Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Home
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Penal Substitution (Atonement) Debate!
I am pleased to announce that a Reformed Protestant Apologist named "Turretin Fan"
has agreed to debate me on a very important theological issue: The Atonement.
The classical Protestant view of the Atonement is popularly termed "penal
substitution" (penal meaning punishment), a teaching which I as a Catholic believe
is an incorrect view of the Atonement (and thus not taught in Scripture).
The agreed upon resolution, schedule and rules for the debate are as follows:
Resolved: God imputed the guilt of the sins of the elect to Christ.
Affirmed: Turretin Fan
Denied: Nicholas E. (Nick)
1. Affirmative Constructive Essay and Negative Constructive Essay - Due Jan 18.
2. Affirmative Rebuttal Essay - Due Feb 1.
3. Negative Rebuttal Essay - Due Feb 15.
4. Affirmative Cross-Examination Questions to the Negative - Due Mar 1.
5. Negative Cross-Examination Answers and Negative Cross-Examination Questions to
the Affirmative - Due Mar 15.
6. Affirmative Cross-Examination Answers to the Negative - Due Mar 29.
7. Negative Concluding Essay - Due April 12.
8. Affirmative Concluding Essay- Due April 26.
All Essays are 5k words maximum, while each of the 5 Questions are 1k words
maximum. The word limits include any citations and quotes.
Rules:
(1) Each person will post their own essays on their own blog. The opponent can then
cut & paste the opposing response.
http://catholicnick.blogspot.com/
http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/
(3) Citing church documents, theologians, and other such references is allowed,
though the opponent is not necessarily bound to defend any claims other than his
own.
(4) Formatting essay text (ie size, bold, underline, italics, etc) is allowed.
Posted by Nick at 2:07 PM
Labels: Debate, Passive Obedience, Penal Substitution
Links to this post
Create a Link
Search
My Favorite Posts
The ultimate argument to use against Protestants
Index of my Debates
Imputed Righteousnesss in the New Covenant?
A concise refutation of Sola Fide
James White's fails to defend Faith Alone
Atonement according to Scripture
Council of Nicea proves Papacy
Protestant "essentials" versus "non-essentials"
1914 A.D. and Jehovah's Witnesses
Sola Scriptura is Unscriptural
Divorce is forbidden in Scripture
Sola Scriptura is self-refuting
Was Jesus damned in your place?
Enter your email to receive notification of new posts
Email address...
Submit
Subscribe to this blog
Posts
Comments
About Me
My photo
Nick
If you have anything you'd like to discuss via email, don't hesitate to ask!
View my complete profile
Blog Archive
? 2019 (1)
? 2018 (21)
? 2017 (14)
? 2016 (9)
? 2015 (5)
? 2014 (17)
? 2013 (76)
? 2012 (44)
? 2011 (35)
? 2010 (42)
? 2009 (16)
? November (1)
? October (1)
? May (1)
? April (4)
? March (4)
? February (2)
? January (3)
Penal Substitution Debate - Affirmative Constructi...
Penal Substitution Debate - Negative Constructive ...
Penal Substitution (Atonement) Debate!
Simple theme. Powered by Blogger.