Monday, October 29, 2007

Dave Misrepresents Response by Challengees

Dave wrote: "So now "Turretinfan", "Saint and Sinner", Steve Hays, and Cory are all on record that they are young earth creationists. Do I detect a theme (i.e., intellectual suicide) in those who want to take on my apologetics, yet run from a golden opportunity to refute me with lots of folks watching, in a chat room?"

I'm not focusing on the fact that Dave discredits himself by calling acceptance of the Scriptural account of Creation "intellectual suicide" and especially by using that slur as an ad hominem on this unrelated topic (after all, one can be a good Roman Catholic and a Young Earth Creationist), but on the fact that Dave misrepresents:

a) his challenge as a "golden opportunity" (whereas it is far from golden - it's an awkward, inconvenient format); and
b) his challengees as "run[ning] from" the opportunity (whereas the present challengee has still left the door open, S&S turned him down based on lack of time, Cory turned him down for a combination of factors, and Gene turned him down because the challenge was improperly presented).

Personally, I think that Dave's mockery of Young Earth Creationism as "intellectual suicide" says more than any 150 minute chatroom debate would.

Still, if Dave could take the position of T, V1, and V2, I would be willing to debate him, as I have made clear.

Dave mockingly comments: "Right. Now Turretinfan and Cory know better what a Catholic is than a Catholic apologist and author does. Yes (and I have some oceanfront property in Kansas to sell you, too, if you are foolish enough to believe that)."

Of course, I had already anticipated this response. What Dave leaves out is that he is a self-appointed e-poligist and largely self-published author. Some (perhaps even all) of his works may have received imprimatur and/or nihil obstat, but not all of his doctrines are Catholic.

In fact, on one of the most clear issues, Dave's position is in clear conflict with another Catholic Apoligist (Tim Lang) who previously argued in comments on this blog that Muslims do worship the one true God, and was offended (I think) and stopped commenting shortly after I repeatedly asserted that the Muslims do not.

Furthermore, and this is key, Dave has apparently never defined Christianity, yet he wants to debate (or at least informally discuss) the topic. Consequently, to call such an option a "golden opportunity to refute" (emphasis added) him stretches any reader's credulity.


P.S. Dave's maturity and honesty in dealing with this situation is illustrated by his response to this post as evidenced by his description of this post on his inappropriately titled "Anti-Catholicism" web page: "additional related puerile inanities" (retrieved 10/29/2007, illustrates Dave's maturity), as well as continuing to falsely claim that his offer was "declined on 10-27-07." (also retrieved 10/29/2007, illustrates Dave's honesty: particularly considering that Dave quoted, and consequently can fairly be deemed to have read and understood: "Obviously, for now, the debate is on hold, pending Dave's decision about whether to follow Roman Catholic dogma or not label himself Roman Catholic." (retrieved at the same time, from the same place, as the previous two quotations) Imagine if we were scheduled to have 150 minutes of that! But maybe it will still happen. Maybe Dave will actually stand behind the dogmatic declarations of the church for which he is allegedly an apologist.


GeneMBridges said...

Yes, well, "I told you so." This was never about Truth,this was always about Dave and his own ego.

That said, perhaps you should debate Dave on the merits of YEC. I'd like to see him refute something like metric conventionalism as "junk science."

Oh, that's right, you're just a Calvinist presuppositionalist...

Carrie said...

This response was totally expected although the crack at YECs is an added bonus.

Turretinfan said...

Although I thought I had seen otherwise on another web site, Dave recently indicated that none of his books have received imprimatur, a point that seems to make little difference (not to insist that it should) to the lay Catholic apologists that utilize his material.
As DA will be quick to point out, some of his books have been published by a "Catholic" publisher (presumably meaning that they themselves both are Roman Catholics and publish Roman Catholic materials, not that they are an official publications division of the RCC), thus, if my post suggested that he is only self-published, it needs to be corrected.


Dave Armstrong said...

Actually, The New Catholic Answer Bible (co-author of apologetics inserts with Dr. Paul Thigpen) has the Imprimatur of Bishop J. Kevin Boland of Savannah and the Nihil Obstat by Douglas K. Clark, S.T.L. (specifically for the inserts).

I'm sure now you'll gain great respect for my work and figure out that I am a Catholic after all . . .

Turretinfan said...

Ah, apparently my reference to seeing something of the sort on another web site has jarred Dave's memory.

Dave writes: "Actually, The New Catholic Answer Bible (co-author of apologetics inserts with Dr. Paul Thigpen) has the Imprimatur of Bishop J. Kevin Boland of Savannah and the Nihil Obstat by Douglas K. Clark, S.T.L. (specifically for the inserts)."

(there's delicious irony in the text of Scripture not getting the Nihil Obstat)

Dave continues: "I'm sure now you'll gain great respect for my work and figure out that I am a Catholic after all . . ."

That depends, Dave. Are you going to continue to assert that you hold sola gratia in contravention of Trent, to the primacy of Scripture in contravention of Trent, Vatican I, and Vatican II, and to the non-identity of Allah with the god of Roman Catholicism in contravention of Vatican II?


Turretinfan said...

Incidentally it takes a few drops of water to be a Catholic, but it takes holding to specific doctrinal beliefs to be a consistent Roman Catholic.


Turretinfan said...

Ah, and as further evidence of Dave's maturity (as if we needed any), here's the version of Dave's comment from his own blog's combox: "I'm sure that'll make a huge difference how all these anti-Catholic clowns will approach my writing now, right? LOLOL"


GeneMBridges said...

"Anti-Catholic" clowns, eh? Thank you Most High Potentate His Holiness Cardinal Armstrong. How quickly the appellation, "Christians strongly differ" becomes "anti-Catholic" clowns.

Dear Dave:
Take your schizophrenia medicine, please.

TheoJunkie said...


I see that Dave has chosen a rabid carnivorous ostrich/monkey combination to represent you on his "Anti-Catholicism" page, and so it appears that he has somehow confused me with you or melded us together in his mind (perhaps because our avatars are both largely in gray scale, this confused him).

For this I apologize, for it was not intentional.

(...Dear Dave, I am not TF, but I appreciate the compliment. TF's avatar is the one that has a picture of Mr. Turretin, with the subtitle "Reformed". Mine is an emu.)