Husband | Father | 1788 WCF | OPC Layperson | Podcaster
Joined June 2014
- Tweets10.6K
- Following594
- Followers6.8K
- Likes470
More dishonest posting by Mr OP
Protestantism requires that a fairy tale view of "the Bible" be held by its followers. "The Bible is a book given to us by God, in English, which we simply need to read, memorize and follow."
If any discussion begins about the translations, source texts, manuscripts, etc., most Protestants will get very uncomfortable. How can one's knowledge of salvation be dependent on a "book" that doesn't even actually exist as such? Better if the "pastors" just cover all that up and pretend the Bible is something it's not (assuming they even know these things).
Worse, any verse that talks about "Scripture" or "the word of God" is treated as if it refers to the Protestant Bible, making things even more ridiculous.
Believe it or not, Timothy did not grow up reading the Protestant Bible and quoting 2 Timothy 3:15-16 doesn't prove what "pastor" pretends it does.
Protestants agree that faith is not disconnected from obedience…
Narrator:
Little did he know, Protestants don't actually reject this.
Mr. Michael continues to demonstrate an inability to do basic reading or exegesis.
1) These were not random Jews... and they certainly knew Jesus. This was his hometown (vs 54).
Protestants argue that Mary was not a perpetual virgin and refer to this passage as if it is proof:
"Is he not the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother named Mary and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas? Are not his sisters all with us?" (Mt 13:55–56)
Thus, Protestants base their position on questions asked by unbelievers, who had no idea who Jesus was.
They declare (falsely) that Joseph is the father of Jesus. If this passage, then reveals, the true relations of Jesus, why don't Protestants argue that the virgin birth is false because this passage declares Joseph to be his father?
They were asking about a man they did not know, about whom their thoughts were false, and in whom they did not believe.
Matthew wrote this obviously intending to show that these men did not know who Jesus was and, consequently, did not believe in him. Rather than understanding this, Protestants choose to make this passage their proof of the relations of Jesus.
It's not surprising that Protestants, who draw their doctrine of the canon of Scripture from non-Christian Jews, also draw their ideas on on Mary from the same unbelieving Jews in Scripture -- whom we know to NOT know what they are talking about.
Let's boil this down:
Catholics think that the means and methods of devotion which are commanded in Scripture are not sufficient, because they believe that Scripture is not sufficient.
Most of the criticisms made by Protestants against Catholics are attempts to prove that the Protestant confusion is actually a good thing.
Devout Catholics celebrate the Eucharist every day. Protestants would have us believe that going to a sermon-service once a week is better.
Devout Catholics pray the Liturgy of the Hours, which consecrates the entire day to God through psalms, hymns, prayers and readings. Protestants would have us believe that it is better to have no such discipline but to read, pray and sing randomly.
Devout Catholics use paintings and statues of Christ, angels and saints to help raise our thoughts to heavenly things and pray more attentively. Protestants would have us believe that having no such helps and constantly fighting against mental distractions is better.
Devout Catholics recite the Rosary, meditating on key events in the life of Christ, while reciting contemplative prayers asking for graces through those events. Protestants would have us believe that not doing so is better.
The criticisms are just not serious. Protestants attack Catholic devotion and have nothing better to offer in its place.
Many of us were Protestants and know the inconsistency and dryness of the Protestant life. The richness of Catholic devotional life, provided for believers by the Church, can never be exhausted.
Official Catholic teaching conflates sanctification and justification rather than distinguishing them.
You cannot use the distinction between justification and sanctification to make this argument and remain consistent with Papal theology.
Nothing about the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory contradicts the teaching that we are saved by the grace of God through Christ. It is simply a question of how the sanctification process works. Protestant objections are almost always based on misrepresentations of the Church's teaching or meaningless arguments that Catholic doctrine does not follow Protestant teaching.
This guy's willful misrepresentation is beginning to broach on high handed sin.
He knows what he's doing, and he can pray as many Hail Marys as his idolatrous priest assigns him, but unless he repents and trusts in the finished work of Christ, he too will perish. (Luke 13:3)
Protestants are telling me that Protestants don't teach that Scripture is easy to understand.
Yes, it may be true that after 500 years of division and confusion, Protestants are admitting that telling every layman he can study the Bible for himself was a bad idea, but the reality is that this was fundamental argued by the Reformers.
It was stated explicitly in the Westminster Confession:
"All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed, for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them."
It was explicitly taught that everyone can save himself by reading the Bible for himself. It was the Catholic Church that told Protestants this was not true.
