tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post5417584884755239167..comments2024-03-21T10:33:24.876-07:00Comments on Articuli Fidei: John Bugay, Dr. Peter Lampe, and the early ministry of the Christian ChurchDavid Waltzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-81992776633201707912011-04-02T12:43:28.009-07:002011-04-02T12:43:28.009-07:00Sean,
One of the things I find troubling concerni...Sean,<br /><br />One of the things I find troubling concerning the BA “asylum” is the treatment that critics receive from the “inmates”. I have received more charity from JWs, than I have from the members of the ‘cult of Calvin’ that participate at BA (Ken Temple being a notable exception).<br /><br />Further, I cannot help but notice the sharp contrast, concerning tone, treatment and content, when one compares threads at BA with those at CtoC.<br /><br />By their fruits…<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-9971233521897497592011-04-01T15:18:25.189-07:002011-04-01T15:18:25.189-07:00Sean Patrick ^ - under wife again...
That is anot...Sean Patrick ^ - under wife again...<br /><br />That is another reason I am dishonest...because sometimes I don't log off my wife and post under her name thus trying to hid my identity. Gotta love it.Stephaniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06861093551727228504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-42508651203839264912011-04-01T15:17:24.241-07:002011-04-01T15:17:24.241-07:00Yeah - that is pretty much the end of the road if ...Yeah - that is pretty much the end of the road if one deals too much with John. <br /><br />The evidence that he supplies for my dishonesty is a thread from GB were I was admittedly sloppy on one point with DT King - I apologized within hours - but there you have it. I am a psychopath. <br /><br />Now, several months later mind you, John actually did lie about me here:<br /><br />href=http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2010/12/army-of-scholars-studying-ancient-rome.html<br /><br />After about 30 comments he finally admitted it and amended his post but never apologized to me and when I thanked him for amending it he said, "Don't patronize me..." <br /><br />So, there you have it. If I am the crazy one according to him than it seems that as far as Beggars All is concerned - the inmates are running the asylum.Stephaniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06861093551727228504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-11105527120571628542011-04-01T06:24:40.498-07:002011-04-01T06:24:40.498-07:00Hello again Sean,
You posted the following from t...Hello again Sean,<br /><br />You posted the following from the pen of John Bugay:<br /><br />>><i> "I have personally found him (me) to be THE most untrustworthy Roman Catholic I have ever encountered. On other threads, I have published the definition of the word "psychopath", once others described what it was like to interact with him. It was amazing how closely their definitions of him and the official definition of "psychopath" seemed to align with each other...."<br /><br />And: "I would not be surprised if it was the Lord who called him to Rome. He is the perfect poster child for it."</i>>><br /><br />Me: My-oh-my, I am at a loss for words...wow...<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-74673605477023870302011-04-01T06:20:54.623-07:002011-04-01T06:20:54.623-07:00Hi Sean,
In your March 31, 2011 - 12:48PM post yo...Hi Sean,<br /><br />In your March 31, 2011 - 12:48PM post you wrote:<br /><br />>>Do you see that? He reserves for himself judgement to disagree with the scholars that he is telling Catholics they are forced to accept. John admits that he is not playing by the same set of rules when it comes to scholarly inquiry so your attempt here to keep him honest will undoubtedly fall on deaf ears. John does not take his method far enough to see how embarrassing it is so we're left with a man on a blog and a handful of cheerleaders egging him on.>><br /><br />Me: I am sure that you realize John operates under numerous double-standards; he clearly allows himself practices that he damns in others.<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-55016926698001926182011-03-31T14:24:03.466-07:002011-03-31T14:24:03.466-07:00It turns out that John Bugay is not a big fan of m...It turns out that John Bugay is not a big fan of mine. I tried to have this conversation on BA and within seconds comments of mine were deleted and he had this to say:<br /><br /><i>"I have personally found him (me) to be THE most untrustworthy Roman Catholic I have ever encountered. On other threads, I have published the definition of the word "psychopath", once others described what it was like to interact with him. It was amazing how closely their definitions of him and the official definition of "psychopath" seemed to align with each other...."<br /><br />And: "I would not be surprised if it was the Lord who called him to Rome. He is the perfect poster child for it."</i><br /><br />Why the Lord would call anybody to evil aligns with Calvinism pretty well, I guess.<br /><br />Anyway - this is what happens if one challenges John enough. He won't argue with you about facts. He'll castigate you to the masses. My 'masses' I really mean the half a dozen people that actually read what he has to say.Sean Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06398268430101758469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-69492574546661383352011-03-31T13:05:41.179-07:002011-03-31T13:05:41.179-07:00Typo, it should be: He did not become a Christian ...Typo, it should be: He did <b>not</b> become a Christian because he was so convinced by historians.Sean Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06398268430101758469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-78499922964045523472011-03-31T12:48:50.841-07:002011-03-31T12:48:50.841-07:00David - I think you are wasting your time, at leas...David - I think you are wasting your time, at least as far as John Bugay is concerned.<br /><br />John only cares about scholarship insofar as he can pull things from it that damage the Catholic Church (or that he thinks damage the Catholic Church). That is the extent of his interest. <br /><br />John's faith is not built on scholarship. He did become a Christian because he was so convinced by historians. Nobody comes to Christ that way. Yet he expects the Catholic Church to shut its doors and never open them again because his selection of scholars call into question the nature of the 1st century church. It does not matter than many of those same scholars call into question the nature of scripture and other ideas foundation to John's faith. John can just disregard those conclusions but we are not allowed to do that...in his mind.<br /><br />Referring to the work of Jesuit theologian Kilmartin which John cited he said to a Catholic interlocutor on BA: "Kilmartin is a problem for you because he knows more than you do...<b>Protestants are not bound by authority in that way, so I may agree or disagree with Lampe based on my own judgment of his case."</b><br /><br />Do you see that? He reserves for himself judgement to disagree with the scholars that he is telling Catholics they are forced to accept. John admits that he is not playing by the same set of rules when it comes to scholarly inquiry so your attempt here to keep him honest will undoubtedly fall on deaf ears. John does not take his method far enough to see how embarrassing it is so we're left with a man on a blog and a handful of cheerleaders egging him on.Sean Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06398268430101758469noreply@blogger.com