Tim Staples/James White Debate

[kleary]

Elzee:

I’d love to find this one too if anyone knows about it.

I have that video. I hate watching it though because as I said they must have edited out the Catholic responses. Either that or Fr. Pacwa was not prepared.

I tried to find it on their website but they now have it chopped up and sold as several videos for even more than the original one that contained them all. You may try calling them to see if they still have the entire video called “The Best of Roman Catholicism”.

Ken

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Philthy:

OK OK! About a dozen of you have requested this link! Its from Sungenis’ Catholic Apologetics International website. Enjoy!

catholicintl.com/epologetics/dialogs/marysaints/bodily-assumption.htm

Phil

Here is a quote that I think defines White perfectly:
Sungenis: I don’t know why he does this, but Dr. White frequently chooses to portray the responses of his opponents as psychological manipulations. He accuses his opponents of utilizing a secret stratagem to avoid direct answers, when, in reality, they are merely showing the inconsistencies in the critic’s arguments. In using such psychological labels, Dr. White, whether intentionally or unintentionally, unnecessarily** demonizes his opponents**, making it appear that they are not interested in truth, but only out to distort the facts and manipulate the audience. But is this not a psychological ploy in itself? Psychologically, there is no better way to prep your audience than by telling them that your opponent is not interested in truth but merely desires to use psychology to manipulate them. Perhaps what is really going on here is, as they call it in psychology, “projection,” that is, accusing someone else of the very thing one is doing. A study of Dr. White’s rebuttals shows that he often manipulates his audience by first attacking the credibility and integrity of his opponents, prior to answering the opponent’s assertions.
I have made the same type of comments before. Especially when I was hearing the Pacwa v White Justification debate. White was more interested in playing on the crowd’s emotions (eg smearing the opponent) than actually dealing with the topic. On that link just one paragraph above this White makes a comment on how most people are not interested in “logic” and “debate” and rather are led by “emotions” and such, when the sick fact is he turns around and goes against these very things!

White is not interested in the facts (else his business would shut down), he is exactly what Paul was talking about in 2Tim4:
3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, 4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths.

 

[PhilVaz]

kleary << I have that video. I hate watching it though because as I said they must have edited out the Catholic responses. Either that or Fr. Pacwa was not prepared. >>

Don’t know, maybe a matter of opinion, but I rank that debate as follows, out of 10 points for each topic. I have the original 4 videotapes (grand total of about 5 hours of debate):

on Justification: Pacwa 4, Martin 6
on Mary/Saints: Pacwa 6, Martin 4
on Peter/Papacy: Pacwa 5, Martin 5
on Confession: Pacwa 6, Martin 4
on Purgatory/Indulgences: Pacwa 3, Martin 7

Something like that. Fr. Pacwa wasn’t prepared to deal with Romans 4:5 which was brought up repeatedly, and Martin rebutted Pacwa’s biblical texts on purgatory, but overall Pacwa did not do that poorly, despite it being 3 against 1 – as Karl Keating points out in one of his books, the debate was actually Ankerberg/Martin/announcer vs. Pacwa.

Phil P

 

[PhilVaz]

Dude << So what happened to straitGate? Thats where the Pacwa justification show was listed and now its gone. >>

StraitGate has been up and down for years. Probably heavy bandwidth problems. I have all the debates from that site (mainly James White ones) that were once publicly available. I also have the ones that were publicly available from TheGreatForum (now defunct, mainly William Lane Craig debates). There is a way to get Real Player files by downloading from the location that the .ram text file points to, rather than streaming. Sometimes this is prevented, but StraitGate and GreatForum sites allowed it. So I have all those debates. Send private Email if you want the original Real Player files.

Phil P

 

[SAINThoodSEEKER]

Man, you guys have given out more info than *I * was prepared for…don’t know about any one else. Thanks again…I’ll be reading for quite some time now. God bless.

 

[MParedon]

bene7:

If you had 100 Catholics on one side of the room and 100 Protestants on the other, how many Protestants would say Staples won the debate? How man Catholics White?

They’re debates, they’re never won. In the end everyone goes home with the same convictions they came in with.

What about the one agnostic in the middle of the room? Believe me, I only listened to one debate while I was teetering on the bring of nothing and everything.

 

[Lothair]

I absolutely LOVE Fr. Pacwa…but I don’t see how he could win a debate…sometimes when I listen to him, just answering questions on open line live, he gets so tongue tied…

he is wonderful though.

Mitch Pacwa is a teacher and lecturer, he isn’t a debater. I think Fr. Pacwa would rather lose and debate than win one. He’s not aggressive, and as a priest he shouldn’t be. James White is a debate junkie who’s tactics are more interesting than his theology.

 

[Randy_Carson]

This is a four-year old thead…

 

[Michael_Francis]

This thread has been dormant for a considerable period. With rare exceptions, reviving threads after a protracted period of inactivity is discouraged because:

• the issues that spurred them are often no longer “hot” or current topics, explaining why thread activity ceased originally
• posters originally involved in the discussion are sometimes no longer active on the forum and, therefore, unavailable to reply to comments added to the thread

Our experience suggests that, when a topic merits revival, it is best accomplished by initiating a new thread that draws on recent events and can be posted to contemporaneously. This eliminates the baggage of folks being frustrated by asking and not receiving responses to issues raised in early posts (because the new poster didn’t notice that the post he is quoting was made a year ago).

You are very welcome to open a new thread on the subject or any other topic, as well as to actively participate in the myriad active threads in the fora.