Apologetics to the Glory of God

Category: Sola Scriptura

  • Going Deeper

    In our last post, we examined Philippians 1 as a bit of a survey, and covered some high points and contextual issues. Now I want to dig a little more into the text and bring out some points in higher relief. We started the post with the observation that neither Rome nor the health and wealth preachers are possessors of the Biblical Gospel. Rome, in particular, makes enough additions and subtractions to make the Judaizers look like amateur heretics. We then made the connection with the term “Evangelical” – which essentially means “those who are about the Gospel”. We hear …

  • Are you an Evangelical apologist?

    The term “evangelical” is used for a whole host of people these days – but what does it really mean? It refers to those who believe the Gospel is the center of the Christian faith, and the core of our message, right? Since we live in such a sound byte culture, it really behooves us to ask – both ourselves, and those we come in contact with, what they mean when they say “evangelical.” Which, of course, brings us to the subject of our post.

    It’s all well and good to say “I’m an Evangelical!” It’s another thing altogether to …

  • The Issue of Authority – God Speaking

    C. Michael Patton’s recent posts, in his own words, look a whole lot like “I am shooting myself in the foot.” He rejects this characterization, of course – but as we have seen in my own posts responding to his over the last couple years, we have an entirely different view of the issues of certainty, and doubt. This recent series, of course, shows where this difference arises from – a different doctrine of Scripture. See, there’s a significant difference between the generally evangelical doctrine of Sola Scriptura, and the historic Reformed doctrine. Dr. White, TurretinFan, and I all …

  • The List of Non-Essentials Just Keeps on Growing

    Subtitled: What a “Mere” Christianity does to orthodoxy.

    C. Michael Patton is one of the people I use to illustrate points, with great frequency. The reason I do so is due to the fact that he is out to do essentially the same sort of thing we are doing – but from a vastly different perspective, theologically. As such, his teaching can be clearly contrasted with our own.

    I realize that posts such as these have the potential to create quite a bit of heat and get me in a lot of trouble. As well, I don’t really want to