Sungenis Comes Out at the CAF...to Debate David Palm

The following exchange between David Palm and Bob Sungenis at the Catholic Answers Forums (CAF) is extremely enlightening.  In a nutshell, this impromptu debate came about because one of Bob’s closest friends and supporters (most likely Mark Wyatt, president of one of Bob’s non-profits:  click here and here for the evidence) opened an account at the Catholic Answers Forums under the pseudonym “YanniP” and immediately left a comment on a thread dealing with a doctrinal question involving Jews.  Rather than confronting the serious doctrinal error that was being proposed in that thread – that Jesus is only the savior of the Gentiles, not the Jews – he ignored it and decided to take a dishonest, cheap shot instead at an article we wrote in Lay Witness that was cited by another commenter precisely to correct that serious doctrinal error.

When David Palm entered the thread and took “YanniP” to task for his dishonesty and Sungenocentric myopia (click here), something very rare and interesting happened.  Suddenly, Bob Sungenis himself opened up an account at the CAF and came to YanniP’s defense.  It’s extremely rare for Bob to leave the safety of his own website on the Internet (and as you read his exchange with David at the CAF, it should become clear why), but it’s rarer still for him to do so in order to defend someone other than himself.

It’s telling that Bob – who has eagerly presented even private, informal email exchanges as though they were a public “debate” at his website – has thus far completely refused to even mention this extended, public exchange about Jewish issues at his website. 

For a good, brief post at the CAF that summarizes this lengthy exchange very well, please click here.  

Below are some of the more noteworthy highlights (or lowlights, as the case may be) of the lengthy exchange, with direct links to the pertinent sections for your convenience:

1) Things got so bad for Bob that he was desperately seeking a way out.  To see the bogus excuse Bob gave for exiting stage left (and how David called him on it), click here.
Remarkably, in Bob’s world, it’s completely immoral to defend an innocent bishop with information gained from a private conversation – even if you explicitly stated right up front (before the information was even divulged) that you would not promise to keep the conversation private.  But it’s fine to knowingly lie about that same bishop in public!

2) Bob’s close friend and inner circle member ("YanniP") was forced to back down from his initial charges of heresy against us, since he was shown numerous passages from our article that stated precisely and unambiguously the very thing he claimed that we hadn’t.  Then he had to fall back on the unsupported assertion that we "insinuate and imply much more." And, in spite of the fact that we explicitly denounced that error as a “heresy,” he claimed that we nevertheless "placate" some other, related heresy.   He couldn’t name the alleged heresy or even describe it, but he had some vague suspicions and fears that were spreading it, regardless. 

Click here, here and here.

3) Bob's close friend and inner circle member ("YanniP") was confronted with some of Bob’s anti-Jewish, bigoted statements and he refused to distance himself from any of them.

Click here, here and here.

4) Bob was repeatedly confronted yet again with his own publicly stated standards in regard to making public allegations of “heresy”.  His response?  Silence.  He continues to publicly level his charges in clear violation of his own standards.

Click here and here.

5) Bob’s baseless charge that we are guilty of “spiritual racism” in favor of Jews was answered yet again.  Bob’s response?  Silence. Yet, he continues to make the same false charge at his website. 

 Click here.

6) Bob was corrected for falsely portraying the replacement of the Old Covenant with the New Covenant as a punishment of Israel.  It was pointed out that his perverse premise – what we have called a “theology of punishment” – is distorting his entire theology in regard to the Jewish people.  Bob’s response?  Some initial obfuscation and then silence after his obfuscation was rebutted.

Click here and here and here.

7) Bob was repeatedly challenged to back up his idiosyncratic interpretations of Scripture in regard to Jewish issues with magisterial statements.  His response?  Diversion, obfuscation and then silence after having it all rebutted.  In stark contrast, we simply laid out magisterial statements in support of the views which Bob finds so disagreeable – especially the interpretation of Romans 11:28-29.

Click here, here, here, here and here. 

8) Bob was challenged to provide a single citation where the Magisterium has ever used the precise word he has been insisting upon for the last five years to describe the status of the Mosaic Covenant:  “revoked.”  He failed the challenge.  The fact is, the Church has never used the term, and for good reason.

Click here, here and here. 

9) Bob was challenged again to provide a single citation where the Magisterium has ever defined or even used the word “supersessionism”.  He again failed the challenge. 

Click here, here and here.

10) We brought to light indisputable proof that Bob has been making several dishonest claims about how and why the second volume of his Catholic Apologetics Study Bible was denied an imprimatur.  Bob’s response?  Silence.
 

Click here.

11) Bob was repeatedly challenged to publish the entire correspondence between him and the Diocese of Harrisburg in order to prove his new account of what supposedly occurred before he was forced to remove the name “Catholic” from his website and writings.  Bob’s response?  Silence.

Click here and here. 

12) It was pointed out to Bob that, contrary to his public assertions, no one had ever attacked him for merely criticizing the dual covenant error.  Bob’s response?  Silence.  In fact, a member of Bob's board of directors was also challenged in another venue to give any proof of Bob's assertions and he went silent as well (see here). The fact is that Bob's contention has always been a complete fabrication designed to make people believe that his problems have stemmed from defending the purity of Catholic teaching rather than because he propagates anti-Semitic garbage. 

Click here. 

13) Bob was challenged for using and promoting material against Jews that was created and presented by the notorious anti-Semite and former “Grand Wizard” of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke.  Disturbingly, Bob actually defended Duke and refused to stop using his work. After being heavily pressured, he claimed not to know whether Duke was still a racist.  But then Bob returned to saying that even if Duke is still a racist, he’s no worse than people who believed that Jews still have a special relationship with God.

Please read the follow links in order:  first, second, third, fourth. 

14) Bob was again presented with our definitive argument from the Latin text of CCC 674, in which the word “post” proves that the “full inclusion of the Jews” in the plan of salvation follows chronologically after the full number of the Gentiles.  It cannot be, as Bob argues, merely a constant trickle of Jewish converts throughout history, concurrently with the Gentiles.  Bob’s response?  Some initial erroneous argumentation and then silence after having those arguments rebutted. 

Click here, here and here. 

15) Bob was again confronted with the fact that he has been blundering monumentally by casting the “context” of Romans 11 as the fall of Jerusalem – an event that occurred after the epistle was written and even after the author himself was dead!  Bob’s response?  Silence.

Click here.

16) Bob was presented with proof that he had allowed errors regarding patristic quotes on certain Jewish issues to remain in his CASB series, even after he had been informed about them.  Bob’s response?  Silence. 

Click here and here.

17) The fact that Bob’s extreme, anti-Jewish theology leads him to flirt with multiple heresies was brought to light.

Click here.


For a good, brief post at the CAF that summarizes this lengthy exchange very well, please click here.  

Again, is it any wonder that Bob hasn’t said a word thus far about this lengthy, impromptu debate at his website?