Apologetics for the Masses #373 - Dialogue With A Protestant "Seeker" (Part 4)

Social Media - Please Share This Newsletter On...

Please share this newsletter with folks on the various social media platforms you frequent...thanks!

Topic

Dialogue With A Protestant "Seeker" (Part 4)

Unsubscribe/Subscribe

http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/unsubscribe - to unsubscribe from this newsletter

http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter - to subscribe to this newsletter

General Comments

Hey folks,

Two things:

1) First - many, many thanks to all of you who so generously responded to our semi-annual $0.10/day appeal. And thank you for all of the prayers and the kind words, as well. I can't tell you how much they are all appreciated! We can't do what we do - sharing the Catholic Faith with tens of thousands of people around the world each year - without you.

2) Second - please keep me in your prayers this Thursday, as I am flying to Louisiana to discuss doing a weekly TV show on the Catholic Faith with the owner of a secular television station.

Introduction

Okay, this is the final installation of my conversation with the Protestant "seeker," Martin. I'll start with Martin's last response from the previous newsletter (http://biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/503-apologetics-for-the-masses-372-dialogue-with-a-protestant-seeker-part-3), and go from there. I hope you enjoy...

Challenge/Response/Strategy

Martin

Okay then, so the Church can tell us what Scripture means? And what The Faith overall is, yes?

My Response

          As I tell people, the Church lays down the boundaries within which we are free to interpret Scripture. The Church does not go verse by verse and say: "Numbers 3:17 means this..." and "Psalm 17:6 means that..." and "Matthew 8:2 means such and such..." and so on. But it does act as an authentic guide and teacher. So, if I come up with some interpretation of Scripture that runs contrary to something the Church teaches, then I have to ask myself: Do I insist on my private, fallible interpretation of that passage, or do I go with the teaching of the Church founded by Jesus Christ and guided by the Holy Spirit?
     It isn't that we can't understand Scripture at all if we don't have the Church, but, as Scripture shows us, having a guide to help us understand the more difficult parts, is scriptural - "Do you understand what you are reading?...How can I unless someone guides me?" (Acts 8:31). And, the Church, as the upholder and the guardian of the truth that has been entrusted to it by Jesus Christ, also acts as an arbiter of what is an authentic interpretation of Scripture and what is not when there is a dispute amongst Christians. Without an authoritative arbiter of such disputes, then the natural result is division after division within Christianity and no one being able to know for sure what the truth is.
     But, there are also times where there can be disputes between Christians as to what this or that passage of Scripture means, and there is absolutely no necessity for the Church to be involved. As, for example, in our recent discussion. In your opinion, certain verses do not offer evidence that people were confessing their sins to the priests so as to receive forgiveness. In my opinion, those verses do offer evidence that people were confessing their sins to the priests so as to receive forgiveness.
     No need for the Church to intervene, though, because in either circumstance - whether those verses show confession to priests or not - it does not impact the teaching of the Church one way or the other. If, however, you wish to interpret those verses as "proving" that the Church's teaching on the Sacrament of Confession is wrong, then you have stepped outside of the boundaries laid down by the Church and now there is an issue and we can "take it to the Church" to get the Church's decision on the matter.

Strategy

Okay, the simple answer to his question is, "Yes, the Church can, and does, tell us what the Scriptures mean and what the Faith is overall." However, this question is asked as a set up. I say it is a set up, because the entire time I've been involved in this conversation, I have felt that Martin was not being completely honest with me regarding his intentions. I mean, how many people "accidentally" find out information about the Catholic Church's teaching on salvation - as he claimed in one of his earlier emails?

Plus, he said he wanted to be "challenged" in his beliefs, but when I did challenge him in his beliefs - particularly regarding authority and who has it when it comes to biblical interpretation - he got a bit put out. (And he gets a lot more put out by that particular question, as you will soon see.) No, he was not really wanting to be challenged in his faith, he was wanting to lay traps for me so as to try and trip me up and challenge me in my faith. So, I have had my suspicions all along, but now, after I give a very detailed response to one of his emails and to his arguments/interpretations of the various Scripture verses under scrutiny here, what does he do? Does he respond to my arguments? Does he go back to Scripture? Nope. He hits me with a simple question, two questions really, about the Church. And what he is aiming at here, is trying to "charge" me with believing in "Sola Ecclesia".

Sola Ecclesia - going by what the Church says, alone. He wants to pin that on me and then say he goes by the Scripture alone while I, and all Catholics, go by the Church (i.e., the Pope) alone. And then he would ask, "Which is better, to go by the Word of God or the word of the Pope? Which would be making a false dichotomy and would also be completely ignoring the fact that Scripture points to the Church as having the authority to arbitrate the truth and all matters related to the Faith.

So, to just give a simple, "Yes," is to step into the trap, but it is also to not fully answer the question. So, I anticipated where he was going and answered as I did, focusing, again, on the authority of the Church.

Martin

      I've realised that there is no point in us continuing the conversation. On further thought, and looking back, all you've done is Dismiss all i say. Whatever I say, it's just my opinion, whatever scripture I talk about, it's just my Personal Interpretation. And now you've insulted me and called me a pope. You've been quite Rude actually, if you're trying to get me to realise I'm in need of the Church, you've utterly failed. All you've served to do is make me feel ignored and belittled and dismissed and insulted. That's no way of leading me to the truth, as you see it.
     And at this point, I'm done. We've had no meaningful dialog, or conversation, or interaction. All you say to me is "That's just Your Personal Interpretation and Opinion" and now you insult me and say I'm my own Fallible Pope with Fallible Opinions and Interpretations. Now why, John, should I continue with someone who does that? Don't tell me you haven't been doing this, you have.
     You ask me to show you a scripture where there is personal Interpretation. Why bother? Why should I? You'll only hand-Wave it away as a mere Fallible Opinion and Interpretation, coming from a Self-Appointed Fallible Pope. Right? That's all you've said to me. Other than insising on me needing your Church, you've only Belittled and dismissed all i said and insulted me personally.
     You've lied too, you said my opinions and Interpretations are oh so important, but you keep on dismissing them. You falsely ask for scriptural evidence, but we both know it's irrelevant to you. You falsely try and prove Confession from Scripture, but you just said it's irrelevant, the Church is your proof.
     There's just nothing to respond to. Whatever I say is nothing to you, you have shut down the dialog I wanted, heck, it never even started. You don't talk to me, you talk At me. You don't talk with me, you talk Over me. We're done.
     I'll pray for you, as you're headed to Hell. I've been given no reason to doubt the Bible, which says that Salvation is by Grace through Faith. I could quote you verses and passages, but why bother? That's just my interpretation, and all this is just my opinion.
     Nevertheless I'll pray for you, you're without Grace, and you need Grace. Not the Grace that is dependant on you to respond for it to save, but on the Grace that Opens the Heart to respond. If you must, see at Acts 16:14.
     Goodbye.

My Response

     Congratulations! You win the award for the most disingenuous person I have ever come across in my 62 years on this planet. Let’s go back and re-visit some of your earlier statements:

     "I want to talk, and to hear others out. So here I want to hear the Roman Catholic Position out and ponder it. I hope to be...challenged and called to a different position."

     "I'm here to challenge my beliefs...What I want to do is firstly to learn and to Understand your position."

     "I stressed my willingness to listen and not to attack, because I've recently just broke off with some Mormons I thought were my friends. I had spent about 5 months with them, learning about their beliefs, and when I finally, after hearing them out on Mormonism, started asking about a few things concerning Salvation, that i was confused about, they promptly called me Hard-Hearted and Close-Minded, and then stopped talking to me."

     Now, keeping those earlier statements in mind, let me address your most recent email paragraph by paragraph:

     "I've realised that there is no point in us continuing the conversation. On further thought, and looking back, all you've done is Dismiss all i say. Whatever I say, it's just my opinion, whatever scripture I talk about, it's just my Personal Interpretation. And now you've insulted me and called me a pope. You've been quite Rude actually, if you're trying to get me to realise I'm in need of the Church, you've utterly failed. All you've served to do is make me feel ignored and belittled and dismissed and insulted."

     You said you wanted to “hear others out” and to be “challenged” and “to challenge [your] beliefs.” Yet, when challenged, how do you respond? You come up with some lame excuses not to continue the conversation, you judge me, and condemn me to Hell. And you want me to believe you entered this conversation with an open mind? Yeah, right.
     Regarding my “dismissing” all that you say, I did no such thing! I took the time to answer every single question you asked, in detail, point-by-point. Is that “dismissing” all that you have to say? No, that is showing you respect. I spent a few hours responding to all of your emails. That is showing you respect. I gave you full throated answers, citing numerous Scripture verses as well as the Church Fathers. That is showing you respect. And when you gave your responses as to what this or that verse of Scripture meant, I responded to your responses, in detail. That is showing you respect.
     However, in addition to giving those detailed responses, I did indeed point out that the only weight your interpretations of Scripture carry, is the weight of your own personal opinion. And, that is a fact that you do not dispute! You can’t dispute it. Maybe I was being "rude" by answering your questions and by challenging you in a way that you can't answer? Which is actually the real reason you are upset here. What you want to do is just go around and around and around with you giving me your interpretation of verses and me giving you my interpretation of verses jumping from topic to topic until you can jump on some perceived flaw in one of my arguments or you can spring some trap that you try to lay for me. But it didn't work out that way, so you're going to cut your losses and run.
     But here’s the thing - you said you wanted to “hear the Roman Catholic Position out and ponder it.” You also said, “What I want to do is firstly to learn and to Understand your position.” Well, the “Roman Catholic Position” is that any interpretation of Scripture that you, or anyone else for that matter, come up with that is contrary to Catholic teaching is, by definition, your private, fallible, non-authoritative interpretation. That is our position, which, despite your claims to the contrary, you apparently do not actually want to hear or try to understand.
     So, let’s review: I responded to your questions, and to your arguments, and I gave you the “Roman Catholic Position” on these matters, citing and quoting verse after verse after verse of Scripture, and what do you do? You characterize that as me dismissing all that you have to say. Why don’t you simply be honest and admit that you are bothered by the fact that you have no good argument in response to what I was saying, and since I didn’t step into the traps you tried to lay for me, you had to find some excuse to break off the conversation. It’s as simple as that.

     "That's no way of leading me to the truth, as you see it."

     It’s not my responsibility to lead you to the truth. It’s my responsibility to throw out the seeds, it’s the Holy Spirit’s responsibility to do the rest. Maybe He will find a heart receptive to the truth and be able to help those seeds bear fruit, or maybe He won't.

     "And at this point, I'm done. We've had no meaningful dialog, or conversation, or interaction. All you say to me is "That's just Your Personal Interpretation and Opinion" and now you insult me and say I'm my own Fallible Pope with Fallible Opinions and Interpretations. Now why, John, should I continue with someone who does that? Don't tell me you haven't been doing this, you have."

     Again, I have answered every one of your questions and responded to every one of your arguments. If you think you are going to make me feel guilty for challenging you, after you said, more than once, that you wanted to be challenged, you can forget it. Respond to my arguments. Answer my questions. Are you not, essentially, the Pope of your own church? After all, your belief system is based entirely on your personal interpretation of the Bible. That, again, is why your opinions are very important. You are your own personal theologian. Stop feigning offense, and answer the arguments, if you dare.

     "You ask me to show you a scripture where there is personal Interpretation. Why bother? Why should I? You'll only hand-Wave it away as a mere Fallible Opinion and Interpretation, coming from a Self-Appointed Fallible Pope. Right? That's all you've said to me. Other than insisting on me needing your Church, you've only Belittled and dismissed all i said and insulted me personally."

     Again, I have not “hand-Waved” anything you have thus far presented. I have responded with cogent arguments time and time again. The reason you are doing what you are doing here, is because you cannot show me a Scripture verse where there is personal interpretation of Scripture for the purpose of determining what is and is not authentic Christian doctrine and practice. Such a verse does not exist. So, again, you have to pretend to be offended in order to remove yourself from a rather sticky wicket.

     "You've lied too, you said my opinions and Interpretations are oh so important, but you keep on dismissing them. You falsely ask for scriptural evidence, but we both know it's irrelevant to you. You falsely try and prove Confession from Scripture, but you just said it's irrelevant, the Church is your proof."

     Actually, you are being false here. I have not tried to “prove” anything from Scripture. You asked for Confession in the New Testament, I gave you some verses that directly or indirectly offer evidence of such. You have, however, merely waved your hand and dismissed what I said. “It seems to me...” you responded. Yes indeed. It “seems” to you... That fact, however, does not make it true. And, again, your opinions and interpretations are indeed important, as they provide the foundation for your system of theology.

     "There's just nothing to respond to. Whatever I say is nothing to you, you have shut down the dialog I wanted, heck, it never even started. You don't talk to me, you talk At me. You don't talk with me, you talk Over me."

     Again, see my comments above.

     "We're done."

     As you wish. I’m not fond of dealing with people who don’t have the decency to be honest in their intent and feel the need to hide their true purpose. Dishonesty and subterfuge do not provide a good foundation for a conversation.

     "I'll pray for you, as you're headed to Hell. I've been given no reason to doubt the Bible, which says that Salvation is by Grace through Faith. I could quote you verses and passages, but why bother? That's just my interpretation, and all this is just my opinion. Nevertheless I'll pray for you, you're without Grace, and you need Grace. Not the Grace that is dependant on you to respond for it to save, but on the Grace that Opens the Heart to respond. If you must, see at Acts 16:14."

     Now we’re seeing the real you! Condemning me to Hell (in your opinion). That has actually been your attitude the entire time we’ve been conversing. Which means your claims about an honest search for what the Catholic Church teaches and wanting to be challenged were nothing more than a ruse. By the way, aren't you doing to me what you claim the Mormons did to you? I'm thinking maybe it was the other way around, right?

     "Goodbye."

     Yes indeed.

Strategy

Once I saw the part about condemning me to Hell, and me being without grace, and that my arguments about authority were completely ignored, I knew exactly where this guy was coming from. No need to "suspect" it any more, it's all right there in black and white.

Folks, by taking the argument to authority, early and often, as THE most fundamental issue in discussions such as these - I've said it before and I'll say it again - you will save yourselves all sorts of time, headaches, and frustration. He and I could have gone round and round and round on Scripture verses regarding Confession and then the next topic of his choosing and then the next and the next and the next. It would have been nothing but his fallible interpretation vs. my fallible interpretation. And, in the end, he would have blistered me in the exact same way and I would have wasted many more hours...many, many more hours.

But, by focusing on authority, as the issue underlying the discussion - whether it be on Confession, or Purgatory, or Mary, or the Pope, or whatever - you get to the guts of the matter way sooner than you would otherwise, and you will spend a whole lot less time chasing rabbits down rabbit holes, because the other guys will either show themselves to be reasonable people and will respond to your arguments about authority, or they will do exactly as Martin did and realize that their fallible opinions of what Scripture does or doesn't mean is not a swamp that you are going to get bogged down in, and they will cut and run.

And, I know, some of you may think I was being a little rough on him, but, that was done intentionally to see if I could provoke one more response - oftentimes you get more honesty from someone when they're a bit angry - that might lead to a profitable dialogue, but, apparently, that is not going to happen. Plus, after someone condemns me to Hell, I generally don't feel the need to be as gentle with them as I otherwise might be.

Closing Comments

No newsletter this coming week as I'll be traveling (see General Comments above), so I hope all of you have a great week and a safe and happy Fourth of July holiday!

Donations

The Bible Christian Society is a non-profit organization that relies solely on your support to bring the truths of the Catholic Faith to tens of thousands of people throughout the U.S. and all around the world each year. If you would like to help us do what we do, you can donate online at:

http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/donations

or send a check to:

Bible Christian Society

PO Box 424

Pleasant Grove, AL 35127.

Anything you can do is greatly appreciated!

Unsubscribe/Subscribe

http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/unsubscribe - to unsubscribe from this newsletter

http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter - to subscribe to this newsletter