I’ve already commented on some other examples of Armstrong’s ignorant prooftexting. Here’s another case in point:
DAVE ARMSTRONG SAID:
“Hays and his buddies tried to make the argument that the custom of wearing sackcloth was simply a Semitic custom of those times (using the merely ‘anthropological’ approach that liberals are notorious for), or that it was for mourning only, and in no sense prescribed by God. . . . .How odd, then, that the prophet Isaiah, speaking on behalf of God (as prophets are wont to do), recommends (‘prescribes’?) the wearing of sackcloth (Is 32:11)... It is only anti-Catholic Bible students today who can't see the obvious.”
Okay, let’s play along with the “obvious” implications of Armstrong’s prooftexting.
Here’s the full text: “Tremble, you women who are at ease, shudder, you complacent ones; strip, and make yourselves bare, and tie sackcloth around your waist” (Isa 32:11).
As one leading commentator explains:
“It appears that it was typical for women in the ancient Near East to bare their breasts in mourning and put sackcloth about their waists. This custom explains the reference here,” J. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39 (Eerdmans 1988), 585.
Since dear old Dave likes to tout his (tenuous) connections with Mother Angelica, perhaps he should produce a Spring Break video of the Poor Clares.