Wikimedia Commons<\/a>]<\/p>\n***<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
(1996)<\/span><\/p>\n***
\n
\n<\/span>An educated and committed evangelical Protestant friend (since received into the Catholic Church) wrote to me in October 1996, inquiring about arguments against the deuterocanonical books (\u201cApocrypha\u201d) raised in Norman Geisler and Ralph MacKenzie\u2019s book Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences <\/i>(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1995). Her words are in<\/span> blue<\/span>:<\/span>
\n
\n* * * * *<\/span><\/p>\n
\n<\/span>Let me throw out some specific issues that Geisler raises . . . . 1) Item 7 regarding the councils [p.160]. a) Do the councils at Hippo and Carthage explicitly state the same deutero-canonical books that are included now?<\/span><\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span>I believe so \u2013 this is my understanding.<\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>b) What about his claim that they were local councils and not binding on the whole church? [p.162]<\/span><\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span>That is irrelevant for at least four reasons:<\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>1) They merely followed St. Augustine (Hippo being his See) and St. Athanasius and solidified what had already been essentially arrived at through consensus;<\/span> <\/span><\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>2) Protestants accept them (excluding the \u201cApocryphal\u201d books, which is arbitrary on their part), and haven\u2019t ever challenged the 66 books which all Christians hold in common. Why? They must believe implicitly and somewhat inconsistently (in terms of epistemology and authority questions) that God guided the men at these councils to figure out what allegedly every individual Christian with the Holy Spirit and an open mind and heart (i.e., Calvin\u2019s view) can figure out individually (as opposed to the earliest Fathers who could not<\/i> figure it out \u2013 the process taking a good 350 years!);<\/span> <\/span><\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>3) It was preceded by a Roman Council (382) of identical opinion, as you note (see below), as well as \u201cratification\u201d by Popes Innocent I (405, 414) and Gelasius I (495). The 6th Council of Carthage (419) also concurred;<\/span> <\/span><\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>4) These would be binding by virtue of the ordinary Magisterium, for all Catholics, as dogma in line with true, apostolic Tradition, even though they were not technically Ecumenical Councils. But this is true for many doctrines, including the Immaculate Conception, Transubstantiation, infused justification, the infallibility of the pope, etc. Just because they were not finally, dogmatically defined in an Ecumenical Council until a later date does not <\/i>mean that they were not binding parts of Tradition. The Catholic must obey \u2013 especially practically speaking \u2013 the teachings which are held firmly<\/i> by the Catholic Church. There is some room and allowance for disagreement in such a situation, but it must be exercised with extreme caution and deference to the Church as \u201cMother\u201d and \u201cGuardian of the Deposit of Faith,\u201d lest a skeptical, individualistic, and\/or \u201canti-Traditional\u201d attitude predominate.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nDidn\u2019t one of these councils also affirm the NT as we know it?<\/span><\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span>They all agreed on that \u2013 it being a settled issue by that time.<\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>And didn\u2019t one of these councils affirm some pretty standard doctrine like the trinity or something?<\/span><\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span>The Council of Rome (382) dealt with trinitarian issues. I\u2019m not sure about the others offhand.<\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>\u2013 see text note 13 about a). any proof about the claim that the Catholic scholars assume it [Baruch] was part of Jeremiah. [p.163]<\/span><\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span>I don\u2019t know for sure \u2013 that would require a trip to the seminary library for me to ascertain. The relevant point is that it was included in the Canon of the Bible, wherever<\/i> it was placed, a factor which is altogether secondary to the main point of discussion vis-a-vis the Canon. Baruch was Jeremiah\u2019s secretary (Jer 36:4-32, 45:1-2), hence the connection, and I see no problem.<\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>I find it quite amusing that Geisler picks at St. Augustine\u2019s authoritative position on p.163, yet you can be sure that if the great Father had agreed with Geisler on this point, that fact would have been emphasized throughout the chapter (since we find this tendency frequently elsewhere in the book). This is, of course, arbitrary, and a double standard. Geisler would have us value his<\/i> opinion more than that of St. Augustine?!! Isn\u2019t that the unspoken assumption in all of this after-the-fact analysis?! And looked at from that perspective, Geisler\u2019s enterprise is quite insubstantial and futile, in my humble opinion (not that he is consciously intending it that way). He is a prisoner of his own inadequate epistemological and ecclesiological principle. It\u2019s either the Magisterium, or the \u201cpriesthood\u201d of \u201corthodox\u201d scholars and commentators such as Geisler, F.F. Bruce, D.A. Carson, John Gerstner, R.C. Sproul, etc. As long as the latter contradict each other, I will stick with Catholic Tradition (and for many other reasons as well). At least that is logically consistent, whether one accepts the premises or not!<\/span> <\/span><\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>\u2013 what about textnote 17 [p.163]<\/span><\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span>Assuming for the sake of argument that St. Augustine was<\/i> inconsistent on this point of the \u201cprophetic\u201d nature of books (which is altogether possible \u2013 Fathers not being infallible), so what? This would have no bearing on conciliar and papal decisions of the Church, which alone are binding, not the individual opinions of Fathers, Doctors, or theologians, however great and brilliant. So that even if Geisler is correct on this relatively trivial point, the overall Catholic argument is not affected in the least. Dr. Geisler would have to somehow prove that Christian councils are inferior to sola Scriptura<\/i> as a means of inculcating theological and moral truth to the faithful. And that would be quite a task indeed.<\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>2) . . . the Council of Rome in 382. Geisler mentions nothing of this. Is there proof that this council affirmed all the deutero books as scriptural too?<\/span><\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span>Convenient for him to omit, isn\u2019t it? The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church<\/i> (2nd ed., edited by F.L. Cross and E.A. Livingstone, Oxford Univ. Press, 1983, p.232) states:<\/span><\/span><\/p>\nA council probably held at Rome in 382 under St. Damasus gave a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament (also known as the \u2018Gelasian Decree\u2019 because it was reproduced by Gelasius in 495), which is identical with the list given at Trent.<\/span><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n3) Geisler in his defense of the Protestant canon states that all the OT books were written by Prophets. What about Esther? My NIV says that we don\u2019t know so how could we know that it was a Prophet? Was David considered a Prophet? \u2013 he wrote much of the Psalms.<\/span><\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span>Good point! I don\u2019t think anyone would consider Esther a Prophet. Her book is also interesting in that it never mentions God, so that it would be difficult for an isolated individual to discover its inspired status, let alone its canonicity, every bit as much as is the case with 1 and 2 Maccabees, which are likewise histories of the Jews. I think David could be considered a Prophet, at least at times, when he gives messianic prophecies, such as Psalm 22. But It\u2019s difficult to regard Solomon, e.g., as a Prophet, come to think of it, from what I remember of his life. And Nehemiah (an architect and administrator), and Ezra (a sort of Secretary of State in the Persian government), and whoever wrote Job and Ruth? Joshua was a Prophet? It appears that Geisler\u2019s argument here is quite insufficient.<\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>4) He gives some strong arguments [about alleged \u201cpropheticity\u201d of all OT books] on page 167 \u2013 the middle and longest paragraph.<\/span><\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n<\/span><\/span>Well, they are only \u201cstrong\u201d assuming his premise: viz., that a book must be \u201cprophetic\u201d to be part of the Canon. But I think that view is fatally injured by the above arguments, which are simple enough to arrive at. Geisler\u2019s arguments are inconsistent and arbitrarily applied. He rails against the Catholic view, wherever it differs, all the while ignoring the huge deficiencies and even often self-defeating nature of the opposing Protestant claims. Geisler is a great scholar (in fact my favorite current-day Protestant apologist), but he, too, falls prey in this book to the almost ubiquitous evangelical bias against the Catholic Church. This is unfortunate. Nevertheless, I still regard his book as by far the best one written by evangelical Protestants on the subject of Catholicism. At least he believes that Catholics are Christians and does a good job in fairly presenting and explaining Catholic views.<\/span> <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n*****<\/p>\n
Meta Description:\u00a0Brief dialogue in which I mostly reply to the objections of Protestant apologist Dr. Norman Geisler.<\/span><\/p>\nMeta Keywords:\u00a046 books, 73 books, Apocrypha, apocryphal books, biblical canon, canon of Scripture, canonicity, deuterocanon, deuterocanonical books, Old Testament, septuagint, The Bible<\/span><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"(largely vs. Dr. Norman Geisler) Judas Maccabeus, who led the Jewish revolt against the Seleucid Empire (167-160 B.C.), by\u00a0Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld (1794-1872) [public domain \/ Wikimedia Commons] *** \u00a0 (1996) *** An educated and committed evangelical Protestant friend (since received into the Catholic Church) wrote to me in October 1996, inquiring about arguments against […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":7032,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[31],"tags":[2680,2679,485,611,489,616,487,607,484,1724,608,2629],"class_list":["post-7029","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-bible-and-tradition","tag-46-books","tag-73-books","tag-apocrypha","tag-apocryphal-books","tag-biblical-canon","tag-canon-of-scripture","tag-canonicity","tag-deuterocanon","tag-deuterocanonical-books","tag-old-testament","tag-septuagint","tag-the-bible"],"yoast_head":"\n
Dialogue on Objections to the "Apocrypha"<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Brief dialogue about the so-called "Apocrypha" (deuterocanon), in which I mostly reply to the objections of Protestant apologist Dr. Norman Geisler.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dialogue on Objections to the "Apocrypha"\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Brief dialogue about the so-called "Apocrypha" (deuterocanon), in which I mostly reply to the objections of Protestant apologist Dr. Norman Geisler.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-04-18T19:46:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-27T18:55:30+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2016\/04\/JudasMaccabeus.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"574\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"480\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html\",\"name\":\"Dialogue on Objections to the \\\"Apocrypha\\\"\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2016-04-18T19:46:06+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-27T18:55:30+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"Brief dialogue about the so-called \\\"Apocrypha\\\" (deuterocanon), in which I mostly reply to the objections of Protestant apologist Dr. Norman Geisler.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dialogue on Objections to the “Apocrypha”\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Dialogue on Objections to the \"Apocrypha\"","description":"Brief dialogue about the so-called \"Apocrypha\" (deuterocanon), in which I mostly reply to the objections of Protestant apologist Dr. Norman Geisler.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dialogue on Objections to the \"Apocrypha\"","og_description":"Brief dialogue about the so-called \"Apocrypha\" (deuterocanon), in which I mostly reply to the objections of Protestant apologist Dr. Norman Geisler.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2016-04-18T19:46:06+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-27T18:55:30+00:00","og_image":[{"width":574,"height":480,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2016\/04\/JudasMaccabeus.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html","name":"Dialogue on Objections to the \"Apocrypha\"","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2016-04-18T19:46:06+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-27T18:55:30+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"Brief dialogue about the so-called \"Apocrypha\" (deuterocanon), in which I mostly reply to the objections of Protestant apologist Dr. Norman Geisler.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/04\/dialogue-on-objections-to-the-apocrypha.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dialogue on Objections to the “Apocrypha”"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7029","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7029"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7029\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7032"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7029"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7029"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7029"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"JudasMaccabeus\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2016\/04\/JudasMaccabeus.png\")
<\/p>\n