A response to Glenn Peoples’ article of June 1, in which he critiques the doctrine of biblical inerrancy and finds it wanting.
A polemic against the argument that, in light of the apparently contradicting evidence of our moral intuitions, total depravity should be interpreted metaphorically.
An exposition of Matthew 22:1–14: the parable of the wedding feast. This exposition focuses especially on the interpretation of the man with no wedding garment, who is bound and thrown out into the darkness, as a response to a request for such by a Roman Catholic correspondent.
An examination of Roman Catholic claims about the keys of the kingdom in Matthew 16:19, listing nine culminating reasons for their failure.
A response to an email from a Roman Catholic correspondent, critiquing his presentation of the doctrine of Scripture and the purposes of God.
Continued from part 3 « Click here for Angels Depart’s final statement; below is my response— As I see it, Angels, there are three main areas which I must cover in this final response so as to show convincingly that God must exist, and that the Bible is his revelation. The first area regards the [...]
Continued from part 2 « Click here for Angels Depart’s third statement; below is my response— Erratum; August 2, 2007: thank you Jim for pointing out that I incorrectly cited the covenant conditions relating to Judges 1. These are not from Leviticus 7, but Deuteronomy 7. As with my previous statement, Angels, I am going [...]