Apologetics for the Masses #523 - Will Pope Leo XIV Preach John 3:16? Pastor Dan Delzell's Response (Part 4)

Unsubscribe/Subscribe

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

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

Topic

Finishing up my conversation with Lutheran Pastor Dan Delzell about his article in "The Christian Post" online magazine, titled: "Will Pope Leo XIV Preach John 3:16"?

General Comments

1) For those of you in the Greenville, South Carolina area, I wanted to let you know that I will be speaking, and emceeing, at the 13th Annual Marian Eucharistic Conference there the weekend of October 24/25. Other speakers will be: Fr. Chris Alar, Fr. Donald Calloway, Fr. Joseph Mary Wolfe of EWTN, Russ Breault (if you haven't ever seen his presentation on the Shroud of Turin, it is incredible!) and Daniel Cellucci of the Catholic Leadership Institute. For more information, and/or to register: https://meconferencesc.net/.

2) If you would be interested in having me come to your parish, or conference, to speak on evangelization/apologetics, just send me an email (john@biblechristiansociety.com) and we can discuss the possibility.

Introduction

This week, I wind up my reply to Lutheran Pastor Dan Delzell in regard to what he had to say about my critique of the article he wrote for "The Christian Post" about Pope Leo XIV (see Apologetics for the Masses - Issue #520). As I did in the last issue, I'll take what he said paragraph by paragraph, with my comments interspersed between his. And, as I mentioned last time, my comments will not include anything on the thinking/strategy behind why I say what I say in my responses. I will probably come back and do a "strategic analysis" of the conversation in another issue.

I'll pickup below by repeating the final section of the last issue - Apologetics for the Masses #522 - and then go from there.

This one is a little longer than I thought it would be - I got a little cranked up on a couple of things - but don't worry, I have some things going on this coming week, so it will be a couple of weeks before I get the next newsletter out. So you've got plenty of time to read and digest this one.

Challenge/Response/Strategy

Pastor Dan Delzell
If Luther and the Catholic church had been able to agree on "Christianity 101," it could have laid a foundation for even broader reform in the church. And it could have led to important discussions about other matters of doctrine as well. Obviously, that is not how it played out.

My Comments
"Christianity 101," Pastor, is that Jesus established a church that has authority...His authority...and we are to obey the teachings of that church in matters of faith and morals (Matt 28:20; 18:15-18; 16:18-19). And, as you have indirectly pointed out above, that church was not the Lutheran church. Martin Luther rebelled against the original church and its authority. He brought division to Christianity with his novel dogmas of Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura and his rejection of authority. And look at the mess that has resulted from it. There was no "Reformation," rather, what Martin Luther wrought should be called the "Deformation".

Pastor Dan Delzell
You wrote in your newsletter John:

"My question for Dan, were I to have the opportunity to ask him a question, is how many times did Jesus 'clearly and consistently proclaim and explain John 3:16'? I didn't read anywhere in the Gospels where Jesus said, 'Yo, guys, gather round. Let me clearly explain what it means that God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.' I did read, however, where Jesus, when directly asked, 'What good deed must I do to have eternal life?' answered by saying, 'If you would enter life, keep the Commandments.' I don't recall Jesus saying, 'Good deed? What good deed? You don't need to do any good deeds to have eternal life. Foolish fellow! Just accept Me into your heart as your personal Lord and Savior and you will have eternal life.'"

John...If you read John 11:25-26, you will see that Jesus affirmed the Gospel message He proclaimed in John 3:16. Jesus said, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

My Comments
I notice, Pastor, that you did not directly answer my question. You wrote in your article in The Christian Post, and I quote: "Can you think of one pope in your lifetime who clearly proclaimed and explained the Gospel?...Will Pope Leo XIV clearly and consistently proclaim and explain John 3:16? So, I asked you, "How many times did Jesus 'clearly and consistently proclaim and explain John 3:16?'" I mean, if you're expecting Pope Leo to consistently proclaim and explain John 3:16, then I would imagine you are asking because you know Jesus did the same, right? Yet, when I ask you how many times in the Gospels we find Jesus "clearly and consistently proclaim and explain John 3:16," you can't give me an answer. You did say, however, that Jesus, in John 11:25-26, "affirm[ed]" the Gospel message He proclaimed in John 3:16. But, you don't say the Gospel message was "clearly" proclaimed and explained in John 11:25-26. So, I guess your answer to my question is, "Zero?"

Here's the thing, Pastor, to ask if there is "one pope in your lifetime who clearly proclaimed and explained the Gospel," is, at best, disingenous; at worst, it is the height of either ignorance or deceit. Tell me, please, Pastor, how many of, for example, Benedict XVI's encyclicals did you read? Did you read Deus Caritas Est (God Is Love)? Spe Salvi (In Hope We Were Saved)? How about any of John Paul II's encyclicals? For example, Redemptor Hominis (Redeemer of Man)? Dominum et Vivicantem (The Lord and Giver of Life)? How many of their talks, or Wednesday papal audiences, or homilies (sermons) have you ever listened to? Apparently, zero. They spoke of Christ, of following Christ, of salvation in Christ, of faith, of love, and of the Gospel on too many occasions to count. And that's just citing 2 of the Popes in my lifetime. In Pope Leo's first message as Pope, what did he say? "We are disciples of Christ. Christ goes before us. The world needs His light. Humanity needs Him as the bridge to reach God and His love." To say that you have never heard a Pope, in your lifetime, ever preach the Gospel is to admit that you are, essentially, ignorant of what the popes in your lifetime have preached, or deliberately ignoring what they have preached.

Now, back to your response to my question. You didn't give me a direct answer, instead, you tried to do a little misdirection with your question for me as to whether or not I believe in what Jesus said in John 11:25-26: "He who believes in Me, though he die, yet shall live..." Well, I will do something, Pastor, that I find you very hesitant to do - I will give a direct answer to your question. Yes, I believe what Jesus says in John 11:25-26. In fact, I believe what every single verse of the Bible says. As does the Catholic Church. I might, as does the Catholic Church, reject your fallible interpretations of what this or that verse means, but I do indeed believe every single verse of the Word of God. But, I don't know if you do, Pastor. For example, do you believe Jesus when He says, "If you would have life, keep the Commandments?" Do you believe Jesus when He says, "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life?" Do you believe Paul when he says, "For He will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, He will give eternal life?" Do you believe Paul when he says, "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision are of any avail, but faith working through love?" Do you believe this?

Pastor Dan Delzell
I encourage you John to immerse yourself in Paul's 13 or 14 epistles, as well of course as the rest of Scripture. The Gospel is clearly presented throughout the New Testament. I struggled to find even one example where you presented the Gospel as you critiqued my article. You seem more focused on pointing to the Law as a supposed means of justification. The Law is obviously important, but the Law cannot convert a soul. Only the Holy Spirit can work the miracle of spiritual conversion through the Gospel. Paul wrote, "I am not ashamed of the Gospel, because IT (the Gospel) is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes" (Romans 1:16). In order for you to clear up your confusion John on the critical doctrine of justification, you will need to rely on Scripture alone, rather than depending so heavily on your organization's interpretations. You will be amazed if you come to see the truth of the Gospel as the Holy Spirit opens your eyes to the clear teaching of the Bible. Try immersing yourself in Romans and Galatians. Those two letters are perfect for anyone who misunderstands justification.

My Comments
I find it a bit arrogant, Pastor, of you to "encourage" me to immerse myself in Paul's epistles. How do you know I haven't already done so? Oh, it's because my interpretation of the Bible doesn't agree with your interpretation of the Bible, right? So that means, of course, that I obviously haven't done much study of the Bible, doesn't it? Your private, non-authoritative, fallible interpretation of the Bible is the standard by which all other interpretations of the Bible should be judged...is that it? Forgive me if that comes across as arrogant and condescending on your part. And when you say that you "struggled to find even one example where [I] presented the Gospel" in my critique of your article, don't you really mean you struggled to find even one example of the Gospel according to the Word of Dan in my critique of your article? Does Hebrews 12:14 not convey the message of the Gospel? How about 1 Cor 6:11? Or 2 Cor 5:17? Rom 6:22? John 6:51-58? Matt 25:14-30, 31-46? Col 3:23-24? Heb 10:35-36? Rom 2:6-7? 1 Cor 13:2? Why is it you "struggle" to find the Gospel message in all of these verses that I cited in my critique of your article? Could it be because you have a misunderstanding of exactly what the Gospel message is?

Furthermore, you stated that in my critique of your article I seemed "...more focused on pointing to the Law as a supposed means of justification." Uhmm, no, I did not. Not a single time did I mention "the Law" as a "means of justification," nor did I even imply such a thing. I find it fascinating how you not only read the Bible through the distorted lens of your preconceived, man-made, belief in the false dogma of Sola Fide, but you are reading my words through that same lens. Where, Pastor, did I quote the Old Testament for my beliefs regarding salvation? Where did I cite "the Law"? I don't believe I did so a single time. Yet, you claim I was "focusing" on "the Law".

But, I know why you make such claims. Because you have to do exactly what Democrats do. When presented with an argument that does not fit the desired narrative, Democrats do not answer the question. They obfuscate. They misdirect. They claim their opponent is fascist or rascist or homophobic or some other such slur. You are doing the same thing. You don't answer my questions. You obfuscate. You misdirect. You insinuate that I am not a Christian and that my beliefs are false because they do not line up with your beliefs. Your beliefs which come, not from Scripture, but from your fallible interpretations of Scripture.

For example, I asked several times in my critique of your article, "Where does the Bible say...?" what you were saying it says. I don't think you answered that question a single time in your response to me. I also asked a few times about what authority do you have to say the things you're saying. Again, not a single time did you answer. Why is that, Pastor? Why didn't you respond to my biblically-based questions about various Scripture verses? Why?! I'll tell you why - because you don't want to think about the difficulties raised by my questions vis-a-vis your beliefs. You don't want to really think about the contradictions imbedded in the very foundations of your belief system when compared to Scripture, in its entirety.

"In order for you to clear up your confusion John on the critical doctrine of justification, you will need to rely on Scripture alone, rather than depending so heavily on your organization's interpretations." Here's an example of just what I'm talking about. Why do you believe I am "confused" when it comes to the "doctrine of justification"? Why? Because my belief as to what Scripture says about the doctrine of justification is different than yours. It's not different from what the Bible says, rather, it's different from what you say the Bible says. How do you come by your belief? What authority do you cite for your belief? You cite your own private, fallible interpretation of Scripture as your authority. You do not want me to believe my "organization's interpretations," but you do want me to believe your interpretations! I find that the height of arrogance and hubris. "John, don't believe what the church teaches, believe instead what I teach." Really?! You would have me gamble my salvation on your fallible interpretations of the Bible? Really?!

And I can hear you now, "No, John. I don't want you to believe my interpretations of the Bible. I want you to read the Bible and interpret it for yourself." Well, actually...no, you don't. Because I have. Yet, you are telling me that my interpretations are wrong. So, again, I will ask: By what authority do you declare your interpretations of the Bible to be more valid than my interpretations of the Bible?" What authority, Pastor? Please, tell me.

Essentially, Pastor, this is the situation your theology leaves you in: Whenever there is a disagreement on what the Bible teaches - whether between Catholic and Protestant or between Protestant and Protestant - then the best your theology can come up with to decide what is or is not authentic Christian teaching, is one person's fallible interpretation of the Bible vs. the other person's fallible interpretation of the Bible. That's it. That's the best you can do. Tell me honestly, do you think that is the state that Jesus left His church in? Do you think Jesus abandoned His followers to having to determine the truth by each person coming up with their own private, fallible interpretations of God's Word? I don't reject the Word of God, Pastor, I reject the Word of Dan. Tell me why I'm wrong to do so.

One last thing here, in regard to immersing myself in Romans and Galatians. I will ask you two questions...one from Romans and one from Galatians:

1) Do you believe that God will render eternal life to men who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality? Yes or no?

2) Do you believe that in Christ Jesus the only thing that is of avail is faith working through love? Yes or no?

Pastor Dan Delzell
You misunderstood John why Jesus told the man to "keep the Commandments" in the passage you referenced above. (Matthew 19:16-22) The man was self-righteous and assumed he was not a sinner. Regarding the commandments, the man said, "All these I have kept." His heart was not yet ready to hear and receive the Gospel due to the hardness of his heart and his self-righteous attitude. Therefore Jesus gave him the Law rather than the Gospel. After all, "The Law was put in charge to lead us to Christ." (Galatians 3:24) The Holy Spirit works through the Word to comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable. This rich young man was comfortable in his sin, and even considered himself righteous. Jesus knew his heart and the exact spiritual medicine necessary for the situation. Likewise, Paul and Silas in Acts 16:25-34 knew the jailer was afflicted and ready to hear and receive the Gospel. Therefore, they told him simply: "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved." Contrite sinners need the comfort of the Gospel, whereas callous, arrogant and self-righteous sinners need the threats of the Law.

My Comments
Where, oh where, Pastor, does the Bible say the man that asked Jesus the question about eternal life in Matt 19:16 was "self-righteous and assumed he was not a sinner"? Where does the Bible say, "His heart was not yet ready to hear and receive the Gospel due to the hardness of his heart and his self-righteous attitude?" That's your fallible interpretation is it not? Jesus indeed knew the man's heart...but you don't! I mean, if what you say was the case, why does the Word of God focus on the fact that the man was rich, insteading of focusing on him being self-righteous? Why did Jesus follow up that conversation by telling His disciples that it will be hard for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven? Why, instead, did He not say, "See, I tell you that the self-righteous will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven?" Or, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a self-righteous man to enter the Kingdom of God?" You completely distorted the Word of God here, Pastor. Why? Because you read it through the lens of your pre-determined belief in Sola Fide. That lens is distorted, Pastor, and you had better wake up to that fact in a hurry.

Pastor Dan Delzell
We are saved by grace through faith, (on the front end of our relationship with God) and "created in Christ Jesus to do good works." (Ephesians 2:8-10)

My Comments
Amen! I believe in Eph 2:8-10. But, let me ask you a question, Pastor: If we decide not do the good works that we are created in Christ Jesus to do, are we still saved? Yes or no?

Pastor Dan Delzell
I am going to list the titles and links to articles I have written that go through Scripture to explain how justification and sanctification play out in the life of a believer. I hope you will print this list of articles John as part of my response because the issues you raised in your newsletters can only be properly understood and addressed by opening up the Bible and being led by the Holy Spirit to understand what is being taught. (rather than merely relying upon your organization's interpretations)

My Comments
I was more than happy to print the titles of, and links to, your articles in my newsletter, Pastor. As I always say, truth does not fear error. They went out to some 60,000 or so Catholics from all 50 states and about 80 countries around the world. But, Pastor, would you be willing to reciprocate? I don't think you will, but I'm going to ask, nonetheless. I propose that you and I have a written dialogue on the subject of salvation. Furthermore, I am asking you to prevail upon the publishers of The Christian Post to print that dialogue in their magazine. Would you be willing to do so? I mean, if I am so ignorant of Scripture, as you believe me to be, and the Catholic Church is so wrong in its teachings, it would be a very eye opening exchange as to the paucity of Catholic belief for their readers, don't you think? Or, would you be open to my coming to your church, at my expense, to have a dialogue with you on that same topic in front of your congregants? Let me know...

Pastor Dan Delzell
Thankfully, numerous Catholics are opening up their Bible these days and studying Scripture, as reported by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops: "Until the twentieth Century, it was only Protestants who actively embraced Scripture study. That changed after 1943 when Pope Pius XII issued the encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu. This not only allowed Catholics to study Scripture, it encouraged them to do so. And with Catholics studying Scripture and teaching other Catholics about what they were studying, familiarity with Scripture grew."

My Comments
I love how you didn't give the full context of that quote about Catholics and Scripture study - a very Protestant thing to do. I note you didn't mention anything about how, in just the paragraph before the one you quoted from, that article states: "Protestants rejected the authority of the Pope and of the Church and showed it by saying people could read and interpret the Bible for themselves." It was a rejection of Church authority that led to Protestants, such as yourself, believing that their private, fallible interpretations of the Bible were more valid than the interpretations of the Church founded by Jesus Christ and guided by the Holy Spirit.

But, it is indeed a very good thing that more and more Catholics are engaging in Scripture study. That is one reason why I am so easily able to recognize the errors taught by Protestantism.

Pastor Dan Delzell
I have witnessed this firsthand in the case of my mother; She is 85, a strong Christian, and a lifelong Lutheran. My mom and some other ladies (mostly Catholic) in their real estate office have been meeting for 40 years to study the Bible together. My mom has told me often about her Catholic friends and their earnest hunger for God's Word.

My Comments
Awesome. And, completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. So, I will offer something similarly irrelevant to the discussion at hand - I have witnessed firsthand that many Protestants are discovering the authority of the Catholic Church and realizing that to separate the Word of God from the Church which authoritatively witnesses to the Word of God, is essentially to separate the Head - which is Christ - from His body, which is the Church. It's decapitating Jesus.

Pastor Dan Delzell
Speaking of Bible study, here are some articles (with links) that I wrote 7 years ago:

"Romans 1 and 2 for Catholics, Protestants and Every Christian"
"Romans 3 and 4 for Catholics, Protestants and Every Christian"
"Romans 5 and 6 for Catholics, Protestants and Every Christian"
"Romans 7 and 8 for Catholics, Protestants and Every Christian"
"Galatians for Catholics, Protestants and Every Christian"
"Ephesians for Catholics, Protestants and Every Christian"
"Philippians for Catholics, Protestants and Every Christian"
"Colossians for Catholics, Protestants and Every Christian"

My Comments
I read the first article listed above - Romans 1 and 2 - and I was curious as to why you apparently believe that good works = the Law? Works of the Law are not the same as good works, Pastor. Again, a fundamental flaw in your methodology of interpretation - seeing everything through the lens of Sola Fide - leads to major misinterpretations of God's Word on your part. Also, I would suggest, that a better title of the article would have been: Romans 1 and 2 for Catholics, Protestants, and every Christian, According to the Fallible Interpretation of Dan Delzell. And, what you did with Rom 2:6-7...well, I just had to shake my head. Does Rom 2:6-7, not clearly and unambiguously say, that God will give "eternal life" to those who "by patience in well-doing" (i.e., good works), "seek for glory and honor and immortality"? Yes or no? And, please, do not misinterpet my words to mean that one is saved by works alone or any such thing. What I'm saying, is that Rom 2:6-7 presents a problem for your theology that has to be explained away, or around, whereas it presents no such problem for my theology.

No need, really, to read any of the other articles as I assume they are all just giving the reader your private, non-authoritative, fallible interpretations of Scripture, right? And those interpretations are all the result of filtering every passage of Scripture through the lens of the false dogma of Sola Fide, correct?

Pastor Dan Delzell
And I wrote this important article a couple years ago:

"Assessing 'Growth in Justification' with Bishop Robert Barron"

My Comments
"Important" article? According to you, yes? I read your "important" article and found it, well, rather unconvincing. One line in it, in particular, caught my attention. You stated: "After all, I don’t know a single Christian who believes that a person can be converted and justified by Christ’s imputed righteousness without there also being a real transformation that accompanies the spiritual conversion." I have to ask, Pastor, if the righteousness of Christ is imputed, yet, a "real transformation" takes place, then that means the righteousness is not imputed. It's "real" in the soul of the person. Your entire article is flawed at its core by a contradiction in your theology...in your logic.

Pastor Dan Delzell
Thanks again John for the invitation to respond to the theological issues you raised.

I hope this helps.

In Christ,

Pastor Dan Delzell
Redeemer Lutheran Church
Papillion, Nebraska

My Comments
It did indeed help, Pastor...it helped to shine a brighter light on the contradictions inherent in Protestant theology. Many thanks!

Closing Comments

I hope all of you have a great week.

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:

https://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

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

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