In Catholic Apologetics we many times end up dealing with the usual suspects. You know who they are. the radicals who question whether Catholics are even Christian and who KNOW they are going to heaven but are not really sure about anyone else. I have generally found these types of Protestant apologists to be rude, arrogant, condescending, and not at all Christ-like. They are the types who think that Salvation is a purely OBJECTIVE phenomenon with no subjective component either on God's part or our own. The 'god' they worship doesn't really care about human beings. He just uses them to prove how great He is. And the 'elect' in their view are chosen arbitrarily with no reference to either their love for God or man. I refer to these kind of Protestants as 'Death Eaters' or 'The Kampus Krusade for Kthulhu.'
Numbered among these ne'er-do-wells are James 'Pseudopodeo' White, Robert Reymond, Jack Chick, James Swann, Jimmy Swaggart and his spawn Donnie, Robert Zins, and the ever militant Ian Paisley just to name a few. This crowd will literally tell you that unless someone believed in "Luther's view of salvation of faith alone apart from good works" that person could not be saved. They are actually willing to consign 1500 years of pre-Deformation Christians and 500 years of post-Defomation non-Protestants to eternal punishment in a "christless eternity" because they either rejected OR NEVER KNEW Luther's private interpretations. The teaching of the church from time immemorial is eother denied, misrepresented, or ignored as unimportant. Pushed to the extreme, they will claim that the Church apostatized in the 1st Century after the death of the Apostles and that sound doctrine was not rediscovered until the 16th Century.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
No Can Say it Quite Like Dr. Sippo
...From the Dr. of Roman Catholic apologetics: Ecclesial Deism: Former Protestants Admit the Problem of the Innovations of the 16th Century:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
LOL - You made the short list. Way to go!
Strawman, strawman, and lots of strawman.
I'm encouraged to see that Sippo has exactly as many readers as does "the Champ" ...... 1!
Peace.
My favorite part of this is I made it before Jimmy Swaggart on the list, so the good Doctor does show some attention to detail.
Keep in mind.., some of you might not know this... Dr. White actually debated Dr. Sippo some years back. If I recall, there are mp3's available at aomin.org.
This is the debate where Dr. Sippo walked out of the room during Dr. White's opening statement to go get a coke. Classic.
Art Sippo wrote:
"Pushed to the extreme, they will claim that the Church apostatized in the 1st Century after the death of the Apostles and that sound doctrine was not rediscovered until the 16th Century."
I have never heard any knowledgeable Reformed Apologist say that - only that the seeds of drifting away from the Bible started very slowly, and the RCC only became apostate at Trent (1545-1563), by its formal condemnation of justification by faith alone.
Although baptismal regeneration, penance instead of repentance, exalting a bishop out from the college of elders, and some kind of merit with venial sins vs. mortal sins distinction; and seeds of what later became transubstantiation are beginning in the second century, those by themselves did not cause the church to be apostate at that time.
Sippo's statement may be what Swaggert and Jack Chick believes, but not us.
"Sippo's statement may be what Swaggert and Jack Chick believes, but not us. "
Yeah, Art loves to burn the strawmen he sets up. He can be very entertaining up to a point.
And the there are the Catholics who think Rome became apostate much later.
Post a Comment