{"id":83387,"date":"2024-05-16T16:37:10","date_gmt":"2024-05-16T20:37:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=83387"},"modified":"2024-05-16T16:37:10","modified_gmt":"2024-05-16T20:37:10","slug":"sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html","title":{"rendered":"Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Baptist anti-Catholic apologist James White debated Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin on the topic of sola Scriptura<\/em> at First Baptist Church of Livingston, Louisiana, on April 24, 2024 [see the YouTube video<\/a>]. This is my response to the White portion only. His words will be in blue<\/span>. I use RSV for Bible citations.<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

1:14 I say that sola Scriptura<\/em> is the default biblical position . . . the Bible says the Lord Jesus said scripture is God speaking to each and every individual who reads its words in Matthew 22:31, where he held men accountable for what had been written 1400 years before them, as if God had spoken it directly to them. Peter wrote that prophetic scripture does not find its origin even in the prophet but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit [2 Peter 1:21] and Paul directed Timothy to that which is God breathed so that he might be thoroughly equipped for every good work 2 Timothy 3:16-17. You will not find any other source spoken of in these ways.<\/span><\/p>\n

None of this proves that the Bible is the only<\/em><\/strong> rule of faith. It proves that it is inspired revelation, which is not in dispute. The rule of faith need not always be\u00a0inspired. It can also be infallible<\/em> (which in Catholicism, includes the Church, tradition, apostolic succession, the papacy, and ecumenical councils). White himself highlighted this characteristic of infallibility in his definition elsewhere:<\/p>\n

The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fidei, the infallible rule of faith for the Church.<\/span> (The Roman Catholic Controversy<\/i><\/a>, Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1996, 59)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

At 3:26 White also stated: \u201cwe believe scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith of the church.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

This being the case, if the Catholic can show how the Bible regards the Church or tradition or apostolic succession or the papacy or ecumenical councils as infallible authorities functioning as a rule of faith, then it inexorably follows that the Bible doesn\u2019t teach sola Scriptura<\/em>.<\/p>\n

2:40 is there anything else that we can meaningfully describe as equal to Scripture in nature and hence in authority?<\/span> If we cannot point to anything else that is the specific revelation of God outside of scripture\u00a0then clearly sola scriptura<\/em> is the default position.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s not clear at all. This is the same category mistake again. Scripture\u2019s intrinsic nature and whether it shares authority with anything else in terms of the rule of faith are two different things. White assumes a thing that is itself unbiblical: the notion that only inspired revelation can be the rule of faith<\/em>. The Bible doesn\u2019t teach that! The quickest and easiest disproof of that is in the following Bible passage:<\/p>\n

1 Timothy 3:15<\/strong>\u00a0. . .\u00a0the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Once that is exegetically and logically unpacked (as I have done<\/a>), we see that it is definitely presupposing an infallible, authoritative Church. Another clear passage is the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15). Church (and papal) authority is exhibited there, guided by the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:28), and proclaimed far and wide as binding by no less than the Apostle Paul (Acts 16:4).<\/p>\n

3:04 so do we find Jesus or the apostles directing us to\u00a0any other ultimate source of authority?<\/span><\/p>\n

Yes. St. Paul appeals to tradition many times:<\/p>\n

\n

1 Corinthians 11:2 <\/strong>\u00a0I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.<\/p>\n

1 Thessalonians 2:13 <\/b>And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.<\/p>\n

2 Thessalonians 2:15 <\/b>So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.<\/p>\n

2 Thessalonians 3:6 <\/b>Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.<\/p>\n

2 Timothy 1:13-14<\/b>\u00a0Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me . . . guard the truth which has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.<\/p>\n

2 Timothy 2:2<\/b>\u00a0And what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

For more, see: Biblical Evidence for Apostolic Oral Tradition<\/a> [2-20-09]. Our Lord Jesus did the same. See, for example, \u201cJesus, the Oral Law, and the Talmud,\u201d<\/a> by James Pyles (9-11-11).<\/p>\n

3:59 by the way, elder, bishop, and overseer are synonymous in the New Testament. They are not different offices. A bishop is not above an overseer. These are all the same office.<\/span><\/p>\n

This is why I have called White a \u201cbishop\u201d these past 23 years. He wrote to me personally back then and made this same point and noted that as an elder in a church he was also a bishop. Yet he has objected all that time to me<\/em> calling him what he called himself<\/em>. Go figure . . .<\/p>\n

5:18 it is claimed that during the days of the apostles a certain paradigm was established, that it is said Rome continues to follow to this day and that those who oppose Rome\u2019s authority claims must prove was changed after the apostles passed from the scene, so you have to prove: \u201cwhere does the bible teach that the paradigm is going to\u00a0change after the apostles pass from the scene?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Very good! This is the burden for those who posit this notion of \u201cinscripturation,\u201d which I have critiqued<\/a>. I\u2019ve never seen Bishop White adequately answer that, and I really didn\u2019t expect that he would do so for the first time I\u2019ve ever seen in 29 years of critiquing him, in this debate. In fact, he immediately obfuscated and changed the subject (in case someone didn\u2019t notice that) \u2014 classic White debate tactics. So, once again, we aren\u2019t informed of exactly where<\/em> in the Bible this Protestant tradition of inscripturation is taught. Failing that, there is no ironclad, unquestionable evidence that anyone must believe<\/em> in the notion. Why would<\/em> we? Just because the good<\/em> bishop<\/em> says so?<\/p>\n

7:41 2 Thessalonians 2:15 is misused at this point where Paul instructed the Thessalonians, \u201cso then brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions which you were taught whether by word \u2014 that is orally \u2014 or by epistle from us.\u201d But in context Paul is talking about the gospel; just look at the preceding two verses.<\/span><\/p>\n

The verse before is, \u201cTo this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.\u201d But this doesn\u2019t necessarily have any direct correlation to the next verse. Nothing there requires the reader to equate the \u201ctraditions\u201d and the \u201cgospel\u201d altogether<\/em>. The same applies to 2:13, which refers to being \u201csaved\u201d and to \u201csanctification.\u201d But there is no\u00a0 requirement to equate the \u201ctraditions\u201d of 2:15 with only the saving gospel. It\u2019s very shoddy thinking and exegesis.<\/p>\n

31:22 he referred to apostolic tradition as teachings taught alongside scripture, and said that the apostles were referring to this. What the\u00a0apostles were referring to was the preaching of the gospel.<\/span><\/p>\n

He can\u2019t absolutely prove that, beyond all doubt. The Catholic view is at least as plausible; I think more so, because we take the word \u201ctradition\u201d at face value, rather than forcing it to be the equivalent of \u201cgospel\u201d every time it appears, because of a view already assumed before one even examines Scripture, \u201crequires\u201d us to do so.<\/p>\n

31:36 the gospel is recorded for us in the New Testament<\/span><\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Yes it is. But we don\u2019t disagree on what the gospel \u2014 as presented in the Bible \u2014 is<\/a>. We disagree that it is everywhere and always the exact same thing as what is called \u201ctradition.\u201d<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
\n
\n
31:42 so when the apostles aren\u2019t here any longer what they taught is found for us in Scripture\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Most of it is, but not all, and White can\u2019t prove that all of it is in the Bible. You notice he offers no prooftext. He simply asserts (which is not argument).<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
36:39 in Acts chapter 15 not only do they quote scripture as a foundation, by the way, did you notice, if you read it, Peter didn\u2019t run [the Jerusalem council], James did. James made the final decision. Peter was not considered the head of all Christians or anything like that [at] this particular point in time.<\/span><\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Nonsense. First, to reply to his final sentence: here is the scriptural evidence in the book of Acts to the contrary:<\/div>\n
\u00a0*<\/div>\n
\n

1. Peter is regarded by the Jews (Acts 4:1-13) as the leader and spokesman of Christianity.<\/p>\n

2. Peter is regarded by the common people in the same way (Acts 2:37-41; 5:15).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

3. Peter\u2019s words are the first recorded and most important in the upper room before Pentecost (Acts 1:15-22).<\/p>\n

4. Peter is the first person to speak (and only one recorded) after Pentecost, so he was the first Christian to \u201cpreach the gospel\u201d in the Church era (Acts 2:14-36).<\/p>\n

5. Peter\u2019s proclamation at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-41) contains a fully authoritative interpretation of Scripture, a doctrinal decision and a disciplinary decree concerning members of the \u201cHouse of Israel\u201d (2:36) \u2013 an example of \u201cbinding and loosing.\u201d<\/p>\n

6. Peter was the first \u201ccharismatic\u201d, having judged authoritatively the first instance of the gift of tongues as genuine (Acts 2:14-21).<\/p>\n

7. Peter is the first to preach Christian repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38).<\/p>\n

8. Peter (presumably) takes the lead in the first recorded mass baptism (Acts 2:41).<\/p>\n

9. Peter works the first miracle of the Church Age, healing a lame man (Acts 3:6-12).<\/p>\n

10. Peter utters the first anathema (Ananias and Sapphira) emphatically affirmed by God (Acts 5:2-11)!<\/p>\n

11. Peter is the first to recognize and refute heresy, in Simon Magus (Acts 8:14-24).<\/p>\n

12. Peter was the first traveling missionary, and first exercised what would now be called \u201cvisitation of the churches\u201d (Acts 9:32-38, 43). Paul preached at Damascus immediately after his conversion (Acts 9:20), but hadn\u2019t traveled there for that purpose (God changed his plans!). His missionary journeys begin in Acts 13:2.<\/p>\n

13. Peter is the first person after Christ to raise the dead (Acts 9:40).<\/p>\n

14. Cornelius is told by an angel to seek out Peter for instruction in Christianity (Acts 10:1-6).<\/p>\n

15. Peter is the first to receive the Gentiles, after a revelation from God (Acts 10:9-48).<\/p>\n

16. Peter commanded the first Gentile Christians to be baptized (Acts 10:44-48).<\/p>\n

17. Peter instructs the other apostles on the catholicity (universality) of the Church (Acts 11:5-17).<\/p>\n

18. Peter is the object of the first divine interposition on behalf of an individual in the Church Age (an angel delivers him from prison \u2013 Acts 12:1-17).<\/p>\n

19. The whole Church (strongly implied) offers \u201cearnest prayer\u201d for Peter when he is imprisoned (Acts 12:5).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

White misrepresents what happened at the Jerusalem council. From Acts 15, we learn that \u201cafter there was much debate, Peter rose\u201d to address the assembly (15:7). The Bible records his speech, which goes on for five verses. Then it reports that \u201call the assembly kept silence\u201d (15:12). When James speaks, he refers right back to what \u201cSimeon [Peter] has related\u201d (15:14). He adds nothing to it.<\/p>\n

This highly suggests \u2014 it seems to me \u2014 that Peter\u2019s talk was central and definitive. James speaking last could easily be explained by the fact that he was the bishop of Jerusalem and therefore the \u201chost.\u201d St. Peter indeed had already received a relevant revelation, related to the council. God gave him a vision of the cleanness of all foods (contrary to the Jewish Law: see Acts 10:9-16).<\/p>\n

46:20 Apostolic\u00a0tradition is what Jesus teaches the apostles and what the apostles teach, that\u2019s called the gospel<\/span><\/p>\n

Once again he asserts what he needs to prove \u2014 offering no biblical arguments for his bald assertion. Merely repeating it again and again makes it no more believable.<\/p>\n

48:10 you cannot find anything today including in the Vatican,\u00a0anything that is properly described as God breathed<\/span><\/p>\n

It doesn\u2019t have<\/em> to be, to be an infallible rule of faith. This is the same fallacy about \u201conly inspired documents can be a rule of faith\u201d repeated again.<\/p>\n

\n
*<\/div>\n
***<\/div>\n
\n

*<\/p>\n

Practical Matters<\/em><\/strong>: Perhaps some of my 4,600+ free online articles (the most comprehensive \u201cone-stop\u201d Catholic apologetics site) or\u00a0fifty-five books<\/a>\u00a0have helped you (by God\u2019s grace) to decide to\u00a0become Catholic<\/a>\u00a0or to\u00a0return to the Church<\/a>,\u00a0or better understand some doctrines and\u00a0why<\/em>\u00a0we believe them<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Or you may believe my work is worthy to support for the purpose of apologetics and evangelism in general. If so, please seriously consider a much-needed financial contribution. I\u2019m always in need of more funds: especially\u00a0monthly<\/em>\u00a0support. \u201cThe laborer is worthy of his wages\u201d (1 Tim 5:18, NKJV). 1 December 2021 was my 20th anniversary as a\u00a0full-time Catholic apologist<\/a>, and February 2022 marked the 25th anniversary of my blog.<\/p>\n

PayPal donations<\/a>\u00a0are the easiest: just send to my email address: apologistdave@gmail.com. Here\u2019s also\u00a0a second page to get to PayPal<\/a>. You\u2019ll see the term \u201cCatholic Used Book Service\u201d, which is my old side-business. To learn about the different methods of contributing (including\u00a0Zelle<\/a>), see my page:\u00a0About Catholic Apologist Dave Armstrong \/ Donation Information<\/a>.\u00a0Thanks a million<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0from the bottom of my heart!<\/p>\n

*<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

Photo credit<\/strong>: Photograph by \u201cklimkin\u201d (7-19-16)<\/span>\u00a0[Pixabay<\/a>\u00a0\/\u00a0CC0 public domain<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Summary<\/em>: Anti-Catholic Baptist James White debated sola Scriptura against Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin in April 2024. I respond to on-topic portions of his arguments.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Baptist anti-Catholic apologist James White debated Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin on the topic of sola Scriptura at First Baptist Church of Livingston, Louisiana, on April 24, 2024 [see the YouTube video]. This is my response to the White portion only. His words will be in blue. I use RSV for Bible citations. *** 1:14 I […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":83393,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[31,1068],"tags":[48,2366,1155,32,35,47],"class_list":["post-83387","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-bible-and-tradition","category-james-white","tag-bible-alone","tag-james-white","tag-jimmy-akin","tag-rule-of-faith","tag-scripture-alone","tag-sola-scriptura"],"yoast_head":"\nSola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate) Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate)<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Baptist anti-Catholic apologist James White debated Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin on the topic of sola Scriptura at First Baptist Church of Livingston, Anti-Catholic Baptist James White debated sola Scriptura against Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin in April 2024. I respond to on-topic portions of his arguments.\" \/>\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\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate) Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate)\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Baptist anti-Catholic apologist James White debated Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin on the topic of sola Scriptura at First Baptist Church of Livingston, Anti-Catholic Baptist James White debated sola Scriptura against Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin in April 2024. I respond to on-topic portions of his arguments.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.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=\"2024-05-16T20:37:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2024\/05\/CatholicBible2.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"640\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"479\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\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=\"8 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\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html\",\"name\":\"Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate) Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate)\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2024-05-16T20:37:10+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-05-16T20:37:10+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"Baptist anti-Catholic apologist James White debated Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin on the topic of sola Scriptura at First Baptist Church of Livingston, Anti-Catholic Baptist James White debated sola Scriptura against Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin in April 2024. I respond to on-topic portions of his arguments.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate)\"}]},{\"@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":"Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate) Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate)","description":"Baptist anti-Catholic apologist James White debated Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin on the topic of sola Scriptura at First Baptist Church of Livingston, Anti-Catholic Baptist James White debated sola Scriptura against Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin in April 2024. I respond to on-topic portions of his arguments.","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\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate) Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate)","og_description":"Baptist anti-Catholic apologist James White debated Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin on the topic of sola Scriptura at First Baptist Church of Livingston, Anti-Catholic Baptist James White debated sola Scriptura against Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin in April 2024. I respond to on-topic portions of his arguments.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2024-05-16T20:37:10+00:00","og_image":[{"width":640,"height":479,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2024\/05\/CatholicBible2.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html","name":"Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate) Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate)","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2024-05-16T20:37:10+00:00","dateModified":"2024-05-16T20:37:10+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"Baptist anti-Catholic apologist James White debated Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin on the topic of sola Scriptura at First Baptist Church of Livingston, Anti-Catholic Baptist James White debated sola Scriptura against Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin in April 2024. I respond to on-topic portions of his arguments.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2024\/05\/sola-scriptura-reply-to-james-white-akin-debate.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sola Scriptura: Reply to James White (Akin Debate)"}]},{"@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\/83387","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=83387"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/83387\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/83393"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=83387"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=83387"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=83387"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}