Apologetics for the Masses - Issue #92

I hope all of you are doing well. Things are crazy busy here in Birmingham. Please keep Queen of Heaven Radio here in Birmingham in your prayers as we try to walk with wobbly knees in our first few weeks of being on the air.

Introduction

In this week’s newsletter, I’m taking another email from a subscriber. Mr. Martinez has engaged in a conversation with a Protestant named Eddie Walker and asked me to help him out with his dialogue. Mr. Martinez has unfortunately lost his wife and several children to the Calvary Chapel folks and is praying and working to bring them back to the truth if at all possible.

I’ll put Mr. Walker’s latest email to Mr. Martinez up first, and then I’ll do the usual and repeat his email with my replies interspersed amongst his comments. Mr. Walker’s comments are in italics.

Challenge/Response/Strategy

Mr. Martinez,

While the writings of early Christians are certainly important to help understand the thoughts of the early church, their interpretation of scripture is not necessarily more or less correct than others. We see even in Paul’s epistles that false teaching had already crept in. I simply urge you to build your theology and doctrine from the scripture, which you know to be true. The early Christian writings are not inspired and are the thoughts of men, therefore are not truth, even if they contain some truth.

As for changed doctrine, you are right there are certainly no lack of those willing to twist and distort the word for their own purposes. But clearly you do not mean to suggest that the teachings of the Roman Catholic church have not changed throughout history, that is to easy to prove. My point was not that the Roman Catholics are the only ones to deviate from the scripture, but that they are more likely to all sound the same as the get their doctrine from one organization. Similarly Jehovah’s Witnesses sound the same as they follow the teachings of the watchtower organization.

You are also right that there are many false teachers, but how can we know who the false ones are? Should we judge them by their message or by their title and the organization? If the traditions and doctrines of the Roman Catholic church did not contradict the Bible I would have no problem with them. However they have forsaken God’s word and decided to follow the traditions of men instead. And these traditions cause many well meaning people to try to worship God in ways that he finds detestable.

Mr. Martinez, it is most certainly not in the Bible, that Jesus ever created the office or position of Pope. Even if Peter was given the position, no apostolic succession was setup or process given. In context the passage in which you refer does not even establish Peter as a Pope or Vicar of Christ, or whatever you want to call it. In fact Jesus calls him Satan in verse 23.

Mr. Martinez , I implore you to please search the scriptures and see if it even fits into scripture, that God would allow any man to receive his honor and praise. Search and see if God would ever allow someone to be called the “queen of Heaven” or allow us to pray to anyone other than God. Daniel faced Lions instead of praying to a man, and Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, faced fire instead of bowing to a statue. These Godly men would rather face incredibly painful deaths than to do what millions of Roman Catholics wrongly do daily in the name of God. And while they may have zeal for the Lord, their zeal lacks knowledge and therefore will not be acceptable to God.

I will continue to pray for you Mr. Martinez.

Eddie Walker

-————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Comments/Strategies:

Dear Mr. Walker,

I hope you don’t mind if I respond to your email to Mr. Martinez. Mr. Martinez knows his faith, and is learning more all the time, but I don’t think he feels sufficiently knowledgeable to adequately respond to some of the points in your email, so he asked for my assistance.

First, I would like to say that in your email there are a number of logical inconsistencies, which I will point out below, and factual errors concerning the Catholic Faith that, while I am not surprised to find, I am, however, continually amazed that intelligent people such as yourself continue to make them. I hope and pray that you are someone who values truth and that you will be open to hearing the truth about the Catholic Faith. I often tell people that if you want to disagree with what I believe…fine. But, disagree with what I really believe and not with some misconception, half-truth, or outright lie that someone has taught you about what I believe.

I will respond to each of your paragraphs individually. If you are serious about evangelizing Catholics and saving our souls from eternal damnation, you now have your chance to reach some 9000 Catholics, as I will be happy to print your response, in its entirety, in my weekly newsletter. And, again, I hope and pray that you are more concerned about truth, than you are about proving the Catholic Church wrong.

Eddie Walker

Mr. Martinez,

While the writings of early Christians are certainly important to help understand the thoughts of the early church, their interpretation of scripture is not necessarily more or less correct than others. We see even in Paul’s epistles that false teaching had already crept in. I simply urge you to build your theology and doctrine from the scripture, which you know to be true. The early Christian writings are not inspired and are the thoughts of men, therefore are not truth, even if they contain some truth.

Comments/Strategies: With all due respect, Mr. Walker, I don’t think you’ve really thought through your comments here. You state that the writings of the early Christians are “certainly important” to help understand the thoughts of the early church, and then you proceed (in the same sentence!) to dismiss their “interpretation of scripture” as being no more or less correct than any other person’s interpretations of Scripture.

Plus, in an earlier email you sent to Mr. Martinez, you stated that you believe in the apostolic truths taught for the last “2008 years” by the “Universal Apostolic Church” that was founded by Jesus Christ. (By the way, “Catholic” means “Universal”…I’m sure you’re aware of that, aren’t you?)

So, on the one hand, you say that the early Christian writings are “certainly important” because they help one to understand the “thoughts of the early church”…may I interpret that as the “beliefs” of the early church?…and, you also say that you believe the apostolic teachings that have been taught by the “Universal Apostolic Church” for the last 2008 years. Yet, on the other hand, you seem to be quite dismissive of the early Christians interpretations of scripture, saying they are no more or less correct than anyone else’s interpretation of scripture, and you state quite boldly that their writings are not the truth. In other words, you have left me thoroughly confused.

If you believe in the “apostolic teachings” that have been taught for the last 2008 years by the church; and the writings of the early Christians give us, as you yourself state, the thoughts or beliefs of the early church – in other words, they tell us what the apostolic teachings of the church were in the early centuries – how can you then turn around and say that the writings of the early Christians are not the truth and that Mr. Martinez would be better served by going to the Bible and coming up with his own interpretations of Scripture? Or, how can you say what you are really saying, which is Mr. Martinez would be better served not to trust in the scriptural interpretations of the early Christians whose writings give us the “thoughts of the early church,” but rather he should trust in your scriptural interpretations?

You further contradict yourself by telling Mr. Martinez to build his “theology and doctrine from scripture,” yet, when Mr. Martinez reads James 2:24, which states that we are “justified by works and not by faith alone,” and Mr. Martinez builds his theology and doctrine on this passage and therefore does not believe in salvation by faith alone – because that dogma is in direct contradiction of Holy Scripture – you turn around and tell him his interpretation is wrong, don’t you?

Or, when he reads John 6:51-58 which states several times that we must eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man in order to have life within us, and he builds his theology and doctrine on this passage and therefore does not believe the Eucharist, or the Lord’s Supper, is merely a symbol, but that it is indeed the real thing…you turn around and tell him his interpretation is wrong, don’t you?

Again, you really don’t want him to trust his interpretation of scripture, just as you don’t want him to trust the early Christians’ interpretations of scripture, do you? You really want him to trust your interpretations of Scripture, right? Well, my question to you is: Why? Why should Mr. Martinez, or anyone else for that matter, believe your interpretation of the Bible over their own interpretation of the Bible, or over the early Christians’ interpretations of the Bible ? Are you an authentic interpreter of Scripture? Is your interpretation of Scripture infallible? Yes or no?

Eddie Walker

As for changed doctrine, you are right there are certainly no lack of those willing to twist and distort the word for their own purposes. But clearly you do not mean to suggest that the teachings of the Roman Catholic church have not changed throughout history, that is to easy to prove. My point was not that the Roman Catholics are the only ones to deviate from the scripture, but that they are more likely to all sound the same as the get their doctrine from one organization. Similarly Jehovah’s Witnesses sound the same as they follow the teachings of the watchtower organization.

Comments/Strategies: I believe Mr. Martinez did indeed mean to suggest that the doctrinal teachings of the Roman Catholic Church have not changed throughout history. You say it is easy to prove otherwise. I challenge you to do so.

Also, in the above paragraph, you continue to make statements that make me think you have not done a thorough and rigorous analysis of your own position. You are clearly implying that for all the members of an organization to speak with one voice in regards to doctrine is a negative thing. With all due respect, but I would really like to hear your reasoning behind that position. You seem to be suggesting that it’s a positive thing to disagree on doctrine? Again, you have stated in a previous email to Mr. Martinez that you believe in a set body of apostolic teaching that has been consistent for 2008 years. For the sake of argument, let’s say that the Catholic Church is the 2008-yr. old “Universal Apostolic Church” of which you spoke in your previous email to Mr. Martinez, then wouldn’t it be a good thing that Catholics “all sound the same” since they are getting their doctrine from one organization – the organization founded by Jesus Christ?

Wouldn’t doctrinal differences be a sign that someone was not following the 2008-yr. old “apostolic teachings” of the church founded by Jesus Christ?

Eddie Walker

You are also right that there are many false teachers, but how can we know who the false ones are? Should we judge them by their message or by their title and the organization? If the traditions and doctrines of the Roman Catholic church did not contradict the Bible I would have no problem with them. However they have forsaken God’s word and decided to follow the traditions of men instead. And these traditions cause many well meaning people to try to worship God in ways that he finds detestable.

Comments/Strategies: With all due respect, but are you not declaring the traditions and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church at odds with the Bible based on your own personal interpretations of the Bible? Indeed you are. What if you are a false teacher and your false teachings are based on your personal, fallible interpretations of the Bible? Does that thought not horrify you? You could, unintentionally, be leading people astray by your teachings. What assurance do I, or Mr. Martinez, or anyone else have that your interpretations of the Bible are accurate? Why do you believe your interpretations more reliable than mine? More reliable than Mr. Martinez’s? More reliable than the early Christians’? Again, I ask, are you infallible in your interpretations of the Bible?

Eddie Walker

Mr. Martinez, it is most certainly not in the Bible, that Jesus ever created the office or position of Pope. Even if Peter was given the position, no apostolic succession was setup or process given. In context the passage in which you refer does not even establish Peter as a Pope or Vicar of Christ, or whatever you want to call it. In fact Jesus calls him Satan in verse 23.

Comments/Strategies: You seem to be suggesting, Mr. Walker, that Jesus left His church on earth with no visible leader. Jesus’ last words to His disciples in Matthew 28 must have been: “Hey guys, everybody just do your own thing. Remember, I’m not leaving anyone in charge down here. Just tell everybody to get their own Bible, read it, and decide for themselves what is and is not correct doctrine. Of course, I’m talking about once the New Testament gets written. Until then, though, just do the best you can. Ciao!”

Or, that if Jesus did leave Peter as the head of the church He established, that once Peter was dead, then there was not to be another leader of this church founded by Jesus Christ. Let me ask you a question, Mr. Walker: Is there any mention in your scripture about your church – the one you attend on Sunday – having a visible head, a pastor? And, furthermore, does the Bible say anything about your what your church should do if your pastor dies? I don’t think it does, does it?

Yet, you have a visible head of your church, and, if that visible head of your church were to die, you would replace him, wouldn’t you? Furthermore, I’ll bet the process of hiring a new pastor that is in effect at your church is nowhere mentioned in the Bible, is it? (Does the Bible ever mention anything about pastors being hired? But I bet your church hires its pastors, doesn’t it?). You seem to be very quick to pronounce the Catholic Church as carrying on extra-biblical traditions, and condemning her for such, yet you do not apply the standards you use in regards to Catholic belief and practice, to your own belief and practice. There is a word for that, and it starts with an “h.”

One last thing, you would do well to read Matthew 16:16-18 in light of Isaiah 22, verses 20 and following.

Eddie Walker

Mr. Martinez , I implore you to please search the scriptures and see if it even fits into scripture, that God would allow any man to receive his honor and praise. Search and see if God would ever allow someone to be called the “queen of Heaven” or allow us to pray to anyone other than God. Daniel faced Lions instead of praying to a man, and Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, faced fire instead of bowing to a statue. These Godly men would rather face incredibly painful deaths than to do what millions of Roman Catholics wrongly do daily in the name of God. And while they may have zeal for the Lord, their zeal lacks knowledge and therefore will not be acceptable to God.

I will continue to pray for you Mr. Martinez.

Eddie Walker

Comments/Strategies: Mr. Walker, I will assume, out of Christian charity, that your statements here are based on simple ignorance, and not on malice. And I don’t say that in a disrespectful manner, but merely to be factual. No Catholic, at least, no properly catechized Catholic, gives to any man the “honor and praise” that is due to God alone. The Catholic Church does not now, nor has it ever, taught that we should honor and praise any man with the honor and praise that is due only to God. If you can find such a teaching in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is the official teaching of the Catholic Church, then I will renounce my Catholic Faith tomorrow.

The source of your confusion may be the Catholic usage of the phrase “pray to.” In this instance, we use the word “pray” in the same manner as the English of old would use it…as a request. I pray thee, sir, do not spread false information about my faith. When we “pray to” the angels and the saints, we do not believe that they are somehow divine…in some way God…and that we can go to them to have our prayers answered instead of going to Jesus. You would be well-served to get a Catechism of the Catholic Church and study our teachings on the Communion of Saints, because your lack of understanding in this area is causing you to falsely accuse Catholics or something that we do not do.

We are simply asking the saints and angels to pray for whatever intentions we bring to them. Do not the scriptures somewhere say, “The prayer of a righteous man availeth much?” Who is more righteous than the angels and saints in Heaven, who are united to Christ in a manner far beyond what we have attained here on Earth?

Also, if you are saying that God does not allow us to give any honor and praise to men, then I would have to take issue with that. We do honor and praise the saints in Heaven, as well as ordinary men and women here on Earth, but not in the same way we honor and praise God. God Himself tells us to honor our father and our mother, does He not? God honored Mary by allowing her to bear His Son. And He said to her, “Blessed are you among women!” What an incredible honor! God honors Mary, are you saying we are not to do likewise?

And, all I have to say in regards to your mention of the “Queen of Heaven,” is this: If the Bible mentioned a woman, and it said she was in Heaven, and it further said that she had a crown on her head, what would you call her?

Finally, I would ask of you two questions, one of which has already been asked. I pray thee answer them:

1) Are you infallible in your interpretations of the Bible? Yes or no?

2) If you believe in salvation by faith alone, then can you please explain to me how James 2:26 supports that belief?

In Christ’s name,

John Martignoni

P.S. I will be asking all 9000 or so of my readers to please keep you in their prayers…that you will one day be able to see and acknowledge the truths contained in the scriptures.

In Conclusion

I hope all of you have a great weekend. If I get a response to this newsletter from Mr. Walker, I’ll carry on the conversation with him in the next newsletter. Please keep him in your prayers!

God bless!

How to be added to, or removed from, the list

If this newsletter was forwarded to you by a friend, and you would like to be added to our distribution list, all you have to do is go to www.biblechristiansociety.com and click on the “Newsletter” page to sign up. It will take you about 10 seconds.

$RemovalHTML$

Share this newsletter on: