All 36 volumes of Spurgeon Sermons:
https://www.monergism.com/spurgeons-sermons-36-volumes-ebook
Tuesday, September 16, 2025
Wednesday, August 27, 2025
Four Door Labyrinth by Steve Hays
Late Apologist Steve Hays' approach to finding your way through Christian theological options. Steve is one of my favorite all time Christian apologists. He died in 2020.
Part ONE:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nl607RS2dUr_gH3bGvovo17rs-n_G0rr/view?usp=sharing
Part TWO:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jp01_eVWJocgPXAsEf3XnNrcD5kQtUC6/view?usp=sharing
Part THREE:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q8M2bQrTJsZF_wk0Yt7f9HoP7OQefxTF/view?usp=sharing
Part FOUR:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vWQ8TOYOHcuUj4DfelbdpsHhYHhrMuoo/view?usp=sharing
A "Knockout Blow" to Penal Substitution? Engaging John Mark Comer on the Atonement
A "Knockout Blow" to Penal Substitution? Engaging John Mark Comer on the Atonement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLZiqwt4UTw
Penal Substitution in the Early Church By Brian Arnold
William Lane Craig and Gavin Ortlund Discuss the Eucharist and Real Presence
Craig and Ortlund Clash on the Eucharist (Respectful Dialogue)
https://youtu.be/imFpLS1I-Hk?si=Kww5RbfGGUvVv8ua
The ULTIMATE Case for Sola Scriptura by Gavin Ortlund
The ULTIMATE Case for Sola Scriptura
https://youtu.be/rpmcr7jOev4
Playlist of YouTube videos Denfending Sola Scriptura:
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLshImU6jwhvyFYwH_KCsnU_XVdLAbvSF5&si=l5h0y5haeeZ2Lilp
Wednesday, August 6, 2025
Can Christians Pray to Mary and the Saints? A Quick Review of Sam Shamoun's Video
A friend asked me to review & critique from a Protestant perspective the following video by Sam Shamoun on praying to Mary. Below the link is my quick and rushed review.
Here's the original video by Sam: Are Catholics right about PRAYING to Mary? | Sam Shamoun
My rushed, cobbled together review:
First off, notice that in this video Sam Shamoun isn't actually debating a seasoned Protestant apologist. He's addressing someone who hasn't studied these issues deeply from a Protestant perspective. So, of course Sam is going to have the upperhand in the discussion with this layman.
Near the end of the video Sam points out that Jesus says the dead are alive and not dead. Citing Luke 20:38. That's a case of obfuscation on Sam's part. Yes, the saints are alive (spiritually), but they are also physically dead. So, it's not a mistake to call them dead in one sense, and alive in another sense.
Sam Shamoun is right that those who leave Catholicism usually didn't know their faith. But that's because most converts on all sides (including both TO and FROM Catholicism or Protestantism or Judaism, etc.) are ignorant. Most people convert without a serious and prolonged examination of their former and prospective/future worldviews. They are usually ignorant of the strengths and weaknesses of both sides.
The majority of conversions are from Catholicism to Protestantism. Even one of the best Catholic apologists, Trent Horn, lamented that fact in a recent video HERE. But, it is true there are a (smaller) number of prominent conversions from Protestantism to Catholicism and Orthodoxy who are highly educated. But often outside the relevant fields. For example, they will often be philosophers or other academics. But not always well versed in the Bible, church history or patristics (i.e. the writings of the church fathers). Though some are moderately.
Most modern Protestants are against praying for the saints. But some Anglicans and Lutherans do pray for the saints. However, Catholics often conflate praying FOR the saints with praying TO or THROUGH the saints. They aren't the same. The former doesn't invoke dead saints, the later does invoke them and attempts to communicate with/to them. One could argue that Protestant theology might allow for prayer FOR the saints, but not TO or THROUGH the saints.
Sam is surely right that the saints in heaven worship God and have "church services," and that they are praying for us. But it's a logical leap from that to assume we may communicate with the dead and ask them to pray for us. In violation of the Biblical prohibition of necromancy and the Biblical teaching that self-initiated prayer and communication to spirits is to God alone. Or at the very least the Bible never encourages us to initiate communication or pray to spirits other than God. Despite there being dead saints whom the authors of Scripture could have prayed to if prayer to or through the dead were permissible. God may send and angel to communicate with us. But that's not self-initiated. That's God initated. Even then, we must test was a supposed angel is communicating to us with the already delivered Gospel [and standardized and finalized in the Scriptures].
1 Thess. 5:21 but test everything; hold fast what is good.
Gal. 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Acts 17:11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.
Rev. 2:2 "'I know your works, your toil and your patient endurance, and how you cannot bear with those who are evil, but have tested those who call themselves apostles and are not, and found them to be false.
Jude 1:3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.
Shamoun is somewhat right that arguments from silence are wrong (I would say often wrong, or poor, or weak). He then goes on to talk about indirect inferences based on direct Biblical teaching and principles to support praying to or through the dead. But that actually undermines his position because the Bible's principles undermine prayer to or through intermediaries other than Christ. The fact that the Bible doesn't either 1. positively teach or negatively condemn praying to saints isn't necessarily proof it's a wrong practice. Sam is technically correct there. But at the very least it should make one wonder whether it's a Biblically permissible practice. In fact, when we read the Bible we find that invoking invisible spirits is always and only directed to God. Dead saints aren't among the physically living, so asking them to pray for us would seem to violate the Biblical teaching against necromancy. And so would be different from the case of two Christians on earth asking each other to pray for the other. The Bible repeatedly refers back to the dead patriarches of "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" yet never does Scripture tell us they are praying for Israel or the Church on earth, or that we are to pray to or through them for believers on earth. Yes, this is an argument from silence, but it's a deafening silence.
Think of all the times the Bible touches on prayer. How to pray; what to pray [the contents of prayer]; who to pray to; the purpose of prayer; the effects of prayer; the nature of prayer. And yet virtually nothing in the 66 books of the Protestant canon can be appealed to to support praying to deceased saints.
[[See the debates on the canon. Also these articles by William Webster on the Old Testament Canon:
https://christiantruth.com/articles/apocryphapart1/ [Part 1]
https://christiantruth.com/articles/apocryphapart2/ [Part 2]
https://christiantruth.com/articles/apocryphapart2/ [Part 2]
]]
The longest book in the Bible, the books of Psalms, is the prayer book and hymn book of the Old and New Testaments people of God and virtually nothing in the psalms is about prayer to deceased saints. It might be argued that that's because the psalms were written and compiled before the saintly dead were taken out of the righteous compartment of Sheol and placed in heaven to live with Christ. Something which only happened around the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ. But we still don't see Christians in the New Testament invoking dead saints like David [OT] and Stephen [NT] in the epistles.
Some Catholic appeal to passages like the above to support prayers to the saints. These passages are an excellent opportunity for the Scriptures to tell us that Jews were praying to or through dead saints. Or that it's proper to do so under some circumstances, but it just so happens that in this particular case the sins of believers were too great that God wouldn't listen to the intercession of dead saints. But nothing like that is taught in the canonical Scriptures. There is never any understood or tacit assumption, or warrant or hint in Scripture that we can ask dead saints to intercede for us.
The apostle Paul talked about how it would be more beneficial to Christians on earth for him to continue living and stay on earth. But if Catholicism were true, he would do more after death if people prayed through him to God and if he interceded for the saints on earth from heaven. This suggests Paul was unaware of the idea that saints in heaven can be invoked. Stephen was already dead as a martyr before Paul was even converted. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were dead many generations prior.
The apostle Paul wrote:
Sam's definition of necromancy is too narrow. The Bible condemns all communication to and with the dead. Not just asking them to be inhabited by them and to [essentially] channel through them, making them channelers. But even then, many modern (alleged) Marian apparitions among Catholics have claimed messages from Mary that those who saw her are to relay to others on earth. That's essentially the same as channeling.
See the following audio lecture by Timothy Kauffman on Marian apparitions. I don't agree with all his views and conclusions, but there's a lot of interesting things he says about the apparitions:
The Occult and Roman Superstitions [lecture by Timothy Kauffman]:
https://www.trinitylectures.org/MP3/The_Occult_and_Roman_Superstitions,_Timothy_Kauffman.mp3
Sam is right that 1 Timothy 2:5 is in the context of Christian intercession (v.1), but it's an earthly intercession, not a heavenly one. Nowhere does the passage talk about saints in heaven who are interceding, much less of Christians on earth invoking them to pray for people on earth. Admittedly, that might leave room for a heavenly intercession, but a case must be made for it, rather than just assuming it A Priori. Sam is also abusing the word "mediator." In Biblical theology, intercessors aren't necessarily mediators. A mediator is a special kind of go-between. Nowhere do the Scriptures talks about Christians on earth or in heaven as mediators. It seems to reserve it to Christ (in the New Testament). The closest thing would be where Peter talks about Christians as a "holy priesthood" (1 Pet. 2:5; cf. Rev. 1:6; Job 1:5). So, all Christians are priests in that sense. Notice, it's egalitarianizing, not hierarchizing/elitizing/stratifying. Just as Pentecost was egalitarianizing in the sense that all believers will be indwelt with the Holy Spirit in a special way not available to Old Testament saints. God would pour out His Spirit on All flesh [young, old, male, female]. A similar thing is the case with the passage Sam quoted. Sam points out James 5:16 says the holier you are, the more powerful your prayers are ["...The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective (or availeth much)"]. Yet, it's also the case that James' example in the VERY NEXT VERSE (v. 17) of Elijah is egalitarianizing in that James says, "Elijah was a man WITH A NATURE LIKE OURS..." James uses that fact as an encouragement to pray for miracles like healing, rather than discouraging us because we're not at the level of Elijah in terms of holiness.
In the Old Testament, bowing down in obeisance to earthly rulers and prophets was permissible. But in the New Testament this is discouraged. Or even condemned in a religious [or at least in a supernatural and numinous] context. Praying to or through the saints seems to violate that New Testament precident. Were praying to the saints proper and part of true Christian practice, then one would think that rather than restricting this type of obeisance, the New Testament would widen and loosen it. Instead, it actually RESTRICTS it FURTHER.
It's true the Catholic Hail Mary prayer has Scripture in it. But the angelic greetings and descriptions of Mary weren't originally prayers to her. The Hail Mary prayer is a prayer to her that's extra-Scriptural. It's converted from greetings and descriptions and turned into a prayer contrary to their original context.
Sam uses the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man to argue for prayer to or through the saints. But the very passages suggests communication between the dead and the living is not normative. Why wouldn't this apply to praying to or through the saints? Rather, in the story Abraham makes Scripture [i.e. "Moses and the Prophets"] the normative source of religious information and spiritual conviction. It even discourages communication between the living and the (formerly) dead (via resurrection). Instead, he directs the Rich Man to Moses and the Prophets as a sufficient witness to his brothers. Though, there's a tacit exception in that Moses and the Prophets predict the resurrection of the Messiah and His authoritative post-resurrection message.
In Catholic theology there are different kinds of worship. There's dulia, hyperdulia and latria The saints receive dulia, Mary gets hyperdulia, and only God gets the true and proper worship of latria. Catholicism properly seeks to reserve full and proper worship to God alone. That's a good thing. The problem is, that the Bible's description of worship to God includes things which Catholics do toward the dead saints. Like self-initiated supernatural communication to disembodied or unembodied spirits and supernatural entites.
See Gavin Ortlund videos on praying to the saints in response to Joe Heschmeyer:
Praying to the Saints: A Protestant Critique
https://youtu.be/TQRQ-bbmVvI
Praying to the Saints? No, Origen is NOT For it
https://youtu.be/7TxB6_IPmYE
Origen on Praying to Saints: FINAL Response to Joe Heschmeyer
https://youtu.be/fayEcMfouOc
Ezek. 14:14 even if these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they would deliver but their own lives by their righteousness, declares the Lord GOD.
Ezek. 14:20 even if Noah, Daniel, and Job were in it, as I live, declares the Lord GOD, they would deliver neither son nor daughter. They would deliver but their own lives by their righteousness.
Some Catholic appeal to passages like the above to support prayers to the saints. These passages are an excellent opportunity for the Scriptures to tell us that Jews were praying to or through dead saints. Or that it's proper to do so under some circumstances, but it just so happens that in this particular case the sins of believers were too great that God wouldn't listen to the intercession of dead saints. But nothing like that is taught in the canonical Scriptures. There is never any understood or tacit assumption, or warrant or hint in Scripture that we can ask dead saints to intercede for us.
The apostle Paul talked about how it would be more beneficial to Christians on earth for him to continue living and stay on earth. But if Catholicism were true, he would do more after death if people prayed through him to God and if he interceded for the saints on earth from heaven. This suggests Paul was unaware of the idea that saints in heaven can be invoked. Stephen was already dead as a martyr before Paul was even converted. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were dead many generations prior.
The apostle Paul wrote:
Phil. 1:20 as it is my eager expectation and hope that I will not be at all ashamed, but that with full courage now as always Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death.21 For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.22 If I am to live in the flesh, THAT MEANS FRUITFUL LABOR FOR ME. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell.23 I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better.24 BUT TO REMAIN IN THE FLESH IS MORE NECESSARY ON YOUR ACCOUNT. 25 Convinced of this, I know that I will REMAIN AND CONTINUE WITH YOU ALL, FOR YOUR PROGRESS and joy in the faith,26 so that in me you may have ample cause to glory in Christ Jesus, because of my coming to you again.
Sam's definition of necromancy is too narrow. The Bible condemns all communication to and with the dead. Not just asking them to be inhabited by them and to [essentially] channel through them, making them channelers. But even then, many modern (alleged) Marian apparitions among Catholics have claimed messages from Mary that those who saw her are to relay to others on earth. That's essentially the same as channeling.
See the following audio lecture by Timothy Kauffman on Marian apparitions. I don't agree with all his views and conclusions, but there's a lot of interesting things he says about the apparitions:
The Occult and Roman Superstitions [lecture by Timothy Kauffman]:
https://www.trinitylectures.org/MP3/The_Occult_and_Roman_Superstitions,_Timothy_Kauffman.mp3
Sam is right that 1 Timothy 2:5 is in the context of Christian intercession (v.1), but it's an earthly intercession, not a heavenly one. Nowhere does the passage talk about saints in heaven who are interceding, much less of Christians on earth invoking them to pray for people on earth. Admittedly, that might leave room for a heavenly intercession, but a case must be made for it, rather than just assuming it A Priori. Sam is also abusing the word "mediator." In Biblical theology, intercessors aren't necessarily mediators. A mediator is a special kind of go-between. Nowhere do the Scriptures talks about Christians on earth or in heaven as mediators. It seems to reserve it to Christ (in the New Testament). The closest thing would be where Peter talks about Christians as a "holy priesthood" (1 Pet. 2:5; cf. Rev. 1:6; Job 1:5). So, all Christians are priests in that sense. Notice, it's egalitarianizing, not hierarchizing/elitizing/stratifying. Just as Pentecost was egalitarianizing in the sense that all believers will be indwelt with the Holy Spirit in a special way not available to Old Testament saints. God would pour out His Spirit on All flesh [young, old, male, female]. A similar thing is the case with the passage Sam quoted. Sam points out James 5:16 says the holier you are, the more powerful your prayers are ["...The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective (or availeth much)"]. Yet, it's also the case that James' example in the VERY NEXT VERSE (v. 17) of Elijah is egalitarianizing in that James says, "Elijah was a man WITH A NATURE LIKE OURS..." James uses that fact as an encouragement to pray for miracles like healing, rather than discouraging us because we're not at the level of Elijah in terms of holiness.
In the Old Testament, bowing down in obeisance to earthly rulers and prophets was permissible. But in the New Testament this is discouraged. Or even condemned in a religious [or at least in a supernatural and numinous] context. Praying to or through the saints seems to violate that New Testament precident. Were praying to the saints proper and part of true Christian practice, then one would think that rather than restricting this type of obeisance, the New Testament would widen and loosen it. Instead, it actually RESTRICTS it FURTHER.
Rev. 19:9 And the angel said to me, "Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb." And he said to me, "These are the true words of God."10 Then I FELL DOWN AT HIS FEET TO WORSHIP HIM, but he said to me, "YOU MUST NOT DO THAT! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God." For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
Rev. 22:8 I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw them, I FELL DOWN TO WORSHIP AT THE FEET OF THE ANGEL who showed them to me,9 but he said to me, "YOU MUST NOT DO THAT! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship God."
Acts 14:8 Now at Lystra there was a man sitting who could not use his feet. He was crippled from birth and had never walked.9 He listened to Paul speaking. And Paul, looking intently at him and seeing that he had faith to be made well, 10 said in a loud voice, "Stand upright on your feet." And he sprang up and began walking.11 And when the crowds saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in Lycaonian, "The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!"12 Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul, Hermes, because he was the chief speaker.13 And the priest of Zeus, whose temple was at the entrance to the city, brought oxen and garlands to the gates and wanted to offer sacrifice with the crowds.14 But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, THEY TORE THEIR GARMENTS and rushed out into the crowd, crying out,15 "Men, WHY ARE YOU DOING THESE THINGS? WE ALSO ARE MEN, OF LIKE NATURE WITH YOU, and we bring you good news, that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them.
It's true the Catholic Hail Mary prayer has Scripture in it. But the angelic greetings and descriptions of Mary weren't originally prayers to her. The Hail Mary prayer is a prayer to her that's extra-Scriptural. It's converted from greetings and descriptions and turned into a prayer contrary to their original context.
Sam uses the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man to argue for prayer to or through the saints. But the very passages suggests communication between the dead and the living is not normative. Why wouldn't this apply to praying to or through the saints? Rather, in the story Abraham makes Scripture [i.e. "Moses and the Prophets"] the normative source of religious information and spiritual conviction. It even discourages communication between the living and the (formerly) dead (via resurrection). Instead, he directs the Rich Man to Moses and the Prophets as a sufficient witness to his brothers. Though, there's a tacit exception in that Moses and the Prophets predict the resurrection of the Messiah and His authoritative post-resurrection message.
In Catholic theology there are different kinds of worship. There's dulia, hyperdulia and latria The saints receive dulia, Mary gets hyperdulia, and only God gets the true and proper worship of latria. Catholicism properly seeks to reserve full and proper worship to God alone. That's a good thing. The problem is, that the Bible's description of worship to God includes things which Catholics do toward the dead saints. Like self-initiated supernatural communication to disembodied or unembodied spirits and supernatural entites.
See Gavin Ortlund videos on praying to the saints in response to Joe Heschmeyer:
Praying to the Saints: A Protestant Critique
https://youtu.be/TQRQ-bbmVvI
Praying to the Saints? No, Origen is NOT For it
https://youtu.be/7TxB6_IPmYE
Origen on Praying to Saints: FINAL Response to Joe Heschmeyer
https://youtu.be/fayEcMfouOc
See also:
Praying to Saints: Defending the Protestant View
Sam's video is specifically about prayer to Mary because Mary has a special place in Catholic devotion and piety [receiving HYPERdulia]. But when we look at Mary in the Scriptures she isn't treated in ways one would expect given Catholic theology. On Catholicism Mary, due to the doctrine of her Immaculate Conception, was saved by God by preemptively applying grace to her at HER conception such that she lived a sinless life. Keeping Original Sin from tainting her, which leads to actual sins in others who are tainted. But we find Mary in Scripture doubting Jesus' message for a long time despite His miraculous conception, holiness and "signs & wonders." Something one would think a sinless person would NOT do. Since sinful hardness of heart is often the Biblical reason and explanation why people don't undertand or receive Jesus' message.
Moreover, Jesus doesn't treat Mary in a special way that one would expect if she had the place in God's system as she does in Catholicism. In Catholicism Mary is a perpetual virgin; immaculately conceived; was bodily assumed into heaven (either dead or alive); preserved from Original Sin; never sinned/sinless; receives higher honor than all other saints (hyperdulia rather than mere dulia); and (though not yet dogmatically/officially defined) generally considered the Mediatrix of All Graces. Yet, look at how she's treated in Scripture. She's hardly mentioned in the New Testament. In the book of Acts she disappears after the first chapter (out of 28). She's almost never mentioned in the Epistles (with a few glancing references/allusions like in Gal. 4:4; passim). Galatians 4:4 doesn't even mention her by name but generally refers to her when Christ is said to be "born of a woman." It's disputed whether the reference to the woman in Rev. 12 is to Mary or Israel, or to both Mary and Israel. The woman is described in Rev. 2:2 as "crying out in birth pains and the agony of giving birth." Yet, such birth pains are a result of the Fall as per Gen. 3:16. But that seems to contradict the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception where she is protected from Original Sin by God's prevenient preemptive grace. Therefore one would think [and it stands to reason] Mary's birthing of Jesus would be painless if she wasn't tainted by Original Sin.
Moreover, Jesus doesn't treat Mary in a special way that one would expect if she had the place in God's system as she does in Catholicism. In Catholicism Mary is a perpetual virgin; immaculately conceived; was bodily assumed into heaven (either dead or alive); preserved from Original Sin; never sinned/sinless; receives higher honor than all other saints (hyperdulia rather than mere dulia); and (though not yet dogmatically/officially defined) generally considered the Mediatrix of All Graces. Yet, look at how she's treated in Scripture. She's hardly mentioned in the New Testament. In the book of Acts she disappears after the first chapter (out of 28). She's almost never mentioned in the Epistles (with a few glancing references/allusions like in Gal. 4:4; passim). Galatians 4:4 doesn't even mention her by name but generally refers to her when Christ is said to be "born of a woman." It's disputed whether the reference to the woman in Rev. 12 is to Mary or Israel, or to both Mary and Israel. The woman is described in Rev. 2:2 as "crying out in birth pains and the agony of giving birth." Yet, such birth pains are a result of the Fall as per Gen. 3:16. But that seems to contradict the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception where she is protected from Original Sin by God's prevenient preemptive grace. Therefore one would think [and it stands to reason] Mary's birthing of Jesus would be painless if she wasn't tainted by Original Sin.
Notice how Mary is treated by Jesus Himself:
Luke 11:27 As he said these things, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, "BLESSED IS THE WOMB THAT BORE YOU, and the BREASTS at which you NURSED!"28 But he said, "BLESSED RATHER are those who hear the word of God and keep it!"
Matt. 12:46 While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his MOTHER and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him.47 48 But he replied to the man who told him, "WHO IS MY MOTHER, and who are my brothers?"49 And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, "HERE ARE MY MOTHER and my brothers!50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister AND MOTHER."
Mark 3:31 And his mother and his brothers came, and standing outside they sent to him and called him.32 And a crowd was sitting around him, and they said to him, "Your mother and your brothers are outside, seeking you."33 And he answered them, "Who are my mother and my brothers?"34 And looking about at those who sat around him, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers!35 For whoever does the will of God, he is my brother and sister and mother."
Luke 8:19 Then his mother and his brothers came to him, but they could not reach him because of the crowd.20 And he was told, "Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see you."21 But he answered them, "My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it."
See also the debates on the topic and related Marian dogmas in the videos linked below:
James White's Catholicism playlist with most [or all] of his debates on Catholicism:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBby84KboLbHnG56Xzlq_91kxhfeSHp_b
I linked to some classic Catholic vs. Protestant debates on my blogpost here:
https://misclane.blogspot.com/2013/05/james-white-vs-robert-fastiggi-debates.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)