that Joey has finally m...Update, I just now noticed that Joey has finally made a post on Logizomai (after 6 posts of not really addressing it), I will take a look at what he has to say.Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-63387099777734317882013-01-15T13:38:00.642-05:002013-01-15T13:38:00.642-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-20200430212073066222013-01-15T13:16:30.522-05:002013-01-15T13:16:30.522-05:00Nick that's strike three.Nick that's strike three. James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-63801926267200790012013-01-15T12:28:19.832-05:002013-01-15T12:28:19.832-05:00Thanks Joey !!
Yes, you beat me to it -
Nick,
Jo...Thanks Joey !!<br />Yes, you beat me to it - <br /><br />Nick,<br />Joey has done a good job of refuting your article (s); it is just that I have not had time to get to thinking more about it and writing on it. <br /><br />I hope to someday also write on it; and Joey's articles are really good for getting started on the issue.<br /><br />Ken T.<br />Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17824685809003307918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-89515713418008841412013-01-15T08:11:18.661-05:002013-01-15T08:11:18.661-05:00Nick,
I've dealt with logizomai and it's ...Nick,<br /><br />I've dealt with logizomai and it's relationship with the theological concept of imputation at Soli Deo Gloria (http://thessalonians516.blogspot.com/). I would like to advise you that ad hominem arguments such as protestants are hiding scriptures does not help your case but merely show weaknesses to your arguments. <br /><br />Regards,<br />JoeyJoey Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04383054573751843392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-68453639762783706262013-01-14T22:11:48.415-05:002013-01-14T22:11:48.415-05:00Ken,
I know CtC has articles refuting Sola Fide ...Ken, <br /><br />I know CtC has articles refuting Sola Fide by principally appealing to Scriptural texts. I would hope we agree that appealing to a few good texts with exegesis is superior to quoting a ton of texts without any exegesis.<br /><br />James, <br /><br />Live debates are not the be-all of apologetics. Apologetics is about making the better argument (either to defend or refute a doctrine), regardless of what form it's delivered, be it book, blog, youtube, or live. I'm a lot less concerned about whether someone has debated live than whether they can make good arguments. Politicians debate live all the time and they love it because it's all about who presents themselves better, not necessarily who presents the better argument. Dr Cross has not hesitated to critique the best Reformed theologian's writings, including interacting in long comment box exchanges with them. White doesn't have a comment box, which has always puzzled me since he should not be afraid of opposing views. CtC allows lots of opposing views to voice their claims.<br /><br />Rhology,<br /><br />I said those things because I don't see Protestant blogs (including this one) interacting with the best arguments Catholicism has to offer. If this blog is focused mostly on Luther, that's fine, but I'd hope some popular Protestant blog or theologian living today would interact with issues like Logizomai. Instead, the approach seems to be to ignore Logizomai until people forget about it, but Protestant seekers are seeing through that dodge and are not going for it anymore. I am convinced that once White or any other big name Reformed comes public on Logizomai, the countdown will begin on their conversion. Until then, they're effectively hiding the Scriptures from the common man, just as Catholics were accused of doing in the middle ages. <br /><br />I don't say this lightly. I have done the research. I can see just how crucial it is to hide the Biblical term Logizomai from the people. While the experts can beat almost any other Greek word to death, they universally acknowledge that Logizomai is taboo. Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-62258219973988240802013-01-14T21:16:01.780-05:002013-01-14T21:16:01.780-05:00Are there any good debates/refutations CTC do on I...Are there any good debates/refutations CTC do on Islam, Atheism, Bart Ehrman etc? Or are they just a typical bunch of anti-Protestants? I searched up the term "atheism" and many of those search result articles were still quite anti-Protestant. I dont see them matching CARM or Aomin in terms of defending Christianity. <br /><br />I would be happy if CTC took on some muslim/atheist blogs, like the blog [debunkingchristianity]. Its filled with hate and mockery for the faith.<br /><br />If John Loftus or Bart Ehrman showed up on CTC and gets past the Father Barron level of apologetics and get really technical, there might be bombastic comments and a lot of blood......[dont get me wrong, I would support the Christian side in that situation].<br /><br />CARM at least can handle the militant forms of atheism, unlike CAF, which banned atheism topics. <br /><br />Nick in his blog believes "we may be living in the final decade or so of intellectual Protestantism". <br /><br />So looks like by 2030, Protestant apologetics would be almost dead, being utterly demolished by Roman apologetics?<br /><br />This is a very bold assertion. Any thoughts on that?<br />Rooneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04755386771208867195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-76195326330394314682013-01-14T18:29:15.986-05:002013-01-14T18:29:15.986-05:00On the level of apologetics, there is no online Pr...<i>On the level of apologetics, there is no online Protestant ministry that is the equivalent of Called To Communion. This is more than just being 'smart', it's about which side has the better arguments. You cannot just downplay the role of solid apologetics when it comes to conversions. The truth is, the 'top' Protestant apologetics ministries like CARM and AOmin are in serious decline because they cannot match the good Catholic blogs. </i><br /><br />1) That's strike 2: you've yet to provide an explanation as to why I should care what either you or Mr. Stellman thinks the book of Romans means. <br /><br />2)I don't consider CARM a "top" Protestant apologetics ministry, particularly in regard to Romanism.<br /><br />3) As to CTC specifically- the truth is I don't read their stuff very often, simply because my area of interest concerns historical inquiries into the Reformation period, with an emphasis on Luther studies. There has been, as far as I've seen on CTC, very little posted in this area, particularly Luther-related issues.Every so often Calvin comes up.<br /><br />4) CTC is still not "up to speed" in my book. How many live public debates do they do? Sure, Mr. Cross I think has done some things with Horton... but until they get in the ring with Dr. White, they're still just a bunch of guys with a website of no real significance. In this sense, I have a lot more respect for guys like Sungenis, Staples, Pacwa, Madrid, Etc. These are guys who are willing to actually engage in meaningful and telling interactions with the views they oppose.James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-52563604121329862822013-01-14T17:32:47.582-05:002013-01-14T17:32:47.582-05:00I disagree completely - their level of simple Scri...I disagree completely - their level of simple Scriptural arguments is almost zero. They are much more dependent on church history, historical theology, Roman Catholic presuppositions (reading 1870 back into Scripture and the early church, Latin, rhetoric and formal logic terms, etc. All of that stuff overpowers any simple exegesis or systematic theology. Their systematic theology is not very good, because it is dependent on the other stuff listed above.<br /><br />Mostly what Bryan Cross and others - they overpower with philosophy, Latin, and technical jargon, church history, man made traditions that have added in - almost no sound exegesis of Scripture. <br /><br />We have no problem with Biblical texts, sound exegesis, and systematic theology - that is not their strong point at all. Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17824685809003307918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-13325343384475424632013-01-14T15:51:49.146-05:002013-01-14T15:51:49.146-05:00I disagree that Called to Communion uses a lot of ...I disagree that Called to Communion uses a lot of Latin and technical jargon instead of simple Scriptural arguments. That said, many issues require us to go into the realm of systematic theology, where you cannot simply retreat back and play the ignorance card. Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-40602316351976816662013-01-14T13:21:46.481-05:002013-01-14T13:21:46.481-05:00Called to Communion is very educated in Latin word...Called to Communion is very educated in Latin words and philosophical jargon and spouting rhetoric terminology and formal logic terminology, and puts their ability to spout all that out and tie up the refutations over clear Scripture and argumentation that does not require Latin and rhetoric jargon. They are like lawyers and insurance salesman in that sense, in my opinion. <br /><br />It is a very overboard head-knowledge emphasis to people who don't have all that education. <br /><br /> It is not convincing to either true believers who are also smart, but don't have that much education in Latin, philosophy, and rhetoric, and church history, and it is not convincing to true believers who admit that they are not smart, and don't have all that education. <br /><br />They also don't allow comments when they deem them "off topic". They carefully control what comes through. (They have the right to do that; but just pointing that out. They always deem the Mary stuff "off target" when discussing apostolic succession, the canon, and Sola Scriptura, and other Papal issues.) <br /><br />When a Protestant mentions the other issues that are all part of the unity of the "traditions of man" that Romanism has added, they cry foul. The key to their strategy is to focus on only one "tradition" at a time, atomizing it; then adding lots of Latin and rhetorical terminology; and not allowing discussion of all "the traditions of man" at one time. They get really upset when someone mentions the Marian dogmas and piety in discussions over authority or the canon or Sola Scriptura. the reason they get upset or don't allow those comments, is because by keeping the clearer "traditions of man" (1854, 1870; 1950) out of the argument, they are able to deceive people into submission to the Pope first, by not focusing on 1870, but by the combination of canon and apostolic succession and church authority; then they are seduced by the "Dark Side of the Force" to "going along with the Marian dogmas and piety". <br /><br />Those former protestants allowed themselves to get sucked in by in that strategy and then later, they were forced to accept the Marian and Papal dogmas, because they got seduced by the "Dark side of the force" by their superior wisdom and education in Latin and rhetoric and quoting church fathers; by atomizing certain arguments against Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura, and canon arguments and apostolic succession or baptismal regeneration or the eucharist or the argument that "church history has to make philosophical sense (to them) under an infallible interpreter".Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17824685809003307918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-49947552712535258152013-01-14T12:09:06.112-05:002013-01-14T12:09:06.112-05:00My point wasn't that being well-educated makes...My point wasn't that being well-educated makes someone correct. I only mentioned well-educated because often times people convert for the wrong reasons, without having studied the issues to see which side offers the better arguments. <br /><br />On the level of apologetics, there is no online Protestant ministry that is the equivalent of Called To Communion. This is more than just being 'smart', it's about which side has the better arguments. You cannot just downplay the role of solid apologetics when it comes to conversions. <br /><br />The truth is, the 'top' Protestant apologetics ministries like CARM and AOmin are in serious decline because they cannot match the good Catholic blogs. <br /><br />Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-49602518033497472522013-01-14T01:13:51.039-05:002013-01-14T01:13:51.039-05:00Many well educated people from the post Vatican II...Many well educated people from the post Vatican II RCC also go into Sedevacantism, SSPX etc. They are fond of calling post Vatican II RCC as a "cult"/"sect". <br /><br />I would definitely choose Sedeville over Post-VaticanII-ville. How could anyone even tolerate the new mass when they see the beauty of the traditional mass? <br />The post Vatican popes look deeply compromised compared with the "on fire" popes who infallibly declare that people of other religions will no doubt enter the fire that was prepared for the devil and his angels. Just think if Pope Benedict 14th went into a time machine and found JP2 being ecumenical..... <br /><br />Off topic, but conversion statistics are not too useful at all, though atheists love using it on us. <br />Rooneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04755386771208867195noreply@blogger.com