![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2024\/06\/AngryMan24.jpg\")
<\/a>\u201cPlease Hit \u2018Subscribe\u2019\u201d!<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0If you have received benefit from this or any of my other 4,600+ articles, please follow this blog by signing up (with your email address) on the sidebar to the right (you may have to scroll down a bit), above where there is an icon bar, \u201cSign Me Up!\u201d: to receive notice when I post a new blog article. This is the equivalent of subscribing to a\u00a0YouTube<\/em>\u00a0channel. Please also consider\u00a0following me on Twitter \/ X\u00a0and purchasing\u00a0one or more of my 55 books<\/a>.\u00a0All of this helps me get more exposure, and (however little!) more income for my full-time apologetics work. Thanks so much and happy reading!<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Anti-Catholic Reformed Protestant polemicist James Swan wrote the article, \u201cWhen Catholic Apologists Pray for You\u201d<\/a> (5-30-07), directed towards yours truly. I will cite it in its entirety (his words in blue<\/span>):<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019ll keep praying for you, as I do all my severe, hostile, critics<\/strong>.\u201d<\/span> [me!]<\/p>\n I\u2019m curious how these prayers actually sound, and if any of this language is utilized:<\/span><\/p>\n Yeah, I think it\u2019s good to follow Jesus\u2019 advice:<\/p>\n Matthew 5:43-47<\/strong> (RSV) \u201cYou have heard that it was said, `You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.\u2019 [44] But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, [45] so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. [46] For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? [47] And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?<\/p>\n Luke 6:27-28<\/strong> \u201cBut I say to you that hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, [28] bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Note how Swan \u2014 in very typical anti-Catholic fashion \u2014 implies that this was insincere on my part, and\/or immediately hypocritical, so that it can be dismissed altogether.<\/p>\n \u201cJimbo\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cAnti-Catholic polemicist and pseudo-\u201capologist\u201d James Swan\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cJames \u2018Dave Got The Citation Wrong Again!\u2019 Swan\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cJames \u2018A\u2026\u2026.g Botches Every Citation He Makes\u2019 Swan\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Similarly, I wonder if these titles are used as well:<\/span><\/p>\n Steve \u201cWhopper\u201d Hays, David T. \u201cI Could Care Less about Context\u201d, King Dr. Eric \u201cThe Yellow\u201d Svendsen, Frank \u201cFederal Action If You Misrepresent Me\u201d Turk, William \u201cHistorical Revisionist\u201d Webster, Bishop King James White<\/span><\/p>\n Perhaps there is a particular saint being prayed to, one of whom enjoys such creative language.<\/span><\/p>\n What horrific language from me, huh? This is simply tweaking, playful, harmless, Rush Limbaugh-type stuff. I was, of course, reacting<\/em> in all<\/em> these cases to truly vitriolic, extreme, slanderous, malicious (fringe group) anti-Catholic insults sent my way, or the Catholic Church\u2019s way, such as that we\u2019re not Christians; our Church supposedly denies the gospel, teaches Pelagian works-salvation, that we are unregenerate pagans and idolaters, spiritual ignoramuses, that \u201cRome\u201d is the antichrist, Whore of Babylon; stuff like that. There is no one-to-one comparison whatsoever.<\/p>\n My epithets or insults are not nearly as harsh as those of Jesus, Paul, and the prophets. Jesus called Herod \u201cthat fox\u201d and the Pharisees a \u201cbrood of vipers\u201d and \u201cwhitewashed tombs.\u201d He even called them \u201cfools\u201d: after saying in another place<\/a> that this usage might lead one to hellfire (obviously, then, it\u2019s not an absolute prohibition). Elijah taunted the prophets of Baal on Mt. Carmel (who were soon to be executed), asking them if their \u201cgod\u201d was off relieving himself; Jesus used the sarcastic \u201clog in the eye\u201d word-picture; St. Paul wrote that he wished false teachers would \u201ccastrate\u201d themselves (Gal 5:12). As far as I know, he\u2019s a guy in Michigan sitting in his attic with a computer.<\/span> (4-26-07)<\/p>\n \u2026.the one who craves attention.<\/span> (12-22-07)<\/p>\n Roman Catholic apologists like Dave Armstrong, who lack any meaningful ability to engage the text in a serious manner, have no compunctions about grabbing anything to use as a bludgeon against the truth.\u00a0(3-27-04)<\/p>\n DA lacks the ability to engage the text of the Scriptures in a meaningful fashion, and 2) DA will use anything to attack the truth. . . . As to the first, I simply direct anyone to the \u201cexegesis\u201d presented in A Biblical Defense of Catholicism, his 2001 publication. The book is a monument to how to ignore context, avoid grammar, shred syntax, and insert the traditions of Rome willy-nilly into any passage you cite. . . . DA thinks himself a modern Socrates, yet, his writing takes wild leaps from topic to topic, inserts endless (and often gratuitous) irrelevant material that serves only to cover the shallow nature of what is being said, and in the end requires one to possess the skill of nailing jello to a wall to be able to respond to it for its utter lack of substance. (3-28-04)<\/p>\n When do, where do you draw the line? I mean, it would be so much easier to just ignore all these people, but the problem is, we\u2019re one of those few folks that actually gets out there and we get our\u00a0hands<\/i>\u00a0dirty. We actually take on these, these individuals, and show where the argumentation\u2019s\u00a0bad<\/i>, and you\u2019re gonna end up with dirt on your hands, and on your face, when you wallow with some of these folks, and we\u00a0try<\/i>\u00a0to figure out where the line is. This guy [sigh], sadly, there are people who write recommendations of his\u00a0stuff<\/i>! I mean, you got Scott Hahn, all these folks, which\u00a0amazes<\/i>\u00a0me. Uh, because you [laughter] look at some of his\u00a0books<\/i>, and it\u2019s just like \u201cwow! there\u2019s just no\u00a0substance<\/i>\u00a0here.\u201d It\u2019s just rattle rattle rattle rattle, and quote John Henry Cardinal Newman and that\u2019s the end of the\u00a0subject<\/i>. And there\u2019s no meaningful\u00a0argumentation<\/i> going on at all. (webcast of 4-20-04)<\/p>\n As I said a few weeks ago, since there is no substance to the man\u2019s methodology or study, but no end to his time to tap away at a keyboard, what do you do when he starts in with his irrational diatribes? Hopefully the clear demonstration of his incapacity to engage in meaningful exegesis (indeed, even to know what the term means) will help some who have been impacted by his sheer volume of verbosity.\u00a0(4-23-04)<\/p>\n Mr. Armstrong has provided a reading list on his blog. In essence, this means that instead of blaming ignorance for his very shallow misrepresentations of non-Catholic theology and exegesis, we must now assert knowing deception. (12-31-04)<\/p>\n Honestly,\u00a0how utterly pathetic can someone become? It was bad enough that his work was shown to be consistently shallow, and worse that his attempts to respond were shrill and panic-filled (leading to his melt down and his unwillingness to even attempt further defense), . . . But it truly amazes me that someone who utterly lacks the tools to do the work he claims to do with such expertise continues to be dragged along by the rest of his compatriots. Just another example of \u201cas long as it is in the service of Mother Church, it is all good.\u201d What a contrast: we seek to be consistent in honor of the truth, . . .\u00a0(4-5-05)<\/p>\n Now, moonbat is an interesting phrase. It is generally used to describe the wacko left, but it strikes me as being particularly descriptive of wackos in general, unhinged folks who have no self-control and are utterly controlled by their angry emotions. Most religions have their moonbats. Rome surely does. Off the top of my head, we can list . . . Dave \u201cthe Stalker\u201d Armstrong . . .\u00a0(5-4-07)<\/p>\n Steve Ray and Dave Armstrong, . . . those Roman Catholic apologists who really are not serious about truth but do what they do for less-than-noble reasons, . . .\u00a0(7-31-08)<\/p>\n The little yip yip yip yip yip dog? That\u2019s Dave Armstrong, because he never does anything original on his own. He always borrows from somebody else. . . . . . . try doing it truthfully. (webcast, 7-31-08)<\/p>\n Serious readers in the field realize that while Dave may stumble over a thoughtful argument once in a while, it is always to be found somewhere else. He simply does not produce original argumentation of any kind, . . . (1-6-10)<\/p>\n Dave Armstrong is not a serious or thoughtful or reflective or studied Roman apologist or writer. Period.\u00a0(Twitter, 5-17-12)<\/p>\n Dave Armstrong has never had a fresh insight on a theological and doctrinal topic. Period.\u00a0(Twitter, 5-18-12)<\/p>\n Eric Svendsen<\/span><\/strong> [link<\/a>]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\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 a\u00a0second 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!
\n*
\nNow let\u2019s review just a few representative examples (out of many hundreds) of what these guys have called me<\/em>:
\n*
\nJames Swan<\/span><\/strong> [link<\/a>]<\/p>\n
\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\nHe has no problem with lying, so long as he thinks he can pin that same charge on someone else; that way he doesn\u2019t \u201cappear\u201d to be lying. What a sad spectacle. (1-14-05)<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n. . . DA\u2019s strategy of deceit, . . . (1-14-05)<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\nWhat\u2019s my \u201clack of charity\u201d got to do with DA\u2019s lack of honesty? Nothing. . . . that\u2019s just what DA does best\u2013he deceives, and he usually accomplishes that by focusing on half-truths (that\u2019s the \u201cstrategy of deceit\u201d that marks the heretic). (1-15-05)<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\nI\u2019ve recently commented on your lack of integrity. It seems this is going to be an ongoing trend for you. (8-21-09, 5:56 PM)<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\nMany folks would be ashamed to have the reports of their dishonesty recalled, but you seem to wear the judgment of godly men like Dr. [Eric] Svendsen and Pastor [David T.] King as a badge of honor. You actually seem proud to have been judged dishonest by them. I\u2019m glad to be in their company in concluding from my personal observations to the same effect: that your agenda is more important to you than the truth. (8-21-09, 7:29 PM)<\/div>\n
\nPractical 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>, or better understand some doctrines and\u00a0why<\/em>\u00a0we believe them<\/a>.<\/p>\n
\n*
\n***
\n*<\/p>\n<\/div>\n