There is no evidence in the Word of God ! You are the people offering false evidence. God is the same yesterdays, today and tomorrow. He condemned Israel for introducing the worship of false gods and goddesses or communicating with the dead. he has not changed Hid mind ! He will deal with the Catholic Church in His own way and in His own time. k
@mikekayanderson408 are you a paid troll or is there just some unhealthy desire in trying to be right. You certainly have a lot of energy in bashing Catholicism. If you don't want to engage with a respectful and meaningful conversation with others who you don't agree with , then can I suggest you take Christ's advice, shake the dust off your feet and run off somewhere else. God bless.
@@pete8684 Maybe there are other comments that were deleted? I only see one comment from @mikekayanderson and it was just a pretty standard disagreement. I'm not sure why the harsh statements of take his meds and being a troll?
I think Catholic apologists have a far easier time countering the arguments of anti-Catholics because whenever you read scripture, the Fathers, or the facts or history, it always points to the truth of Christ’s one true Church.
@@cba4389there is a difference between God communicating and man misinterpreting it to the tune of 20 thousand disparate and often conflicting denominations..
@@Danaluni59 Did God ever claim man was perfect? How do you make this claim that contradicts God's word? God told us the answer- the Holy Spirit. Jesus also clearly told us that not all that claim his name are known by him. So your complaint is that man has proved God right. Odd complaint.
@@Danaluni59 The Bible tells us all scripture points to Jesus, but you have twisted it into all points to the catholic church. The replacement of God never stops and is easy once you replace God's word with man's. catholicism is gnosticism with corrupt man as the gatekeepers. Both heresy, but cathlicism takes the heresy even further.
When are Orthodox Christians (I'm Orthodox) and Roman Catholics going to stop fawning over Ortlund because "he's so very charitable and irenic?" He admits freely in one of his blog posts that we've "lost the Gospel." Stop treating grown men with kid's gloves. I'm not accusing you of doing this, but it's a running theme among RC/Ortho apologists. Don't be afraid to tell people the truth, even if it rubs them the wrong way. This is especially true for someone who seems bent on dragging people out of the Church and into the chaos of Protestantism. I don't want to call him intellectually dishonest, but he distorts and misrepresents the truth far too often.
“Truth Unites.” I'm noticing a pattern where Orthodox and Catholics are coming together and putting aside their differences to address the pervasive issue of Protestantism.
He's soft spoken and this fools people that don't know the faith. This is how the evil one tempts people into sin and error. The early church fathers called a spade a spade. A protestant is a protestant because of their pride. Cain worshipped the way he wanted to worship.
This has been the key question. But thats how Satan operates: sow confusion and obscurity. So in one sense, the response is necessary; cos he "unintentionally" deceives many. In another sense, the attention given to his so-called irenic and soft-spoken seems to subtly endorse him, and his misinformation; as he always doubles down even when corrected. The latter does not surprise me, considering the appeal to 'I", my authority, that defines Protestantism.
In a previous debate with Trent Horn, Gavin relates that if he lost the freedom of holding his protestant position that it would break his heart. As smart as he obviously is, I think this points to the real problem with their version of protest to be true, they are emotionally attached to it.
It's hard because so much of religious identity is ethnic. I had to break away from 500 years of family history, tank my chances of ever being buried in the family grave yard with hundreds of ancestors, and become the family black sheep, all to return to His Church. It hurts. I don't blame him. I just pray for him.
That's why he is so obsessed. He didn't even consider the impact of Islam, who claims to respect Mary and Jesus, and the stronger Marian devotions of the Christians in the Middle Ages. If you look at what Islam has to say about both, you understand why the Angelus, for example, was instituted. We need to look at the context in history, and see why. At Lepanto the army asked for the intercession of Our Lady, the New Ark of the Covenant, they were in clear disadvantage, yet they won. There is so much to say about it. They always quote "one mediator", yet they don't look at the context (the epistle starts with an exhortation to intercession and petition..!!) Nor the meaning of the sentence. Btw I like that he cited the deuterocanon: it's VERY Christocentric and the writing style is on par with the New Testament.
Yes the faith was long ago delivered to the saints by Jesus by the apostles in the New Testament writings!, But it is you the Catholics who have rejected the truth and now not much is left of the truth of the Word of God and you have rejected the teaching of the Bible that the blood of Christ saves totally once for all and you now have the heresy of trying to add to his work by sacraments, Mary, priests, and daily resacrificing of Christ in your ungodly rituals if the mass. And by the way the saints means the believers of the day to whom the apostles were preaching. Not some supposedly special people canonised by the pope!,, k @trollpatrol7215
Ortland is a straw man. He likes to say “I don’t see” as though that proves his point. He proof texts the early church fathers like he proof texts scripture. He doesn’t see what he doesn’t want to see. We know for sure that Jesus didn't establish any of the thousands of Luther, Zwingli or Calvin inspired denominations. They are all conceived by men! Show me where Jesus or the inspired authors said in the Bible that in the 16th century I will raise up men to restore my Church because I planned to let the Church I established fail. Oh that's right Jesus didn't, he said just the opposite, Mat 16:18-19, “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Of course everyone in heaven intercedes for the saints on earth. Because everyone in heaven loves what God loves. If they didn’t they would be in heaven.
We all know you meant to write "If they didn't they would NOT be in Heaven." And you are right -- there is nothing but Love in Heaven -- which is why I am going to confession today!
''Of course everyone in heaven intercedes for the saints on earth.'' The only saints in heaven today are Enoch, Moses, Elijah and those who were resurrected with Christ. They're living, breathing human beings. The dead are not in heaven. There aren't dead people's ghosts floating about the throne of God. God is a God of the living, not the dead.
@@danielcristancho3524. How do you reconcile your view with Mark 12:27 “He is not the God of the dead, but of the living “ and Luke 23:43 “Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”? If those destined for heaven are waiting for the resurrection, where are they now? For me the above two quotes from scripture explicitly state that at the death of our bodies we experience judgment and believers go to heaven. If we die and not in the presence of God, where are we? Hell?
@@johnsimmons5951 ''If those destined for heaven are waiting for the resurrection, where are they now?'' In the grave, asleep, just like Jesus described a dead Lazarus. If Lazarus had been judged and gone to heaven, it would have been cruel and unfair of Christ to pull him out of heaven to live on this planet and die again. By the way, Lazarus would have told us what happened at death and what he experienced during death because he was actually dead (not an NDE), except he doesn't say a word. ''For me the above two quotes from scripture explicitly state that at the death of our bodies we experience judgment'' Then every person is judged TWICE because the bible clearly states there is a day when God will judge the nations in righteousness. Except, being judged twice is not only absurd, it's not biblical.
"All generations will call me blessed". Isn't this in the Bible? While the push back among some Protestants is to reduce her to a _simple container._ Something they would not do for their own mother. Hardly calling her Blessed. Another thing in the Bible is. "How is it that the _Mother_ of my Lord comes to visit me?" Whose mother is she? Why is Elizabeth surprised that the *simple container* of her *God* has come to visit her?
What I know is this: I wanted a rosary and God provided one for me. I hesitantly tried praying with it and discovered it made me closer to God. Now I go no where without it.
@@mikekayanderson408Mary was Jesus's first and best disciple. She gave the Rosary to St. Dominic. The Rosary is about meditating on the life of Jesus. Praying the Rosary defeated the Muslims in the Battle of Lepanto. Oh it's definitely Christian
@@iphidamasfilms1245 "I'm just saying you guys are all pagan idolaters and the true Christian faith was nearly wiped out for at least 1000 years until some psychos who mostly didn't think man has any meaningful free will rediscovered it." That most of these men would likely call Gavin himself a heretic is somehow not a problem.
Just thought I would throw this one out here as well, I think it is VERY informative that a PAGAN is complaining about what Christians are doing in regards to both the veneration of relics AND in asking the saints to intercede for us and saying that IT IS NOT PAGANISM. This is from, Eunapius of Sardis, he wrote in the late 300's. He’s pagan, complaining about Christians: "For they collected the bones and skulls of criminals who had been put to death for numerous crimes, made them out to be gods, and thought that they became better by defiling themselves at their graves! “Martyrs,” the dead men were called, and ministers of a sort, and ambassadors with the gods, to carry men’s prayers".
Prayer can be asking God for something. Prayer can also be worship when speak out about all God’ s glorious attributes to Him and praise Him for who He is and all the wonders He has performed. That is worshipping Him. Among other things. We worship him is the reading of His word. We worship Him in hymns. k
@@mikekayanderson408 Basically, worship and prayer are historically the same thing. Adoratio, translated as worship in English speaking catholic customs, literally means "the act of praying to", from ad (towards) orare (to pray, from os, "mouth" and a verbal ending) and atio (the state or action of). Catholic adoration includes genuflect, bowing, crossing, kneeling, beating the breast, all of which are manual/gestural prayers. The act of sitting for the readings and reciting the psalms and singing hymns is also part of the corporate prayers. The act of asking for is rogare or votare, the former of which gives rogatives and the word interrogation, the latter gives use votive candles and "devotional practices". So there's two linguistic problems with the entire argument being had: the conflation of adoration and devotion, and the confusion between prayer and worship, largely because we are speaking English instead of Latin.
There is going to be disagreement among us. False doctrine does exist, but that doesn't mean we cannot be nice when we debate. Gavin is not in bad faith when he advocates for Protestantism and I am sure many Catholic apologists are not either. It is good to flesh out bad ideas through debate and arguments but why does that process have to be ugly?
How is it ugly to point out the damage he does by attacking Catholic teachings?? I have no doubt many protestants considering Catholicism have been dissuaded by him, and some Catholics have become protestant because of him.
I was a baptist and Gavin (who is Baptist) talked me out of it into Lutheranism, and then by his insistence that he was following sola scriptura pushed me into Catholicism. Gavin has an internally incoherent theology, and I really do think he is faithful following sola scriptura. I don’t think anyone could have more thoroughly debunked Protestantism than a well thought out Protestant making the case for his beliefs.
Those insinuations of paganism (in the four Apostolic Churches) by Protestants are utterly ridiculous and an integral part of their ideological apparatuses.
Thanks for unpacking the Origen quote. I already knew that the Augustine one was out of context because he was clear that we invoke the martyrs to pray for us.
@@saintejeannedarc9460 Solid question. Yes I do: “At the Lord’s table we do not commemorate martyrs in the same way that we do others who rest in peace so as to pray for them, but rather that they may pray for us that we may follow in their footsteps” (Homilies on John 84)". So it specifically mentions that we invoke the martyrs during the liturgy (so not just a private practice) so as to ask for their prayers.
“To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.” ― St. Thomas Aquinas The two most documented miracles in modern day were Marian apparitions: Fatima 1917 and the Lady of Zeitoun 1968. Over 250,000 eyewitnesses in one day saw Mary on the dome of Saint Mary's Church in Zeitoun. Millions converted to Christianity because Mary points them to Christ. Mary illuminates Christ and his love for us. I would like to know if Protestants would even believe in these miracles even if there is overwhelming evidence?
@mikekayanderson408 It's the Catholics that are constantly having to defend the one true church Jesus started. His church is still being persecuted today.
Gavin is so dependent on himself….. He is full of I, me, my, I’m… myself. Does he know he’s just making these things up and also full of assumptions about history.
These gratuitous insinuations of pagan influences in the early Church sound like a vile low blow to me. Especially if coming from Protestant apologists that are supposedly considered “very thoughtful.” The same church that canonized the New Testament for Protestants to be able to scream, “Sola Scriptura!”, accused of being corrupted by paganism. Very very sad.
Gavin is rhetorically charitable, and "nice", but outside of his delivery, his arguments are usually as substantially profound as the firebrand evangelicals yelling at us for our pagan practices.
@@Leo-uq6jp agreed. I grant him the fact he is charitable in his approach. But after a while you start wondering if it is just a facade to attract more viewers with no real intention to engage in serious conversation.
@@MB-zn9vg It's definitely not hatred of the church. Pastors like Gavin make their love for Catholic obvious. He sees the RCC as an extension of his church. He recognizes there is a universal, small c, catholic church that we are all part of. He looks to correct things he thinks are in error. Just as Joe or Trent will do a rebuttal, it's for love of brethren and the truth, not of hatred.
Joe's legal background is apparent in his ironclad defensive case for Marian and saintly devotion. Masterful use of all the evidence and cross-examination, sharp and persuasive arguments, and a really beautiful, touching closing. A wonderful lawyer-apologist for God and His Church. The jury votes "not guilty"!
@@duncescotus2342 As hard as it is to believe, even lawyers can make it to heaven, if St. Thomas More is any indication, lol. Jesus should have used the lawyer instead of the rich man in his eye of the needle simile.
There’s no Christology without Maryology. Most of us Catholics are aware that any Maryology that doesn’t lead to Christ is NOT Christianity as per her last words….( Do whatever He tells you)
Respect and honor are not the problem. I also respect and honor for Mary because of her special role. But when you make her Queen of heaven, immaculately conceived, sinless, assumed into heaven and co mediator and co redeemer with our Lord Jesus Christ, you've crossed a line.
I find that, in their zeal to deny Catholic teaching, Protestsnts unknowingly denegrate both the Saints and our Lord Himself. That we can't trust parables for theology is a whole new argument to me. Much worse than just saying the Saints are 'dead.'
parables were stories used by Our Lord to demonstrate a spiritual truth. For teaching yes. But if you are trying to say the rich man in hell is a truth that we can pray to someone other than God the Father through Jesus by the power or leading of the Holy Spirit then you are totally wrong. The teaching is that the rich man thought he was going to heaven but because he ignored God he went to hell. The poor man was a man of faith and went to heaven. The rich man discovered the error of his ways and wanted to warn his family and friend but could NOT do so because he was dead and there was no way to communicate with them. Jesus even said if someone did rise from the dead people would not believe because they are so deaf and sinful. Jesus did rise from the dead and millions do not believe what he gas to say ! So that was also part of the teaching. I wonder how many popes are wishing the could come back and warn the R C Church of its folly! K
@@mikekayanderson408the communication goes one way. The Saints are asked for their prayers only. Anything else would be divination/necromancy and is explicitly forbidden in the scriptures.
@@mikekayanderson408 What an uncharitable thing to say. By what prophetic power do you judge that deceased popes wish they could warn the Church of "it's folly"? Seems terribly presumptous.
You don't merely devote Mary. I have witnessed catholics crying in tears and prostrating to statues of Mary. They pray directly to Mary. There are those who believe in their hearts, and several who would kill to have it in the official canon, that she is the co-redemptrix. Catholics are like trans people. They just say they're doing something else and then they expect the rest of us to believe they're doing something else instead. No. You worship Mary. You pretend you don't by calling it something different. But a man is still a man even if he wears a dress, and you prostrating the ground and praying to Mary without even mentioning Christ's name is worshipping Mary whether you call it that or not.
@@sameash3153 unless God has gifted you Christs ability to read a persons heart to know their intent I suggest you be very careful by sining through bearing false witness about others you have no ability to say their actual intent! If Catholics tell you they are not worshiping Mother Mary then they are not - again you can’t claim otherwise unless you can read their heart!
@@irishandscottish1829 Wow, that is exactly how trans people think! They use this exact same reasoning! Thank you for the illustration. They say stuff like "only trans people can say who they are, who are you to tell a trans person what they say about themselves isn't true?" Well I will say that their actions and revealed preferences speak much louder than their self-deluded admissions of statements of faith. I cannot bear false witness by saying that a person is mistaken about what they are doing. They are not lying, they are confused. Now, our church actually does have Marian devotions. We have a shrine with votive candles and a statue of Our Lady of Walsingham. We pray the rosary before mass. We have the Angelus in our prayerbook. Now, what is the objective difference between Anglican devotion to Mary and Catholic worship of Mary? How can I prove that one is devotion and the other is worship? Because you guys pray TO Mary. We pray to God to look with favor upon the Queen of Heaven. That is the difference. Mary is never on equal footing with God, she is a creature and is therefore subordinate. Though the dogma of co-redemptrix has not been approved (YET), the mere fact that it was ever proposed and the fact that many catholics personally believe it in their heart shows that they do believe Mary is not only an object of devotion, but one of central worship. Lastly, numbers don't lie. Catholics in central America pray to Mary more often than they pray to Christ.
While I appreciate that Gavin is more even-keeled and less polemic than many of the other prominent youtube protestants, he's no less ruinous to souls in the long run. Poison administered "charitably" is still poison.
He's a better looking and better demeanored James White type. To your point, both are dangerous. Scripture holds those in preaching authority to a higher standard. One in such authority should be very careful with claims, and when making one, show convincing evidence that their interpretation is right. The pagan corruption theory, unsupported with any evidence, should give all protestants pause as to who it is they are listening too.
You're contradicting yourself. How can that which is good be bad? Either call the fruit good (even-keeled and irenic dialogue) and the tree good (a brother of the holy Christian faith), or the tree bad (Protestantism) and the fruit bad (everything done by a Protestant). You can't have it both ways. I encourage you to rethink your own thoughts, following your own threads to a more logical conclusion. Is it not more likely that we are all wrong to some extent, and yet all unified on one Christian faith, Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant, lacking the unity which He always intended, but will one day come: "That all of you would be one, so the world might believe." Love to you, your family, with all the graces of the Holy Spirit, with revelation, joy, mercy, power and fellowship in the Gospel, good works which he appointed for us to walk in, and every good and perfect gift, according to this Passover promise: "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved, you and your house."
@@duncescotus2342There's only one Lord, one faith and one baptism. The Holy Spirit, who is the spirit of truth, is more than capable of prompting those in false religions (i.e. Protestants and Eastern Heterodox) to question their false beliefs and leading them to the true religion. Why doesn't God do that though? Because He upholds and sustains creation from moment to moment and searches the hearts of all men and knows who is sincere and who is not. He knows who has a humble and submissive disposition to God and the things of God. Tell the average Protestant that brith control is a serious moral evil and that Christians are forbidden to use it and watch how they react. They will look at you like you're crazy. And when you explain why it's wrong and provide evidence, both scriptural and historical, they will go into denial mode. That's just one example but there are many more. God will not bestow grace upon people He knows lack true saving faith and who refuse to submit to the requirements of Christian belief and practice. That's why He allows heretical sects to exist and leaves people to wallow in ignorance and confusion. It's the just punishment for sin. Read Corinthians 1:11-19
@@duncescotus2342 Sorry, but your comment makes almost no sense. - It's not a contradiction to say that his presentation or method of delivering his message is less incendiary than those who call Catholics pagans or idolaters outright, or go as far as to call them un-Christian, or who do so in an aggressive manner. That's just an observation regarding his style. If anything, I think it may be more dangerous because it's deceptive in its nature. - The fruit is obviously bad, I called it poisonous. - I don't need to rethink anything. My conclusion that his message is poison is the result of my considerations about Christianity over the course of my lifetime. I'm not changing that for RandomRU-vidGuy420's message of effeminate moral equivalence. - Even if it were the case that all of us have some defects in our understanding of the truth, I don't have to accept falsehoods under the guise of "getting along" for some nebulous "unification." We can't be unified if we all believe different things and all have different approximations to the truth. If we're all to be one, then allowing people to persist in error, separated from the true Church would not be acceptable. Leading people away from the truth would be even worse. - Appreciate the blessing. God bless you and your family likewise.
@harleymann2086 Brother Ortlund has almost all the Evangelical blind spots, which makes his ability to cross boundaries all the more remarkable. At least, I would argue that.
Ou need our prayers and for God to do a spiritual work of regeneration in you to bring you to repentance and a true saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. k @@shadowsteppah
@@willtheperson7224how exactly is he dishonest? I would like specifics. I get frustrated with Ortlund but I do find him to be an honest actor. He seems to regularly attempt to understand what the Church teaches as well as reflect it. Does he totally understand it, definitely not. But I do see an honest attempt. We should pray for him that his continued research will inspire an aha moment for him. I think your interpretation of him is uncharitable and flirts with the line of bearing false witness. (I’m not saying you committed that sin, but I do think that is dancing on the line)
I find it funny how they are offended by "Outside the Church there is no salvation" and demand we be inclusive yet they label our worship and our veneration as "Pagan"
It is funny. It's even funnier when they insist that Faith alone and imputed righteousness is the only thing that saves and unless one adobts that man-made tradition, they have no salvation.
Yup. What I find more funnier is when they say a saved person is always saved but if that person stumble and fall midway, then he's not saved to begin with. It's easier for the stumbled to repent and go back to His ways than to believe that he was not saved in the first place.
Outside the Church means the church of Christ. The church is made up of those regenerated by God. Born again. Called by God. Community of the chosen or elect. Church is not a group of people doing religious things and calling themselves Christian’s! It is the called out ones. The ones separated by God and truly belonging to God. But even this genuine church does not save anyone. God alone saves people and ADDS them to His church The real church is called by God to preach the true Gospel so that unbelievers hear it - but it is God Ali e that saves. The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation. God decided who he will mercy on and who He will save. So this should tell you that the sacrament of baptism does not save or bring any kind of forgiveness as you priests tell you. They have no power and neither does the water. None of the added extra sacraments save. So stop relying or depending on them. There are millions of people who have sat inside church buildings and been baptised and I mean in all denominations and die in their sin and go to hell. No denomination saves you. Onetime a sovereign gracious act of God. K
@@mikekayanderson408 for you to deny the importance of Baptism means you deny Scripture… *The Gospels report:* •Jesus was baptised by John the Baptist in the Jordan River (Matt. 3:13-17; Mark 1:9-11; Luke 3:21-22). Jesus modeled the reception of baptism. Jesus saw the spiritual value of baptism for himself and, in doing so, showed that those who believe in him should also be baptised. •The Gospel of John tells us about John the Baptist declaring Jesus as the Lamb of God “And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.” (John 1:32-34 KJV) *The Gospels also tell us:* “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mark 16:16 KJV) “Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5 KJV) This prefigured Baptism we are told saves: “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us….” (1 Peter 3:21 KJV) *Jesus’ baptism ministry - what do the Gospels tell us* “After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized” (John 3:22 KJV) “When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,” (John 4:1 KJV) “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:” (Matt. 3:11 KJV) *Jesus instituted the Sacrament of baptism before His Ascension when He instructed His disciples:* “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:” (Matt. 28:19 KJV) Baptism held such an important place in the spiritual life of the early Church that John the Evangelist wove baptismal imagery into the encounter between Jesus and Peter at the Sea of Tiberias. When St. Peter saw Jesus, “he girt his fisher's coat unto him, (for he was naked,)” which represents a baptismal garment, and he “and did cast himself into the sea.” which represents the waters of baptism. (John 21:7 KJV) When St. Peter said “Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee.” (John 21:15 KJV) he was making a profession of faith, which is equivalent to baptismal promises. The disciples took Jesus’ commissioning to heart and began a vigorous baptismal ministry. *St. Peter* St. Peter invited his listeners to repent and be baptised: “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call….. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.” (Acts 2:38-39; 41 KJV) St. Peter explained that those who are baptised would be forgiven of their sins and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, and: “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.” (Acts 2:41 KJV) St. Peter also baptised Cornelius and a number of others in Joppa: “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.” (Acts 10:48 KJV) *St. Philip* Likewise, St. Philip went on a missionary journey to Samaria: “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.” (Acts 8:12 KJV) He also baptised Simon the magician: “Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.” (Acts 8:13 KJV) Another time, as St. Philip was traveling along the road from Jerusalem to Gaza, he came upon an Ethiopian court official, and after explaining the Scriptures to him: “And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.” (Acts 8:38 KJV) *St. Paul* St. Paul was baptised by Ananias after his conversion: “And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.” (Acts 9:18 KJV) When St. Paul arrived in Greece, he first preached in Philippi, and a woman named Lydia and her entire household were baptised: “And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul. And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us. (Acts 16:14-15 KJV) Later, St. Paul was imprisoned there, and after his miraculous release, he baptised the jailer and his family: “And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.” (Acts 16:33 KJV) When St. Paul went to Corinth, he baptised Crispus and many other Corinthians: “And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.” (Acts 18:8 KJV) St. Paul baptised many more in Ephesus: “And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Acts 19:1-5 KJV) After the Jews seizing St. Paul in the Temple and as he was about to be killed by the Jews the chief captain took soldiers with him to the area. After St. Paul into custody on arrival to the stairs of the castle St. Paul asked to be allowed to speak to the Jews following them. He recounted his conversion to them: “And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” (Acts 22:16 KJV) When writing to the Romans St. Paul teaches them the promises of baptism: “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life….. Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” (Romans 6:3-4; 6 KJV) When writing to the Corinthians St. Paul says: “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” (1 Corinthians 12:13 KJV) When St. Paul writes to the Galatians he says: “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:27-28 KJV) When St. Paul writes to the Colossians he says: “In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;” (Colossians 2:11-13 KJV) When St. Paul writes to Titus he says: “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.” (Titus 3:5-7 KJV)
Jeremiah 9:23 This is what the LORD says: "Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, nor the strong man in his strength, nor the wealthy man in his riches. You think you are so WISE, Uriel? Who are you boasting in because it is not God.
@@krisgangwer3796 Where did I say anything about myself? I did not convert from Protestantism to Catholicism. Mind you, I did convert from NO Catholicism to Catholicism...
@@UrielAngeli147 Can you please write to show the intelligence you claim? No, I am not mad, but will rebuke your foolishness. You can call me whatever you please, because that is a reflection on you, not me.
This settles it. Joe, you're my favorite Catholic apologist, hands down. I love the other guys at Catholic Answers and the Steubenville crowd, but your graciousness and intellect are a gift to us all -- a beautiful charism. Praise God!
that tobit to revelation detail is really powerful. I would like to hear the arguments to counter this. If it's know where else in the bible are Protestants going to appeal to Tradition?
Jesus proclaimed that he was God. Catholics believe Jesus is God and that the Holy Spirit is God. We all believe in the trinity, so it's rather a mute point.
NO. You have turned Mary into something she is not. Practically put her on the same level as God! You are the reprobates and need bible believing Christians to pray for your souls. K
@@KristiLEvans1 When muslims love and revere the mother of God more than protestants- then you should realize how far off you protestants are from the truth on this point.
Joe is such a good teacher. My jaw dropped when i heard that the scholars moved the date forward on that papyrus just because of personal feelings rather than going with the evidence. Joe did a great job of pointing out Gavin's technique of highlighting the church fathers when they sound protestant and ignoring them when they sound catholic. I hope Gavins audience listens to this podcast, most of them seem to be in the same protestant fantasy land where the early church was made up of reformed baptists.
Being fair, Catholics also highlight the church fathers when they sound catholic and ignore them when they sound protestant. The difference is that Gavin can appeal to the higher authority of the Scripture to support ignoring the fathers, but the catholic church cannot.
@christopherneedham9584 I would say that is an unfair assertion. Usually when a catholic apologist defends a church father of the accusation of being protestant, they read out the entire quote and put it in context like Joe did. Recently on the catechuman channel, he responds to Jeff Durbin who does the exact same thing with augustine. Worth a watch.... on the gospel simplicity channel, patristic pillars, catholic truth, you'll find the same kinds of examples. Recently someone commented on one of my posts about clement being a proponent of sola fide yet in the same sermon clement talks about all sorts of other things that play a part in salvation. It's like finding a chef that's writing a book about donuts without giving you an exact recipe. You'll find places in the book where he says you need flour, places where he may say you need sugar and oil as well. The protestant reads the part in the book that talks about flower and adds the word 'alone' to it. See right here it says flour... nothing about sugar and oil. Ah but here's the part of the book that says flour alone is not enough to make a donut. So then you get a bunch of people looking for parts of the book that just say flour, ignore the parts that say the other ingredients and then cherry pick everything all the way down looking for places that say flour and ignoring anything that says anything else that goes into a donut. I cannot think of a single example of a place where the catholic ignores a church father's position because it sounds protestant. Augustine says that scripture is self revelatory meaning you can deduce whether a book is scripture just by reading it. He thought the dueterocanon was scripture based on this principle.... is his principle wrong? Is scripture so self evident that you don't need a magisterium to give you a canon as the the protestants say? If so how could he have gotten 7 books wrong using this method? How many books are you allowed to get wrong with this method before you damage your deposit of faith? As a catholic I have no problem agreeing with augustine that the Canon was right and I'm at liberty to disagree with him on how he arrived at that conclusion. The councils were guided by the spirit to ensure the Canon is infallible. They certainly weren't self evident to everyone because we have tons of evidence that there was a lot of debate on which books were scripture. Augustine was likely a proficient scribe and theologian of his time but could the same be said of everyone? I hope you can see that I'm trying to demonstrate a fair and objective view of st augustine. Using the Canon as a fulcrum to test whether he's more catholic or protestant. You have to look at all angles to get a clear view. I hope this demonstrates for you how a catholic can look at the church fathers in an objective way. Augustine on infant baptism is another great example.... augustine admits that scripture is all but silent on the topic and so it is right and just to accept the apolostolic tradition passed down by the councils. That the church should be the authority on matters that scripture isn't clear on. The typical protestant view is augustine was a sola scriptura guy but how could this be if he trusts in the church's authority on matters of salvation? Perhaps the catholic view of scripture is higher than protestants expect or augustine's view of scripture wasn't as high as protestants like to assert. Personally I love scripture and reject sola scriptura as a means of defending it from people that twist it to their own theologies. Can we both agree that there is a truth to scripture and that it's not just a buildabear shop where you can just make up your own jesus bear and dress him with whatever doctrine you can squeeze out of scripture?
Speaking of the deuterocanonical books talking about the intercession of the saints there’s another interesting passage in Baruch. Baruch 3:4 “O Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, hear now the prayer of the dead of Israel, and of their children, that have sinned before thee, and have not hearkened to the voice of the Lord their God, wherefore evils have cleaved fast to us.”
@@LiliGoof-gh4ch You guys are just plain crazy. So wanting to pray only to God is heresy now, and blasphemy? I don't want an answer, you've already provided your view. These comments are terrible places. Being called a blasphemer for believing that prayer belongs only to God is just unhinged, as well as vicious. That's quite the fruit you're producing w/ your form of prayer. Speaking of strawmen, I never said your praying to saints was pagan or idolatrous.
As a new Catholic still learning, I've come to understand the communion of saints this way. It's not just MY relationship with God; it's OUR relationship with God. Love for God, love for others, and love for self all go together. So prayers TO God and prayers FOR one another and TO God THROUGH one another makes sense. I also see more clearly that the early church did not look only to the written text of scripture for truth and guidance. They looked to the teachings of the apostles which includes the writings but more. Scripture itself alludes to things believed but are not explained and expounded in the text. Paul explicitly tells his audience to hold fast to what was handed down to them whether by word of mouth or letter. Moderns are more trusting of writing because its more difficult to get away with alteration compared to oral tradition. But its not like it isn't plenty possible for a text to be altered over time just like oral tradition. Just like protestants place unwavering faith in divine preservation of the written tradition, Catholics place unwavering faith in divine preservation of the whole tradition.
You hit the nail on the head. How can one say that they love God and yet not love their neighbor. God does not need us to participate, yet he asks us to do exactly that. He is building a family. We are allowed to participate in salvation. Not because we’re needed, but because we need it. Evangelicals often act as if God does not allow us to participate in his life. This is not at all true. He incorporates us in his life by having us participate in the lives of others.
You are never in danger of "overstaying your welcome," Joe. I've really just started diving into Catholic theology, and I could (and have) listen to you talk for hours. Thank you for your insights and thoughtful explanations. God bless you!
Why are you all so fixated on Mary. The Bible doesn't say anything about this We acknowledge her past life in bringing forth Jesus and her role in asking him for help during the wedding in Cana but she has nothing to do with salvation for man personal with Us we all have to know and live for God same as she. Catholic Church has another Mary......and keeping Hailing her on and on over and over. God doesn't hear prayers said to his UN THE PAST MOM
@@TriciaPerry-ef7bi JESUS is the center focus of the catholic faith, but MARY holds a place of honour, and that is valid and biblical: 👉 LUKE 1:48 "All generations will call her blessed. 👉And the Old testament shows us that the Mother of the king holds a place of honour and sits on his rioght hand side as queen: ● 1 KINGS 2:20: Then she said, “I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me.” And the king said to her, “Make your request, my mother, for I will not refuse you.” (Jesus is the Greatest King and he also honours his mother's requests) Which church calls her blessed as LUKE 1:48 tells us we should? catholic or protestant? which church either removes her completely, pretending she is not a part of the gospel, or they belittle her? catholic or protestant? why don't y'all stop scrutinizing the FIRST CHRISTIANS who existed long befor PROTEST-antism and start looking at your own flaws instead?
@@TriciaPerry-ef7bi ➔ All the following Catholic things (and more that I could have included) that Protestants attack are in the Bible: Holy images are BIBLICAL and are not "Idols" .... ➔ INTERCESSION OF MARY & THE SAINTS, ➔ CARVED IMAGES IN THE TEMPLE OF THE LORD, ➔ HONOURING MARY, ➔ THE QUEENSHIP & ASSUMPTION OF MARY, ➔ MARY'S STATE OF PURITY ➔ AND BOWING AS A SIGN OF HONOUR AND RESPECT: (All copied from the protestant version of the bible by Cynthia X) ➔ Including proof that saints are not dead, They are sharing in eternal life with Christ. ➔ Saints are biblical. The protestant "reformers" are not. ➨ INTERCESSION OF MARY & THE SAINTS IN THE BIBLE ...INCLUDING BIBLICAL PROOF that SAINTS ARE NOT AMONG THE DEAD: The Protestant claim that we are forbidden to speak to / pray to Mary and the saints is NOWHERE in the Bible. In fact, the following scriptures were copied (by me) directly from the Protestant version of the Bible: ... ➨INTERCESSION of a holy person on our behalf: ● JOB 42:8 8 Now therefore take seven bulls and seven rams, and GO TO MY SERVANT JOB, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and MY SERVANT Job SHALL PRAY FOR YOU, FOR I WILL ACCEPT HIS PRAYER NOT TO DEAL WITH YOU ACCORDING TO YOUR FOLLY; for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has. ➨INTERCESSION of MARY: ● JOHN 2:1 At the wedding feast at Cana, it was Mary who asked Jesus to help the wedding party. ➨The KING Honours his mother's request: ● 1 KINGS 2:20: Then she said, “I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me.” And the king said to her, “Make your request, my mother, for I will not refuse you.” (Jesus is the Greatest King and he also honours his mother's requests) ➨INTERCESSION OF THE SAINTS: ● REV 5:8 The prayers of the Saints are offered to Jesus the lamb. SAINTS ALSO WORKED MIRACLES: ➨ JOHN 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. ➨ PAUL RAISES A MAN FROM THE DEAD: ● ACTS 20:7-12 9 And there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep: and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead. 10 And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing him said, Trouble not yourselves; for his life is in him.20: ● MARK 6:12-13... 12 They went out and preached that people should repent. 13 They drove out many demons and anointed many sick people with oil and healed them. ● ACTS 19:12 The Handkerchief of Paul healed sick people: 12 so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them. ● ACTS 5:15 The shadow of Peter healed the sick: so that they brought the sick out into the streets and laid them on beds and couches, that at least the shadow of Peter passing by might fall on some of them. ➨SAINTS ARE NOT AMONG THE DEAD: AND THEIR INTERCESSION IS BIBLICAL: They share in the ressurrection of Jesus: (Protestants attack Biblical saints while they follow dead reformers) ● MATTHEW 27: 52 -53: When Jesus was raised from the dead Many were raised up with him. 53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. ● LUKE 23 v 39-43...Jesus told the good thief "today you will be with me in paradise" ● REV 19 v 14...when Jesus returns he will be accompanied by his heavenly armies of saints. ● 2 COR 5 v 8...Paul tells us that to be absent with the body is to be with the Lord. ● JOHN 11 v 25-26...Jesus said I am the ressurrection and the life, he who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives, believing in me will never die. ● LUKE 1619-30 The story of the rich man and Lazarus show The Rich man, Lazarus and Abraham, all concious and interacting with each other even though they have physically died. ● LUKE 9:30-31 And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elias: 31 Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem. (Moses & Elijah were alive, and were yalking with Jesus) ● REV 6:10 The souls of the martyrs are before the throne of God, crying out for justice. (they are conscious and actively petitioning God) ● HEB 12:1-3 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, ● MATT 17:1-13 ...At the Transfiguration of Jesus, he is seen speaking to Moses and Elijah, further showing that Holy ones of God are not among the dead. ● JUDE 1:14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints ➨HONOURING MARY AND MARIAN DOCTRINES IN THE IBLE: ➨THE QUEENSHIP AND ASSUMPTION OF MARY IN THE BIBLE: ● REV 12:1 A great sign appeared in the heavens, a woman clothed with thge sun, themoon under her feet and on her head a CROWN (signifying a Queen) of 12 stars. REV 12 tells us the wiman who aooears in the heavens is the woman who gives birth to the male child who will rule the nations. (Mary) ➨ MARY'S STATE OF PURITY ● LUKE 1:24-48 The Angel Gabriel greeted Mary with: "Hail, full of grace (grace is the state of purity that God gives to human beings by which they are saved) the Lord is with thee" --------------------------------------------------------- Sacred Images are Biblical & mocking & destroying them is a serious sin, an act of blasphemy: ➨ SACRED IMAGES IN THE BIBLE: Sacred images are not idols and it is an act of blasphemy to attack them: ● EXODUS 25:18-22 God commands Moses to make STATUES of Angels. ● NUMBERS 21:8-9 God commands another image to be made, a serpent. ● EZEKIEL 41:18-25 KJV ➔ EZEKIEL's VISION OF THE TEMPLE OF THE LORD ADORNED WITH CARVED IMAGES: ... 18 And it was made with CHERUBIMS (ANGELS) and PALM TREES, so that a palm tree was between a CHERUB and EVERY CHERUB HAD TWO FACES; 19 So that the FACE OF A MAN was toward the PALM TREE on the one side, and the FACE OF A LION toward the PALM TREE on the other side: it was made through all the house round about. 20 From the ground unto above the door were CHERUBIMS (ANGELS) and PALM TREES made, and on the wall of the temple. 21 The posts of the temple were squared, and the face of the sanctuary; the appearance of the one as the appearance of the other. 22 The altar of wood was three cubits high, and the length thereof two cubits; and the corners thereof, and the length thereof, and the walls thereof, were of wood: and he said unto me, This is the table that is before the Lord. 23 And the temple and the sanctuary had two doors. 24 And the doors had two LEAVES apiece, two turning leaves; two leaves for the one door, and two leaves for the other door. 25 And there were made on them, on the doors of the temple, CHERUBIMS and PALM TREES, like as were made upon the walls; and there were thick planks upon the face of the porch without. ● 1 KINGS 6:23... ➔ Carved images of Cherubim (Angels) lions and other images in Solomion's temple: 23 For the inner sanctuary he made a pair of CHERUBIM (Angels) out of olive wood, each ten cubits high. 24 One wing of the first cherub was five cubits long, and the other wing five cubits-ten cubits from wing tip to wing tip. 25 The second cherub also measured ten cubits, for the two cherubim were identical in size and shape. 26 The height of each cherub was ten cubits. 27 He placed the cherubim inside the innermost room of the temple, with their wings spread out. The wing of one cherub touched one wall, while the wing of the other touched the other wall, and their wings touched each other in the middle of the room. 28 He overlaid the cherubim with gold. 29 On the walls all around the temple, in both the inner and outer rooms, he carved cherubim, palm trees and open flowers. 30 He also covered the floors of both the inner and outer rooms of the temple with gold. ➨ BOWING as a sign of honour / respect: ● JOSHUA 7:6: 6 Joshua & the elders of Israel tore their clothing and lay prostrate (face down on the ground) before the Ark of the Lord. (an OBJECT) ●1 KINGS 2:19 Solomon bows to his Mother. (a human being) ● JOSHUA 5:13-15 13 Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?” 14 “Neither,” he replied, “but as commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.” Then Joshua fell FACE DOWN TO THE GROUND in reverence, and asked him, “What message does my Lord[a] have for his servant?” 15 The commander of the Lord’s army replied, “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy.” And Joshua did so.
@@TriciaPerry-ef7bi ummm...no, protestants do NOT acknowledge Mary, and do not thank her the way they should for bringing Jesus to the human race, they almost never mentiuon her at all and never acknowledge what she did for us. Mocking a man's mother is never going to please that man and it will never sit well with him. y'all do everything you can do to remove her from the gospel story completely and call her things like a "dead woman" and a "sinner" do you treat your own earthly mothers like that too?
Mother of our Lord its not just Mary,its Holy Mother of God.if you remove Mary and not concidere her as Mother of God ,you have a problem.she gave a birth to our God ,her Son Jesus,not to the Father not to the Holy Spirit,she is Daughter of Father Mother of our Lord and Spouse of Holy Spirit,that is not just anybody,she says yes to Holy Spirit and to God the Father
''Free will'' is a strange virtue coming from the church that invented, instigated and operated the unholy Inquisition. Every time the Roman church has had power, there has been brutal persecution. That is not one of the fruits of the Holy Spirit. It is a fruit of another kind of spirit.
@@danielcristancho3524 Hi, friend! I'm afraid your argument proves too much. If religious persecution is the standard for evil then all of Christianity would have to be disbelieved in. Not to mention the other religions, every nation, race and creed, and humanity itself.
Prayer is NOT synonymous with worship. Pray in the old English use of the word, which Catholics refer to, means to ask. So when we "pray" to the saints, it is not worship. It is a prayer request to those alive in Christ that are fellow members of the Body of Christ. We are a community of believers whether those believers are on Earth or in Heaven. Also, there is no evidence that Mary had other children as the word translated to "brothers and sisters" in scripture actually meant kin. A big clue that Mary, a widow, had no other children was that Jesus gave her to John on the cross. If he had other siblings, this would have broken Jewish familial tradition and been an insult to his siblings. Why? Because this would have meant that Jesus wouldn't have trusted his siblings to take care of his mother. Giving her to John means that Mary would have been destitute otherwise because she had no other children so John became her adoptive son and took on the responsibility of her care.
The archaeologic evidence is also pretty compelling for prayer to the saints. There are over 2000 prayers of the Saints etched into the walls of the catacombs. Thus the christians who were being fed to the Lions were praying to the Saints. Hard to believe these early Christians got it wrong but Protestants got it right .
@@twoody9760 Supposing I could afford to take a trip to go "prove" something that is not scripturally supported, what will it really accomplish? It's obvious that prayers to saints cropped up somewhere in history. It's not like you can carbon date inscriptions in catacombs. Besides, what is conclusive proof for you, is going to read completely different to me. This would be why Joe didn't even bring this up.
@mikeoconnor4590 wrote, "Hard to believe these early Christians got it wrong but Protestants got it right." I do not see why that is so hard to believe. Especially, if those were apostatized christians.
This is wonderful! Thank you, Joe! There are so many great points here. You are single-handedly helping me get past my concerns of praying to the saints.
EVERY pagan religion prays to the dead. When a so-called Christian church has something in common with every pagan religion in the world including witchcraft, somethings wrong.
Gavin will be in for the shock of his life when he sees the Mother of his Savior clothed in Glory even higher than the angels, sitting at Jesus's right hand. God have mercy on him, for he knows not what he is saying.
This is utter nonsense. Where in the Bible - when it is describing Heaven or the day of judgement etc - the throne room of the most high God - does it ever mention Mary being present? K
@@mikekayanderson408 I'm starting to think you Protestants don't watch any video of any Catholic apologist addressing topics pertaining to the Catholic faith and what the church believes. You guys just comment a bunch of smooth brain takes in a hastily reactionary Vibe and expect people to take you seriously
I am going to be as charitable as my conscience lets me. Having watched several of debates and responses to Ortlund, I recognize certain grifter flags. Ortlund, to me, seems like he is a protestant because it pays his bills. And thusly searches far and wide, stretching the very fabric of reality to find reasons to be a protestant. Saying Marian Devotion has pagan origins is something vile and low that I would only expect out of a charlatan. Protestantism is flat earth theory, plain and simple.
This is such a good breakdown. As a 'new' Catholic I had a lot of questions about Mary and Saints lately. This is really clarifying a lot of them. Thank a lot!
Gavin Ortlund has dodged my question over a dozen times! I asked Gavin, were those who sought mediation and intercession of mere human beings like Peter and Paul and their prayers and shadow and handkerchiefs, guilty of taking away the power and focus on ofJesus Christ? If not, Gavin loses! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
Thanks for your work Joe. This has become my favourite catholic podcast. I love the format. I love all the bits of information you dig up and show us here. I love your good natured approach. Keep going. You are in my prayers.
@@NTNG13 I’m 22 and was raised Catholic but of course hated going to church and had trouble with my faith. Recently I’ve been trying to find the truth and this podcast is the greatest thing I’ve came across. So beyond grateful!!! ❤️🙏
I haven't seen Ortland quote from a text contra Catholicism where he has taken the full meaning of the text like with that Origen quote-mine. It's the same thing protestants do with the Bible. You can't take Romans without all of Romans without the Gospel or in contradiction to James, but often they proof text their pre-held beliefs then just bulldoze over anything that seems contradictory not to the verses per se but their own interpretation.
They definitely cherry pick bible verses with zero exegesis. They really profess individual interpretation is biblical. This is why they have thousands of denominations, so sad.
Beautiful presentation, Gavin's position can be maintained only by sifting the evidence through protestant presuppositions, the historical, and scriptural evidence is all in line with the Catholic Faith.
I made it clear here earlier that once exposed they double down in error as GO has done, claiming misrepresentation. Listening to his response video as usual, clearly suggests to me the ego behind the research, which becomes often visible when his stance and position are faulted. This is typical in statement and claims of being insulted, mischaracterized etc. Ortlund's belief in his interpretation of History and the Bible, reinforce the importance of Catholic's reliance on the church not individuals. If they was anything accurate mentioned in Galvin response, it is simply that Joe did not provide more information on Origen's position: that is, one must pray to God alone, not even to Jesus. I saw how Garvin waters down that extreme view saying, "let Origen be Origen". None of these surprised me, as GO must defend his belief and paycheck. What I don't appreciate is the double standard and claims of being insulted, mischaracterized when people cite his video, interpretation, claims, the very same way he cites them. He is doing the same thing he accuse Joe of doing: taking part of a comprehensive argument and claiming you were being misrepresented. Winger tries that tactic and was put in his place since he won't even debate at all. Gavin, at least, tries to do research on things and engage in debates. But if he tends to always feel misrepresented, then he should debate. He must stop the dolling out videos on complex topic that his protestant lens is already opposed to, and then tries to selectively provide evidence to only support his position or interpretation of, or worst still but very common in his approach, evidence that only brings skepticism rather strong proof, and expect people not to ever misunderstand his view and interpretation of the same evidence. His personal 'truth' has rather divided than united more people, especially as it has become so aggressively self-defensive overtime, through emotional response back and forth all the time on being mischaracterized. Thank you Joe, and Thank God the church does not rely on individual for its doctrine.
Protestants redefined words then accused Catholics of violating the new definition despite never putting forward the principle that was at issue. In other words they shifted the goalposts. I brought this up in a comment to Ortland too, and it's a part of what he just ignored. Apparently all Christians before the reformation were doing this thing, venerating the saints (again, worship in English used to be a perfectly acceptable word to describe this behavior as semantically it covered both saintly veneration and worship due only to God), which is supposedly quite grevious and puts into question whether they were truly Christian. That quote from St Jerome is spot on when addressing Ortland. He only cares about the essence of things when it benefits him. If it benefits Catholocs, he ignores it and uses the modern definition of words in his sect's lens to condemn people. "Oh this saint from x century said you _do_ worship saints. Ok so it's idolatry"
A shifting of the goalposts was entirely the point of Martin Luther's work. That's what the reformation *was*, a demand that the goalposts needed to be shifted because they were wrongly placed.
I like using their KJV for Daniel 2:46 Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face, and WORSHIPPED Daniel, and commanded that they should offer an oblation and sweet odours unto him. 🤣🤣🤣
catholics read the Bible allegorically and Christians read it as the literal word of God. If I was catholic, I'd come up with other things to talk about too. catholics must go ask a man to tell them what to think, or just not think. That is not a relationship with God.
Calmly and extraordinarily well reasoned apologetics. This is the best Catholic apologist I have come across. There is a vast amount of material covered and all the ramifications that he sees show the workings of a brilliant mind. I am going to listen to all of these podcasts and recommend them to everyone I know.
Gavin should have been there at Fatima at the Miracle of the Sun. He should have told it to Mother Mary then . She said to pray the rosary daily . Even a hardened Commie reporter converted to Catholicism instantly . They cannot ignore Miracles of the Eucharist either . They cherry pick and there is no excuse for him not to know, unless it is diabolical blindness .
The arguments that Gavin is offering are little different from those offered in “The Davinci Code” and similar sources to argue that Christianity itself is pagan.
On the Unbroken Practice Hypothesis, archeologists in Israel just uncovered a 1st century mosaic in the Church of the Apostles in Bethsaida with an intercessory prayer to Saint Peter on it.
The ancient Jews prayed to Mother Rachel as the Mother of Israel to intercede for them. Mother Mary is our Mother. Jews today travel to Ukraine every year to attend the grave of Rabbi Nachman with their candles lit to pray for his intercession. Our faith is grounded in ancient Judaism this is why protestants don't understand why we do certain things. Other practices we inherited from ancient Judaism is confession, priests, liturgical temple worship with priests *Purgatory as a place where souls are cleansed made holy, *praying for the dead, 30 days of prayers for the dead, * the communion of the saints (Tzadik), praying to the saints, saints as a source of graces, *pilgrimaging to the tombs of the saints, *keeping of relics and these being conduits of Divine energies and grace, *the treasury of merit, indulgences, jubilees and the requirement for a magisterium, *praying the same prayers as the liturgy of the hours, deification, *the requirement of holiness, *mortification of the self, the need habituation of charity and prayer, rules followed for baptism, *work as a form of prayer * the tabernacle holding the word of God, liturgical octaves and liturgical worship, and much more are held in common solely due to a shared tradition. These practices are still done by ultra-orthodox jews who have kept traditions closer.
Great Video. Thorough, persuasive, and very generous to our separate brothers and sisters. I would like to say that I'm not so sure their interpretation of biblical silence and what to do with it is as ad-hoc as you said. There's a consistent theory they apply, it's called "don't be too Catholic"
Joe is the antidote for Dr. Ortlund’s errors. His rebuttals to Ortlund on the Papacy, Marian Dogmas and the Veneration/Intercession of the saints have all powerfully demonstrated the truth of the Catholic position against the errors of protestantism.
@@Justas399Then I guess you didn’t watch the video, as Joe focused heavily on the Biblical evidence. Plenty of “facts” in there. Dr. Ortlund, on the other hand offers no “facts” , but only assertions on why this practice is pagan, which is one of Joe’s main criticisms. Outright dismissing the Biblical evidence does not count as “having the facts.”
Hey Joe great podcast. Can I add my little two cents. The idea of intercession of the saints are rooted in Jewish beliefs. Check out the Talmud in Sotah 34b- it is said that Caleb bowed down at the grave of the Patriarchs and prayed for their intercession. You can also go to the Talmud in Taanit 116a. Jews will go to the graves of the deceased and ask for their intercession. Let me know if that's helpful. CA- 2021.
The Talmud and is not the source of true Jewish beliefs. The Torah is but unfortunately the Jews have moved away from what was given them from God and into all sorts of ungodly beliefs. Most of the Jews today do not follow the original beliefs of the God given Torah but books written by renegade Jews. K
@@mikekayanderson408 you're right not everything in the talmud is biblical but it does contain historical data that sheds light on the Jews from the time of christ.
@@mikekayanderson408The point is that if intercession of the saints predates Christianity it can't be a pagan borrowing. It's a Jewish borrowing, if anything. It wasn't made up ex nihilo.
‘Mother Rachel’, ‘mother of Israel’ is cited among Talmudic and rabbinic sources, modern and ancient as being an intercessor of all Israel through time. The other thing is that the Father Himself desired all prayer be received through the Son, and the Son in turn receives all offering through his own Body, the Church - which is alive on earth and in heaven. The Lord told Moses that the people had sinned, and Moses goes down and finds them in sin, and then advocates for them before God. Thus, God Himself informs his own saints what he wills for them to pray for, and the saints do not have such knowledge from their own senses or will.
Actually, I think it shows that Gavin does *not* see Scripture as a perfect and complete record (at least in one sense)- since he de-prioritizes the Parables of Christ@weaponofchoice-tc7qs
What do you mean by "both sources" Paul and Christ? Because - as a source, I would argue that Paul is not infallible, and even if he were he would not be equal to Christ Himself.
You're the accuser of the brethren and don't have a clue that you are. Try actually listening to him preach a sermon. I may disagree w/ Catholic priests on some of their theology, but some of them are teaching the word of God, just as Gavin does.
@@saintejeannedarc9460 are you saying “ALL” Catholic priest are good, clean, upstanding sheep preaching the the good news? If not how do you know? I have no idea what Doug8521 knows or doesnt know. But what i do know is just because someone “hears” someone preach a good sermon does not mean that preacher is a good person. He could be the quintessential definition of “wolf in sheep's clothes”.
@@srich7503 I never said all, but I'd say most. The bible says we know people by their fruit. A good shepherd will generally show good fruit when he teaches. It's not a guarantee, but a good indication. I've seen or heard nothing of Gavin to indicate he's a wolf. That's just ugly accusations and it's groundless.
@@srich7503 I'm not accusing anyone though. The OP is calling Gavin a wolf, really based on nothing. The other Catholic apologists think Gavin is a good shepherd and dialogues w/ them peacefully and in good faith. Even though he has disagreements, he does it graciously. I think it's just good to follow a peaceful example. We are exhorted, "As much as is possible, to live in peace w/ all men".
I love that video thanks for sharing such amazing thoughts. But I as an XMO , converted to Catholicism , I had this dream with Momma Mary❤, she was above the sky and she was carried baby Jesus on her arms. Her beautiful was nothing that we can describe! Nothing. But Momma was praying for us!! All of us with all love and mercy. And since then I just started to follow and love her as a Queen of Heaven ❤. Oh Jesus My God and Lord thanks for be my savior ❤️🙏 and take care of us. ❤
Catholics, when they're not using the "the pope said so, so deal with it" tactic, most often use the "well wouldn't that be kinda cool if that was true?" tactic. Your post is an example of the latter.
Very very well put. I was surprised by one omission in Part 1 though. I thought you would have mentioned Mary’s petition to her son at the wedding at Cana. This is an example of exactly how we ask her to petition to Jesus for our needs. Incredible that she, a mere mortal, to move God Himself to perform a miracle that he was clearly not planning to perform and only did so because she asked him to. I would say in a particular way that is distinct from the other petitions of others to have miracles performed for themselves.
I always chuckle and snicker when folks like Gavin say, "My Historical interpretation of X is..." and then they don't cite any primary or corroborating sources for their Historical claims.
First of all, if devotion and honor given to Mary is rooted in Medieval piety, then why is the earliest image in a catacomb/church in the catacomb of Santa Priscilla an image of Mary with the Child Jesus? Second of all, anyone who understands biblical typology would know from that if Jesus is the new "King David" then Mary is the new "Queen Mother". Also Mary is the new Arch of the Covenant.
People just keep saying this and that Catholic practice was derived from paganism, but they don't provide actual historical evidence of this claim. Imagine there was some letter written by an early Christian in which the author urged Christians to mimic the practices of the pagan rituals, then this would constitute some evidence for the pagan origin claim. But the only evidence people use for the pagan origin theory is the fact that some Catholic artistic images of Mary and the saints look similar to art work from the ancient pagans. They see an Egyptian sculpture of the goddess Isis with her son Horus on her lap, then they say that this looks sort of similar to the churches artwork that shows Mary with the baby Jesus. But this isn't good evidence of pagan origin because every society in the world has mothers raising their children. Pagans are not the only people in history who would take an interest in the mother-child relationship.
@@mikekayanderson408We don't have to revere her?? I think you misspoke. If you revere your town war hero more than the MOTHER of Christ you have your priorities messed up. In Jewish culture the mother of the King carried greater honor than any wife or family member, and in fact the King KNELT when the Queen Mother walked in. The Queen Mother was the only one called Queen and had her own throne. While Mary wasn't the mother of Christ's divinity, Christ was King through human adoption and thus Mary is Queen by all measures. If you worship Christ as King, then at the very least give some honor to King's mother. Even if not in prayer.
Thanks for putting in the legwork on this. Too many Protestant apologists assert the supposed pagan origins without trying to shoulder a burden of proof.
Because they don't need to..... because Protestants would consider the practice pagan regardless of its origins. Why bother going on a history lesson when you would call it Pagan anyway without the history lesson? Protestants disagree with praying to Mary *in principle*, not as some technicality from history.
Outstanding vid & absolute refutation of Ortlunds position. I have searched the scripture to find the explicit support of Protest doctrine..& low a behold we see the opposite, from the solas to dissension, but Catholicism is not afforded the charitable view of implicit support. I missed the date of the Marian prayer but believe the Catacombs contained a Marian prayer dated to the 1st cent, if indeed valid
@@mikekayanderson408The canonization process leaves no room for that. If there's any doubt the Church errs on the negative. And it has to be a repeated incident, namely several well-attested miracles need to be reported and properly documented. So?
I don't know that there's a scant amount of evidence of early church writings. The gospels and NT was written much earlier than we once thought, and there are all sorts of copies of these writings. There was also a lot of aprocryphal books written. The Dead Sea Scrolls showed us the richness of early church writings. I don't think it's so much that there was little written in the early centuries, it's more that it's hard to find preserved copies of it going that far back.
@@LuzianJ Some of the dead sea scrolls were written in the early church period, and show the dates of some gospels and epistles to be much earlier than we had once though. I understand there are OT books, like Isaiah in the DSS as well. Apocryphal books are OT additions, so that's my mistake in that way. I was thinking of other books rejected from the NT canon, and misstated.
@@LuzianJ You're right, the DSS contain the OT and no NT books. I thought they contained a gospel of Mark and I'm not sure why I thought that. Scratch my proposed argument that it would be harder to find writings from the first few hundred years of the NT church. If we have all those OT writings, then we could surely have more NT writings and prayers to Mary and saints, if that was an early church practice.
Because the concept of Trinity isn’t explicitly in the bible, does that mean that Christianity has been wrong for odd 2,000 years? Our brothers and sisters in Christ needs to accept first and foremost of Magisterial authority before anything else can be refuted. We pray for their hearts to open and let truth seep in :)
The concept of the Trinity IS explicit in the Bike. The word Trinity is not used but the concept I’d definitely there. Jesus speaks often of His Father and the Holy Spirit. I am going to my Father and He will send the Holy Spirit (comforter). All three persons of the Godhead are referred to often. K
@@mikekayanderson408 The problem with your explanation is that people who think they have the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to interpret the truth of everything in the Bible come up with things like JW, Unitarian, Oneness Pentecostals, etc. So there's that.
