Anti-Catholics: Here is How to Convince Me I'm Wrong

[URA]

How much time did he put into investigating Eastern Orthodoxy I wonder. Not very much I suspect.

I knew someone would bring that up! He describes his Bible study as an attempt to disprove Catholicism, until he realized that Catholicism actually was Biblical, and his priorities shifted around. I think Orthodoxy wasn't something he put into much consideration, although he does include chapters in papal supremacy & infallibility.

It looks like you’re basically saying that people need to buy and then read a book before discussing the matter with you. I’m also Catholic and even I find that a bit unreasonable.

I don't expect most people to do it, just for practical reasons, but if people are serious about anti-Catholicism, I'm giving them the chance.

Hi rereading your initial post it is funny how you tab the quote of bishops rule the church of God as somehow pointing that the RCC is Biblical. What is the qualification of a bishop according to scripture?
1 This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop,[fn] he desires a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money,[fn] but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; 4 one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); 6 not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. The scriptures have married men with children as the model for who the bishops should be. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, The doctrine is from scripture. How many married men you got with kids running your church?

And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Matthew 23:9

Isaiah 51:2
2 Look to Abraham your father
and to Sarah who bore you;
for when he was but one I called him,
and I blessed him and made him many.

Exodus 20:12
12 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which the Lord your God gives you.

Genesis 45:8
8 So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and he has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt.

Job 29:16
16 I was a father to the poor,
and I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know.

Acts 7:2
2 And Stephen said:
“Brethren and fathers, hear me. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopota′mia, before he lived in Haran,

1 Corinthians 4:14-15
14 I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. 15 For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.

There are more!

Its understanding what Jesus meant in your quote my friend. Its not what you 'think' it meant!

God bless you

Thank you for your posts, but particular issues like this are not the point of the thread, the book I mention is.

What do you say to the fact that far more Catholics convert to Protestantism than the other way around?

Unfortunately, Catholic education is very lousy at effectively showing Biblical reasons for Church teachings. I intend to become a high or middle school Theology teacher at a Catholic school, and part of what I want to do is turn this around. Everything the Church teaches us thoroughly Biblical; it's just presented badly.

I have this book in my library and I have read it. Challenge accepted. I will respond over the next few days when I have some free time.

I look forward to a good discussion & pray that we both may come to God's truth, wherever it may be!

May God continue to bless us all!

 

[Athanasius377]

Let’s not have this thread descend into a myriad of conspiracies about Jesuits or some other order. Our Catholic friend is trying to get someone who is not Catholic to read something from a catholic point of view and engage that argument. Let’s keep that in view and not snipe each other over something that’s dubious in reliability at best.
Recall Rome affirms and has taught as well as defended over centuries things like:
The doctrine of the Trinity
The deity of Christ
The inspiration of the scriptures
Salvation through the sacrifice of Christ by the Cross.
The Virgin birth.
The two natures of Christ.

the list goes on. And also recall that it was the Catholic Church that preserved the scriptures and learning as a whole through the collapse of west. The establishment of Universities, institutions of mercy like hospitals. And perhaps the most impressive the evangelical zeal of her missionaries through almost two millennia. All of which I am extremely thankful for. So this is in house debate for Roman Catholics are our Christian Brothers and sisters not some nefarious organization like the Illuminati. As a Lutheran I agree that Rome teaches error. Yet there is so much that Rome gets right. So let’s do what our friend asked and engage Catholicism on her terms and fairly discuss her claims. Or at least do our best to do the same in a Christ honoring way.

Save the heckling to Twitter and Congress. Christians should show more charity than what passes for discussions in those two platforms.

steps off soapbox.

 

[Athanasius377]

Also @Unofficial Reverand Alex the book is a bit more in depth than I remember and I want to be fair so give me a bit more time.

 

[grampster]

Scripture teaches us in many places that we are the body of Christ, that body has many parts, that those parts have different functions...ears for hearing, eyes for seeing...yet they compliment each other and contribute to the whole and that Christ is the Head of that body. As Christians perhaps we should spend a bit more time realizing that and also that we compliment each other. Every church, no matter what denomination that teaches Jesus as Lord, the only begotten Son of God, Christ crucified and resurrected, that in the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, the Word was God and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us is a brother and sister in the same body. Yes, many denominations are not always right about all things; 'some doing what they know they shouldn't and not doing what they know they should and who will save them from all that', yet if they are about the aforementioned knowledge and faith in Jesus, perhaps we'd quit trying to convince each other about who is better and more right. I take Paul's position as for a trustworthy saying: 1 Timothy 1:15-16.

Stop trying to divide us!! Who is better? ....I follow Paul. I follow Apollos..... (1 Corinthians 3:1-22) Start accepting we are united in that we serve Jesus Christ crucified, resurrected and sitting at the right hand of the Father, in the ways and with the talents we are graced with.

 

[DennisTate]

[Perhaps Anti-Catholic is too strong a term, but it was a lot shorter than saying, People who seriously disagree with the Catholic Church on Biblical grounds. But I digress.]

A very common argument against Catholicism is the idea that the Catholic Church is unbiblical. A valid concern; however, I truly believe that this idea is a misconception. I've spent quite a bit of time arguing theology here & in real life with my Protestant brothers & sisters, and my Protestant brothers and sisters have spent quite a bit of time arguing theology with me. To date, nobody has changed their mind either way.

This is often due to an understandable lack of thoroughness; the Bible is a very detailed, sometimes complicated, and remarkably long book. A proper understanding of all its implications would take extensive time & effort that many of us just don't have.

So I will direct you to a book written by someone who has put in all that time & effort...an evangelical Protestant, who did a year-long in-depth Bible study to disprove Catholicism.

Long story short...he converted.

The author is Dave Armstrong, and the book is titled A Biblical Defense of Catholicism. It's around 350 of very meticulous Biblical analysis, written to explain how the Catholic Church is the most Biblical Christian Church, and even the only truly Biblical Church.

It's detailed enough that it can be hard to read, especially when Armstrong discusses the original languages used in the Bible. But if you really want to convince me against my Catholic Christian faith, this is my challenge: Read the book (all of it), take careful notes if that's how you do things, find out how the concert got it all wrong, and let me know. Give me a thorough enough explanation for how the Catholic Church isn't Biblically & historically valid, and I promise I will convert. You have to read the book first; I can't defend my faith & explain Scripture as well as Armstrong can, so I direct my apologetics to him (sometimes it's good to let someone more educated do the explaining).

You can find it pretty cheap online (remember to use Amazon Smile if that's your avenue; that gives money to a charity of your choice, with no extra fee to you). And if you don't want to, I understand, it's a lot of reading. But if disproving Catholicism is really what you want to do in this life, then a Catholic Theology major just told you what you need to do to convince him.

May God continue to bless us all!

In my opinion one of the huge advantages that the Roman Catholic Church has over many denominations is that they take near death experience accounts seriously. I would guess that Mr. Dean Braxton has often been asked to give his testimony in Catholic Churches.

 

[DamianWarS]

[Perhaps Anti-Catholic is too strong a term, but it was a lot shorter than saying, People who seriously disagree with the Catholic Church on Biblical grounds. But I digress.]

A very common argument against Catholicism is the idea that the Catholic Church is unbiblical. A valid concern; however, I truly believe that this idea is a misconception. I've spent quite a bit of time arguing theology here & in real life with my Protestant brothers & sisters, and my Protestant brothers and sisters have spent quite a bit of time arguing theology with me. To date, nobody has changed their mind either way.

This is often due to an understandable lack of thoroughness; the Bible is a very detailed, sometimes complicated, and remarkably long book. A proper understanding of all its implications would take extensive time & effort that many of us just don't have.

So I will direct you to a book written by someone who has put in all that time & effort...an evangelical Protestant, who did a year-long in-depth Bible study to disprove Catholicism.

Long story short...he converted.

The author is Dave Armstrong, and the book is titled A Biblical Defense of Catholicism. It's around 350 of very meticulous Biblical analysis, written to explain how the Catholic Church is the most Biblical Christian Church, and even the only truly Biblical Church.

It's detailed enough that it can be hard to read, especially when Armstrong discusses the original languages used in the Bible. But if you really want to convince me against my Catholic Christian faith, this is my challenge: Read the book (all of it), take careful notes if that's how you do things, find out how the concert got it all wrong, and let me know. Give me a thorough enough explanation for how the Catholic Church isn't Biblically & historically valid, and I promise I will convert. You have to read the book first; I can't defend my faith & explain Scripture as well as Armstrong can, so I direct my apologetics to him (sometimes it's good to let someone more educated do the explaining).

You can find it pretty cheap online (remember to use Amazon Smile if that's your avenue; that gives money to a charity of your choice, with no extra fee to you). And if you don't want to, I understand, it's a lot of reading. But if disproving Catholicism is really what you want to do in this life, then a Catholic Theology major just told you what you need to do to convince him.

May God continue to bless us all!

so you expect us to read a book's position that you can't articulate yourself and then deconstruct it to convince you to convert from Catholicism? Why don't I just tell you to read a book as a rebuttal... wouldn't that be more like for like?

 

[Dave L]

Martin Luther's Bondage of the Will permanently took out Catholicism and a good number of Protestant Churches for me. Free Will is the jugular vein in all of these that he severed using Scripture alone.

 

[Lost4words]

Martin Luther's Bondage of the Will permanently took out Catholicism and a good number of Protestant Churches for me. Free Will is the jugular vein in all of these that he severed using Scripture alone.

Please explain

 

[Jermayn]

[Perhaps Anti-Catholic is too strong a term, but it was a lot shorter than saying, People who seriously disagree with the Catholic Church on Biblical grounds. But I digress.]

A very common argument against Catholicism is the idea that the Catholic Church is unbiblical. A valid concern; however, I truly believe that this idea is a misconception. I've spent quite a bit of time arguing theology here & in real life with my Protestant brothers & sisters, and my Protestant brothers and sisters have spent quite a bit of time arguing theology with me. To date, nobody has changed their mind either way.

This is often due to an understandable lack of thoroughness; the Bible is a very detailed, sometimes complicated, and remarkably long book. A proper understanding of all its implications would take extensive time & effort that many of us just don't have.

So I will direct you to a book written by someone who has put in all that time & effort...an evangelical Protestant, who did a year-long in-depth Bible study to disprove Catholicism.

Long story short...he converted.

The author is Dave Armstrong, and the book is titled A Biblical Defense of Catholicism. It's around 350 of very meticulous Biblical analysis, written to explain how the Catholic Church is the most Biblical Christian Church, and even the only truly Biblical Church.

It's detailed enough that it can be hard to read, especially when Armstrong discusses the original languages used in the Bible. But if you really want to convince me against my Catholic Christian faith, this is my challenge: Read the book (all of it), take careful notes if that's how you do things, find out how the concert got it all wrong, and let me know. Give me a thorough enough explanation for how the Catholic Church isn't Biblically & historically valid, and I promise I will convert. You have to read the book first; I can't defend my faith & explain Scripture as well as Armstrong can, so I direct my apologetics to him (sometimes it's good to let someone more educated do the explaining).

You can find it pretty cheap online (remember to use Amazon Smile if that's your avenue; that gives money to a charity of your choice, with no extra fee to you). And if you don't want to, I understand, it's a lot of reading. But if disproving Catholicism is really what you want to do in this life, then a Catholic Theology major just told you what you need to do to convince him.

May God continue to bless us all!

I'm a protestant and I love the Catholic Church. There's some doctrine I don't agree on, but as far as I know I agree on most of the main points. I certainly don't think Catholics are all going to Hell, but people from all church's that place their faith in Jesus will be saved.

 

[Uber Genius]

The problem with appeals to authorities is that we can turn around and appeal to a really smart guy who argues the opposite points. Further Dave Armstrong's arguments after don't represent the majority view on the texts he cites. There are many controversial issues in the church. But they are all credal Christians. Orthodox have a differing view of justification and the nature and work of the HS than Catholics or Protestants. The Catholics think that Baptism, chucrch membership, confession, communion, are all means of grace (necessary for salvation), where as Protestants would claim that they are ordinal vs Sacramental.

If communion serves a symbolic function rather than a salvific one, we are called to perform it but do not risk loss of salvation if we do not.

My challenge to the readers is to engage arguments one at a time. Focus on a careful reading of the scriptures NOT its surface appearance. Follow sound exegetical and hermeneutical practices.

Dave Armstrong has some good arguments in his book and his show. He has worked hard on this issue. Some of his arguments are more compelling than others.

Baptism as a sacrament is probably his most powerful.

Marian intercession is perhaps the weakest unless one deletes the book of Hebrews.



Be charitable to those that don't hold your view.

There is a center set to Christianity that is known as "Mere Christiaity." Things such as justification and sacramental/ordinal are not part of the credal formula.

 

[zippy2006]

I don't expect most people to do it, just for practical reasons, but if people are serious about anti-Catholicism, I'm giving them the chance.

I agree with @thecolorsblend. When two laymen disagree on a topic, merely citing a professional who falls on one side of the issue isn't likely to resolve anything. This is because 1) neither of the laymen are competent to judge the claims of the professional, 2) the other layman could just as easily cite an opposed professional, and 3) the person citing the 350-page book usually isn't willing to read a 350-page book written by an opposed professional. It is an argument from authority where the authority is not accepted by both parties.

It's also not clear that your challenge is trustworthy. For example, suppose someone on this forum reads Armstrong's book, begins a correspondence with Armstrong, convinces Armstrong that his position is false, welcomes Armstrong back into Protestantism, and then publishes the correspondence and arguments that occasioned the change. Would you convert, as you promised? Probably not, and that's a good thing, because your Catholic faith should not be grounded in Dave Armstrong.

A more constructive approach would be to summarize or quote one of Armstrong's arguments as a way to begin an earnest conversation.

 

[KateforChrist]

A Lamp in the Dark: The Untold History of the Bible - Top Documentary Films

you can google the title and perhaps find another link that will play it

Go to YouTube and search the title. It is available there.

It's part one of a trilogy.

 

[URA]

Also @Unofficial Reverand Alex the book is a bit more in depth than I remember and I want to be fair so give me a bit more time.

No ptoblem, and I appreciate the respect your bringing into this discussion. I wasn't expecting any quick rebuttals to the book anuway; I know I'm asking a big thing, and I appreciate that someone is actually taking me up on it.

Peace & all good things, brother.

 

[URA]

A more constructive approach would be to summarize or quote one of Armstrong's arguments as a way to begin an earnest conversation.

Also @Unofficial Reverand Alex the book is a bit more in depth than I remember and I want to be fair so give me a bit more time.

Thank you for your thoughts; please refer to the Update I put in the original post & let Me know what you think!

May God continue to bless us all!

 

[charsan]

The meme also doesn't apply to Methodists or other Wesleyan denominations either.

or other liturgical Churches

 

[Athanasius377]

Thank you for your thoughts; please refer to the Update I put in the original post & let Me know what you think!

May God continue to bless us all!

I’ve thought a lot about your post and have a counter. I can include the appendix as it’s fairly short but I don’t think I can make a well reasoned argument without including chapter 1. I agree that it would not be well served to get into the usual objections against the RCC. I believe what it comes down to is authority and the nature of the church catholic. I dint think I can adequately make an argument for or against without both components. Would that be alright?

 

[URA]

I’ve thought a lot about your post and have a counter. I can include the appendix as it’s fairly short but I don’t think I can make a well reasoned argument without including chapter 1. I agree that it would not be well served to get into the usual objections against the RCC. I believe what it comes down to is authority and the nature of the church catholic. I dint think I can adequately make an argument for or against without both components. Would that be alright?

That's fine; my addition about Appendix 2 was for sale of narrowing down a section of a long book. Fire away, remember to pray, God guide what we say, now & always!

 

[ewq1938]

The first statement in the picture is true regarding salvation. The bible verse is not regarding salvation but how a church is organized and as many have said already, many churches do have bishops. None of this proves the Roman Catholic church as being right or the only true church nor does it negate any other churches or denominations from being the true church.

 

[tz620q]

The first statement in the picture is true regarding salvation. The bible verse is not regarding salvation but how a church is organized and as many have said already, many churches do have bishops. None of this proves the Roman Catholic church as being right or the only true church nor does it negate any other churches or denominations from being the true church.

The Nicene creed has what are called the four marks of the church in it. The true church is:
1. One (United, no divisions)
2. Holy (Called by God to be his Bride and called to be sacred and to value that which is sacred)
3. Catholic (This is in the universal sense of being not confined to a single region; but worldwide)
4. Apostolic (Started based on Christ's teachings as passed down from the Apostles, fulfilling the mandate in the Bible to have a passing on (succession) of called out leaders that faithfully guard and preach on these teachings).

If you put all of these together you get a church that is united, worldwide, sacred church that can trace its teachings back to the apostles. All of these mandates on the true church are biblical and can show us the characteristics that Christ wanted in his Bride. He did not want a polygamous relationship or a turbulent household ruled by bickering and strife. So I ask of you, has the bible only model caused the church to better embrace these four marks or move farther from them?

 

[Athanasius377]

Arguments to resume. But in the meantime I hope all my Christian brothers and sisters have a merry Christmas.