Replies to My Conclusion About Protestants (Part 2) - Apologetics for the Masses #557

So, here are just a couple of questions I would love for you to answer:

1) I assume you believe the Gospel of Mark is the inspired, inerrant, Word of God, right? I also assume you believe in Sola Scriptura, right? (Let me know if you don't.) So, given both of those facts, can you give me book, chapter, and verse that says the Gospel of Mark is the inspired, inerrant, Word of God. And, if you can't give me anywhere in the Bible that says that, then what authority do you rely upon to believe that?

2) I assume you believe in Sola Fide - salvation by faith alone. (Again, if not, please let me know.) So, do you believe the Bible when it says that God will render unto every man according to his works, or not? That those who strive for honor and glory and immortality He will give eternal life?

Strategy/Comments  
Okay, you say you "fear" for Catholics?  Do you really?  Then prove it by answering some of my questions. Do what you can to help me escape this evil "system" that I'm in.  Or are you just talking out of both sides of your mouth?!

So, I asked her two questions.  One each about the 2 pillars of Protestantism - Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. Question #1 is based on common sense.  You go by Sola Scriptura - the Bible alone - so where in the Bible does it tell you that the Gospel of Mark is the inspired, inerrant, Word of God?  And, if it's not the Bible that tells you that, then what authority are you relying on for your belief?  No Protestant can answer this question and be consistent with a belief in Sola Scriptura.  That's why I ask it all the time.

The 2nd question comes straight from the Bible - Romans 2:6-7 - which states very clearly that God renders to man according to his works and that He gives eternal life to those who strive for honor and glory and immortality.  If you believe we're saved by faith alone, what do you do with that verse?  Well, you have to make things up, of course.  Which she did...

Renee Ratcliffe
The argument that we need an external church council to tell us what belongs in the Bible falls flat. 2 Timothy 3:16 explicitly declares that "all Scripture is breathed out by God." It carries its own divine, infallible authority from the moment it was written. The early Christians didn't need a church council centuries later to grant authority to the Gospel of Mark; they recognized it immediately because it came directly from the apostolic circle (Mark being the scribe of the Apostle Peter). The Holy Spirit confirms the voice of God to believers through His Word (John 10:27). The church did not create the Bible; the truth of the Bible created the church.As for Romans 2, looking at the verse in isolation misses the entire point of Paul’s letter. In the opening chapters of Romans, Paul lays down God's perfect legal standard to prove a point: absolutely nobody can meet it. This is why he concludes just a chapter later in Romans 3:20 that "by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight."We are absolutely saved by faith alone, but true faith is never alone. Ephesians 2:8–10 perfectly resolves this: we are saved by grace through faith not of works, but we are saved for good works. When God evaluates our lives on judgment day, our works do not earn our salvation; rather, they serve as the visible evidence proving whether our faith was genuinely alive or completely dead.

John S. Martignoni  
Well, a finer example of circular reasoning I have never seen. You go by the Bible alone, yet you rely on tradition that is outside of the Bible in order to have your Bible in the first place. That's pretty funny! Well, it would be if it wasn't so sad...for you.

2 Tim 3:16 does indeed say that all Scripture is "breathed out by God". That is not in dispute. What I want to know, is who told you that the Gospel of Mark was written by Mark, the "scribe of the Apostle Peter"? Does the Bible tell you that?  No, it doesn't. So who told you? It's a non-biblical tradition that you believe in, isn't it?

By the way, you are aware, aren't you, that 2 Tim 3:16 is speaking specifically about the Old Testament, right?  I mean, just read 2 Tim 3:15.
Regarding Romans 2:6-7, it says specifically that God will render to every man according to his works. Yet, you disagree with what the Word of God says. Wow!  And, in order to justify your disagreement with the Word of God, you have to translate it to mean: " Paul lays down God's perfect legal standard to prove a point: absolutely nobody can meet it."  Where does the Bible actually say that? It doesn't. You made it up!  So, I give you the Word of God, and you come back to me with the Word of Renee. Will you admit that your interpretation of this passage is nothing more than your private, non-authoritative, fallible interpretation...yes or no?  

Strategy/Comments
Where, in my question about the Gospel of Mark, did I mention anything about a Church Council?  I didn't.  She has to deflect from the question and try to turn it around on me because she cannot answer my question...and she knows it.  She said, "The church did not create the Bible; the truth of the Bible created the church."  Actually, God, through the Church, did indeed create the Bible as we know it today.  The Bible (i.e., the New Testament) did not create the Church as the Church existed before a single word of the New Testament was written.  

Pretty much everything she said is made up.  Fabricated out of the Protestant imagination because the Bible does not say what they are trying to make it say.  And all of it is to avoid giving direct answers to my very simple questions.  When you are dialoguing with Protestants - in person or online or wherever - specifically look for direct answers/responses to your questions/arguments.  If you don't get them, then repeat your questions/arguments and keep repeating them until you do get direct responses.  And, if you never do, then simply shake the dust off your sandals and move on.  Don't waste time on people who refuse to have an actual conversation.  Ask a question 3 times...if no answer...move on.  The exception being, if you have an audience.  If there are other people following your conversation, then go another round or two so that they can see the Catholic asking the same question over and over and over again, and the Protestant either unable, or unwilling, to answer.  That could plant a seed or two.

Renee Ratcliffe  
I speak,write think and do per guidance from the Holy Spirit. You're asking me to identify traditions outside the Bible that I'm relying on, but it seems like you're starting from a place of assumption. Can you provide some evidence or context for why you think I'm relying on extra-biblical traditions, and how that relates to our discussion about the Catholic Church's teachings?

John S. Martignoni
You asked, so here ya go:

1) You stated: "2 Timothy 3:16 explicitly declares that "all Scripture is breathed out by God." Indeed it does. But, 2 Tim 3:16 doesn't tell you which books are or are not inspired, inerrant Scripture. Nor does any passage of the Bible give you a list of the books that are inspired, inerrant Scripture. Who decided which books are, or are not, the inspired, inerrant Word of God? You are relying on extra-biblical tradition to know that.

2) "The early Christians didn't need a church council centuries later to grant authority to the Gospel of Mark." Right here, you explicitly admit that you are relying on the extra-biblical tradition of the "early Christians" in order to know that the Gospel of Mark is the inspired, inerrant, Word of God. By the way, which "early Christians" are you referring to? Can you give me some names?  

So, there you go - I am using your own words to prove that you are relying upon extra-biblical tradition. How it relates to the Catholic Church's teachings, is that you claim the Catholic Church is wrong in its teachings, yet your claims are based on your private interpretations of the Bible. You can't even tell me how you know which books should or should not be in the Bible! In other words, you claim to go by the Scripture alone, but you are relying on some authority - outside of Scripture - in order to have the Scripture in the 1st place. I just want to know what authority that is?  Quick question: Are you infallible in your interpretations of the Bible...yes or no?

Strategy/Comments 
Her asking me for "evidence" as to why I think she is relying on extra-biblical traditions is what gave me a glimmer of hope that this conversation could maybe be a bit different than most conversations I have with Protestants.  Anytime you hear a Protestant say, "the early Christians," you need to do 2 things: 1) Remind them that the witness of the early Christians is something that we Catholics call...tradition!  It is not Scripture!  2) Ask them to give you some of the names of these "early Christians".  Who were they?  Where were they?  When were they?  Give me some names...

Renee Ratcliffe  
To answer your question: No, I am not personally infallible, but the Holy Spirit who guides me is. My approach to understanding the Bible isn't just 'private guesswork.' I have studied hermeneutics, which means I apply objective, historical, and grammatical rules to understand what the authors intended to communicate.Acknowledging that God used early Christians to recognize the canon is history, not 'relying on Roman Catholic authority.' The Holy Spirit ensures that God's people recognize His voice in Scripture, and that same Spirit allows non-Catholics to faithfully read, interpret, and live out the Bible today without needing a church council's permission.

John 16:13 – "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come."1 Corinthians 2:12-14 – Explains that human wisdom cannot understand the things of God, but believers receive the Spirit to comprehend God's thoughts: "Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God... The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned."1 John 2:27 – Highlights the internal teaching work of the Spirit within the believer: "But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him."John 14:26 – "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you."Ephesians 1:17-18 – Paul prays for believers to receive spiritual insight: "That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened. 

John S. Martignoni  
Well, that was a pretty ambiguous answer. I hope you are intellectually honest enough to really think about, and take to heart, what I am about to say.

1) "To answer your question: No, I am not personally infallible, but the Holy Spirit who guides me is."  That is a cop out. Trying to have it both ways, aren't you?  If the Holy Spirit is actually guiding you in your interpretations of the Bible, then you are indeed infallible in your interpretations of the Bible, because the Holy Spirit is infallible. If He's guiding you, you're infallible. If He's not guiding you, you're not. So, are you infallible in your interpretation of the Bible...yes or no?  If not, then will you admit that the Holy Spirit isn't guiding you in your interpretations of the Bible?

2) "My approach to understanding the Bible isn't just 'private guesswork.' I have studied hermeneutics, which means I apply objective, historical, and grammatical rules to understand what the authors intended to communicate."   Actually, no, you don't apply any objectivity to Scripture. You approach Scripture with pre-formed beliefs and you make Scripture conform to your beliefs. And I can prove that you don't really apply objective grammatical rules to understand what the authors intended to communicate. Matt 16:16-19, Jesus gives Peter the keys of the kingdom and says that He will build His church on the rock that is Peter. You don't agree with that, do you? Why not? Are you going to make the "petra vs. petros" argument? If you do, then that shows you don't understand even the most basic rules of Greek grammar.

3) Acknowledging that God used early Christians to recognize the canon is history, it is not "relying on Roman Catholic authority".   It is indeed history. History that is also known as "tradition". So, you claim to go by Scripture alone for your beliefs; yet, you claim "tradition" - the witness of the early Christians - as the source of your beliefs about Scripture. Can you say, "contradiction"?  Plus, you apparently cannot answer the question that I asked previously: Exactly which early Christians do you rely upon for believing the Gospel of Mark, and the other books of the New Testament, are the inspired, inerrant, Word of God? Give me some names. Don't just throw out the term "early Christians," give me some actual names. And what authority did they have to declare some writing to be the Word of God? These are questions that you cannot answer.

Also, do you know that it is an historical fact that the early Christians baptized babies? That the confessed their sins to priests? That they believe the "Lord's Supper" was the actual body and blood of Christ? That they had bishops, priests, and deacons as their clergy? That they did not believe in a "rapture"? That they did not believe in Sola Scriptura nor Sola Fide nor Once Saved Always Saved? Do you agree with the "early Christians" on any of those positions? Of course not.

4) "The Holy Spirit ensures that God's people recognize His voice in Scripture."   Where, exactly, does the Bible say that? Give me book, chapter, and verse please? What the Bible actually says is: "Do you understand what you are reading?" Philip said to the Ethiopian eunuch reading Scripture, "How can I unless someone guides me?" (Acts 8:31). The Word of God also says, "There are some things in them [Paul's letters] hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures," (2 Peter 3:16). It also says, "First of all, you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation..." (2 Peter 1:20).

5) "...and that same Spirit allows non-Catholics to faithfully read, interpret, and live out the Bible today without needing a church council's permission."
So, are you saying non-Catholics are all guided by the Holy Spirit into infallible interpretations of Scripture?

6) "John 16:13 – 'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come."  Amen! And that was spoken specifically to the Apostles at the Last Supper. Not to every single Christian who ever lived. Read verse 12. If you believe that was spoken to, and about, all Christians, then why do Protestant Christians, in particular, disagree on practically every single matter of Christian doctrine and morals? Is the Holy Spirit guiding all of them into different "truths"?

7) "1 Corinthians 2:12-14 – Explains that human wisdom cannot understand the things of God, but believers receive the Spirit to comprehend God's thoughts: 'Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God... The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.'"   There you go giving your private, fallible interpretation of Scripture. Was Paul talking about ALL the Corinthian believers he was writing to? No, he wasn't. Read chapter 3:1-3. Just because someone is a believer, it doesn't mean that they automatically understand all the things of God via the Spirit. Sin gets in the way!

8 ) "1 John 2:27 – Highlights the internal teaching work of the Spirit within the believer: 'But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him.'"   Again, fallible interpretation. Here's the thing, if you have no need of anyone to teach you, why do you go and listen to your pastor preach every Sunday? Why do you read books on history, biblical grammar, and why have you "studied hermeneutics"? Do you ever attend a Bible study? Why? Isn't the Spirit teaching you enough? And, if Christians have no need of anyone to teach them, then why does the Bible tell us that, "God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, their TEACHERS..."?! Why have teachers in a church where no one needs a teacher?

9) "John 14:26 – 'But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.'"   Again, spoken specifically to the Apostles who were at the Last Supper. Read verse 25. Context is everything. I thought you studied the rules of hermeneutics?

10) "Ephesians 1:17-18 – Paul prays for believers to receive spiritual insight: 'That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened.'"   I believe the operative word here is "may". That they "may" have these things. Not that they already do have those things.  Apparently, the people Paul is writing to are believers, but they obviously don't have those things at the time Paul is writing to them. Yet, you say believers somehow automatically have those things? If it's automatic that believers receive these "spiritual insights," then why is Paul praying that they "may" receive them?

I really, really hope and pray that you take these words of mine to heart and ask God to help you discern the truth in what I'm saying. In your system of theology, it's basically every man/woman for themselves. Everyone who can read the Bible gets to decide for themselves, as they believe the Holy Spirit is guiding them, as to what is or is not authentic Christian doctrine and dogma. Do you believe your particular interpretations of Scripture are more valid, and carry more authority, than all those Protestants who disagree with you on one or more doctrines?

Strategy/Comments  
Okay, I went all in here.  I wanted to show her that she was contradicting herself all over the place, that her interpretations were not just her private fallible interpretations, but that they also made no sense when Scripture was taken in context, and that I was no stranger to the Bible as she apparently assumes all Catholics are.  

It always makes me laugh when Protestants claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit when reading/interpreting Scripture, yet they don't claim to be infallible in their interpretations of Scripture.  How is that possible?  If I am absolutely, 100% positive, without a doubt, sure that the Holy Spirit is my guide when interpreting Scripture, then you better believe that I am going to claim to be infallible in my interpretations thereof!  I mean, what mistakes does the Holy Spirit make when He interprets Scripture?  What mistakes does He make when guiding me in my interpretations of Scripture?  None!  Assuming, that He really is guiding me in my interpretations.  The Holy Spirit doesn't make mistakes!  If you claim the Holy Spirit is guiding you in your interpretations of Scripture, yet you claim to not be infallible in your interpretations of Scripture, then you are claiming something that is, on its face, a contradiction.  It's one or the other...it can't be both.  You're either infallible in your interpretations, or the Holy Spirit is not guiding you in your interpretations.  Period.

Renee Ratcliffe  
John S. Martignoni Let's not go back and forth endlessly about this. Honestly, what's the point? You can keep your religious experience, and I'll keep my personal relationship with Jesus - that's where the Gospel truly comes alive and true salvation is found.

John S. Martignoni
Ah, yes, I get that a lot from Protestants. Which is why I said what I said in my opening post. You are proving that what I said is absolutely true. When confronted with questions/arguments for which they have no answer, what do they do - retreat. Run away.

"Let's not go back and forth endlessly about this," translates to: "I have no reply for most, if not all, of your questions and arguments, but I don't want to admit that to myself, so let's just stop now before I have to seriously look at what you're saying and maybe...just maybe...have to reconsider some of my beliefs and opinions."

Let's just narrow this down a bit. How about you respond to just two of my points:

1) How can you not be infallible in your interpretatations of Scripture if the Holy Spirit is guiding you? Isn't He infallible? And, if He's guiding you, then doesn't that make you infallible in your interpretations?

2) Who are these "early Christians" upon whom you rely to know that the books of the Bible are indeed the inspired, inerrant, Word of God?

Actually, just one more point. Again, you stated: ""Acknowledging that God used early Christians to recognize the canon is history, not 'relying on Roman Catholic authority.'" You do realize that the canon of Scripture for the early Christians consisted of the 7 books that Martin Luther threw out of the Old Testament in the 1500's right? There was no such thing as a 66-book Bible until Martin Luther came along. So, why do you not recognize that God used the "early Christians" to recognize those 7 books as part of the canon? Are you not contradicting yourself?

I'm asking you to seriously pray about this, Renee.

Strategy/Comments  
Throwing a "Hail Mary" pass here.  Whenever you get something along the lines of, "Let's not go back and forth on this...," or, "We'll just have to agree to disagree," what's really happening is they are being like Brave Sir Robin...and running away!  They are either unable or unwilling to respond - fear - and so they run away.  And, usually, like Renee hear, they hurl a few insults as they do so: "You can keep your religious experience, and I'll keep my personal relationship with Jesus."  Oh, Catholics have a "religious" experience, but Renee has a "personal relationship" with Jesus...i.e., we don't.  Arrogance.  

Renee Ratcliffe
Hoy lekha (הוֹי לְךָ) 

John S. Martignoni
So, you come on this thread to respond to the conclusion I have come to about Protestants, and then you proceed to do nothing more than simply affirm that conclusion. You are either unable, or more than likely unwilling, to even attempt to answer my questions. They are not difficult questions to answer, at least, if you have a theology that isn't riddled with contradictions.

You said you "fear" for those, such as me, who are still in the Catholic Church. Was that the truth, or a lie? I mean, if you fear for me, then why won't you answer my questions? I'm asking in all sincerity, because to me, it looks like you really haven't thought through what it is you believe and why you believe it. Which makes me not want to give any credence whatsoever to anything you have to say here. 1 Peter 3:15 says to always be prepared to make a response to those who ask. I'm asking. Do you live by the Word of God or not?

Strategy/Comments
"Hoy lekha?"  Don't know what that was all about.  Was she thinking she was writing in tongues or something?  Who knows?  The fact of the matter is, though, when presented with questions and arguments for which her theology had no answer - at least, no logically consistent or biblically consistent answer, what does she do?  Does she take a deep breath, look me in the eyes, and say, "Okay, I'm listening," or does she turn tail and run? 

Renee Ratcliffe
{No further response.}

Conclusion about Protestants affirmed.  

Closing Comments

I hope all of you have a great week!  Please pray for us...we're praying for you! 

Donations