Michael Flournoy posted this meme recently on facebook:
Must be reading a different Book of Romans than I am. I mean, Romans teaches baptismal regeneration and a host of other doctrines Michael would reject. Don't take my word for it. See:
Full Refutation of the Protestant Claim Romans 10:9-10 Teaches Sola Fide (includes a lengthy discussion of Rom 6 and how it teaches baptismal regeneration, as well, of course, a full refutation of Rom 10:9-10 as commonly used by Protestants)
Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness (discusses Rom 4, one of the favorite verses Protestants treat like a rag doll)
Robert Gagnon vs. Common Prooftexts used in support of Eternal Security/Perseverance of the Saints (includes a discussion of Rom 8:35, 38-39 as a "proof-text" for the P of TULIP)
As Flournoy seems to be leaning more and more towards Calvinism, this is also rather apropos:
An Examination and Critique of the Theological Presuppositions Underlying Reformed Theology
