Hello. Thank you for your kind video. However, I'm concerned when you said that Protestants are sealed and can't lose salvation. How would you interpret Galatians 5:19-22 which seem to contradict your view?
I have a question. Is your view that if one truly believes that he will necessarily show good fruits, or do you believe that no sins can vary one from heaven?
@@Jamric-gr8gr if a person is a genuine Christian their faith will result in good works, and if they are sealed by the Holy Spirit they will go to heaven.
@@BornAgainRN thank you for the reply. Yes I am very much aware that. But focus on the verses that talk about the flesh. The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. THOSE WHO DO THESE THINGS WILL NOT BE SAVED. So I don't think the Bible teaches (along with other verses) that a justified believer can't lose his salvation. By the way, I apologize for calling you a heretic the other day. I was having a bad day. I hope you can accept my apology. Likewise,Just like you deal with comments that express hatred towards Protestants, I hope you can be charitable and do the same thing to comments that insult Catholics. Matthew 7:12 principle
@BornAgainRN Yes. I believe that too but I had to ask because a lot of Protestants I know believe that no amount of sins can bard one from heaven. I know that such a view is not a mainline Protestant view. However, the possibility of a true believer losing salvation is clearly expressed I the N.T in my opinion. Notice in Galatians 5:21 those who commit such sins will go to Hell. And St. Paul says "I warn YOU as I have warned YOU before that those who do these things (sins) will not inherit the kingdom of God. In Galatians 3:26-27, we see that YOU is referring to people who have put on Christ and actually did believe. Moreover, St. Paul himself says: But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway. 1 Corinthians 9:27 The Greek word for "castawat" here is used multiple times in the new testament to mean "reprobate" or somehow who's damned. So the Bible teaches that Paul himself could lose salvation for not living properly. This is why Romans 8:13 says For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live. The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? 43 It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. 44 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 45 But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk. 46 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers. In Luke 12:42-46 Jesis describes people who were his servants yet will be put with the unfaithful, clearly indicating the loss of salvation.
Thank God whatever you say has no authority and is not binding on any Christian, that includes Catholics, and your interpretation of the Bible is your own personal and Protestant interpretation out of thousands more!!
@@atgred you are making a strawman and demonstrating you do not have a clue what protestants believe or what the reformation was about. You are just pontificating. Did you even watch the video? Probably not.
3 дні тому+2
@@BornAgainRN the holy spirit doesn’t dwell in division. You didn’t answer my question. Where in the bible does it say that the bible is the sole rule of faith. Not one Protestant can answer that question.
@@drewbydoo4828 I agree with how he takes the five solas and contrasts them with five opposing Catholic views of soteriology. I guess I’m wondering what specifically about his view of Catholicism. I would agree with him that the Roman Catholic Church is apostate, and they believe in a false gospel. Is there something specific you’re wondering about if I agree with him?
Fr Ripperger said the Catholic Church provides solely for salvation in Christ. Protestantism was created by men who never met Christ, nor chosen by Him. His Church was established 2,000 years ago. Protestantism does not offer or provide the way to heaven. Non Catholics are saved not by various interpretations of the bible, but the Mystical Body of Christ.
@MavourneenKathleen-l5j Should we follow and obey the teachings of Fr Ripperger or The Holy Bible? Catholicism offers no salvation, it is only a broad road to the kingdom of the ruler of this world; the greatest seducer and murderer from the beginning. Study the Bible and pray to The Lord Jesus Christ. Pray that you may be filled with His Holy Spirit and thereby discover and enter the Kingdom of God. For whoever knocks at the door, the door will be opened for him.
So you're arguing that someone can believe and confess the entire Nicene creed, but because they don't have a precisely correct understanding of the theology of justification they are not even a Christian? I encourage you to think more carefully about what you're suggesting: It's not actual faith in God /Jesus which saves, it's the intellectual understanding of highly complex and much disputed religious doctrines which saves? How did you get to the idea that when Jesus referred to "those who do the will of God" in Mark 3:35 that what Jesus really meant was those who have a proper understanding of justification?
@@KingoftheJuice18 because the New Testament says song. Read 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, and Romans “ whoever calls upon the name of the lord shall be saved.“ ” if you believe Jesus died for our sins, and God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” It is simple Soteriology. It’s Rome that makes it complicated.
@BornAgainRN Show me one faithful Catholic who doesn't believe that Jesus died to save him from his sins or that God raised Jesus from the dead. Just one! It isn't "simple"; you put a ton of extra conditions on it, all of which amount to "you have to be an evangelical Protestant exactly like me to be saved".
@@BornAgainRN Yes, yes, there are many texts to choose from. And what about when Jesus says, "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who DOES the will of my Father who is in heaven"? Or when James says, "Faith without works is dead"? Or the beautiful parable of the sheep and the goats? "'Truly I tell you, just as you did not DO it to one of the least of these, you did not DO it to me.' And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." Surely you aren't suggesting that how you live as a Christian is completely irrelevant to salvation?
Thank you Steve. You express similar concerns to mine. My mother left the Catholic Church after she married my father and never looked back. I could not be more grateful. Pray that my other family members see the light of the true gospel, which we know as the power of God for salvation to all who believe, in which the righteousness of God is revealed, a righteousness that is by FAITH from first to last... God bless Steve, and keep up the excellent work!
@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty thank you so much for the kind words! And most of my family are still Roman Catholic too and are not saved. So I continue to pray for them every day. And whenever we are in dialogues with Roman Catholics we have to remember the words of the apostle Peter to defend the faith with gentleness and reverence, which I genuinely attempted to do in this video with Dr. Ortlund who I believe is a brother in Christ, yet I believe he’s wrong about Catholics being Christians, based on the authority of scripture.
So glad to see someone responding to this. The vibe I got from Gavin when first exposed to him was milk toast fence sitter for the sake of adding more words in an already long conversation.
@@midnighthymn yes, I am seeing more ecumenism with protestants recently, including protestant pastors and apologists, beyond just catholics and protestants sharing some essential doctrines, such as the deity of Christ and the Trinity, as well as the virgin birth and Jesus dying for our sins and being risen from the dead.
@@BornAgainRN If we believe all of that, Steve, in what way are we not Christians? Is it Sola Fide? Is that the issue? If it is, just know Saint Paul doesn't teach that and the concept is foreign to the Bible. Do you really find it moral on your part to reject the Christianity of billions on a false gospel that was invented wholesale between the 15th and 16th centuries?
@@thepalegalilean I addressed this in the video. Did you even bother to watch it?? If so, why would you ask "in what way are we not Christians?" As far as debating, lately you have been less than charitable in your comments, and some of your comments have been strawman. I don't really care to debate people who comment this way. I will also be deleting comments of other Catholics, which I don't care to do, since I believe in freedom to post publicly. But I will not tolerate insults (from other Catholics, not you) on my channel. So, please be careful how you comment. But for now, I am not interested in debating you, as I have other fires on the burners. Maybe in the future.
@@BornAgainRN His point is accurate to a tee! Your comments and video is pure comedy that only a fool would believe. That’s why the Protestant faiths in America and the rest of the world are dwindling and the Catholic Church keeps growing!
@@BornAgainRN Catholics do not want to realize that insults to the accepted Sons of God and Temples of God have consequences for those who damage the Temples of God. And then they think they are doing their god a service?..! Be steadfast and sober, for we know that The Word will return asap.
Where can I find Matt Slicks intercession of the saints debate ? He uploaded the after show last night, but never uploaded the actual debate. I didn’t even know that he was having such a debate.
@@animallover7072 I don’t think Matt uploaded the actual debate. It’s on William Albrecht’s channel. But Matt did do an after hours debate review, which I joined in about an hour into it. I’ll post the link in a separate reply here.
@@BornAgainRN just went to William Albrechts channel and saw the video. I’ll watch the debate soon. It’s about time that Matt Slick finally debated that guy. Now we just need him to debate Trent Horn.
@animallover7072 and boy did William Albrecht destroy the man made traditions of Matt Slick! It was entertaining to see how many times Matt contradicts himself! Praying for his conversion! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
@@animallover7072 I also posted the link to Matt’s after hour debate review on Matt Slick‘s channel, which I participated in. Does the link show up on your end? If not, you might have to select “new comments“
FYI, many Christians, both Catholics and many Protestants teach that being born again of water and the Spirit refers to baptism. It’s called baptismal regeneration.
@@DarkHorseCrusader when I was younger, I was raised and educated Catholic, and I was even Lutheran for a short while. So I’m well aware that many protestants teach born again means water baptismal regeneration. However, Jesus expected Nicodemus who taught Israel from the Old Testament what “born of water and spirit“ meant. And the Old Testament did not teach Water baptismal regeneration, but rather whenever water was used symbolically with the spirit, it referred to simply the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, meaning a spiritual rebirth, not water baptismal regeneration, because the Old Testament did not teach that - look it up.
BornAgainRN Oh for the love of God, take a cold shower! Do you know of the great commission? Matt 28:19 seems clear to me. Were the early followers of christ martyred by Nero, considered christains? I would go so far as to say that those who gathered to celebrate the Eucharist in the catacombs of Rome were Catholic as in universal Christains.
@@DarkHorseCrusader No, nor does it need to be, since Jesus expected the average Jew to know what scripture means without them being able to infallibly interpret it. The new test but never promises anyone can infallibly interpret scripture, and even the Roman Catholic Church does that infallibly interpret scripture, despite claiming that it can. In fact, it is only claims to have interpreted six verses in the entire Bible, and they haven’t even done that right Carol which I demonstrate in other videos on my channel. Check out my Live section, where I demonstrate this.
@@alexs.5107 If you spent any time actually watching the video, you would’ve found out, and it’s not me, it’s not the Roman Catholic Church, and it’s not you.
3 дні тому
@@BornAgainRN well which of the 30,000 sects do you follow? How do you know yours is the truth? You have to be a Baptist lol.
This is generally a very flimsy argument by RCs. I will concede that there are passages and verses in the Scriptures where context is important to the understanding, and therefore the correct interpretation could be missed. However, when it comes to Paul's letters, the express purpose is to clarify a point beyond doubt; he is teaching, he is rebuking, he is correcting, and he is trying to be as clear as possible due to the confusion that already exists. Of course understanding the context can give us a better grasp on what is going on; but no fair scholar would say that Protestants have misinterpreted Romans or Galatians or Hebrews, which all have a focus on teaching and touch upon what it means to follow Jesus, how we were saved, the terms of being saved, and so on. Rather than plucking verses with completely different themes and topics, and trying to prove a different theory of justification or salvation through them; why do you not go to what was written specifically about justification and salvation? If you go there, you find the verses that we Protestants are always banging on about, and which lead us to the belief that we are saved by Christ Alone, by Grace Alone, through Faith Alone. God bless you.
The definition of being Christ' disciples was given by Christ Himself in John 13:35 and it does not match with what you said in the video. What makes you think you follow the Gospel according to Scripture? Let us examine the Gospel according to the Reformers, which you believe, and compare it with what Scripture says, NEITHER with what Church fathers said/wrote, NOR with any official statement from the Catholic Church. The Gospel according to the Reformers: How do sinful men find acceptance (or are justified) in the judgment of righteous God? The Reformers taught that Justification is by faith alone and through Justification an exchange took place between believers and Christ, known as double imputation. The believers got Christ’ righteousness imputed on them as if that righteousness were theirs while they remain sinners. Christ got believers’ entire sins (past, present, future) imputed on Him as if those sins were His while He remains sinless. There is no limit of either amount or type of believers' sins imputed on Him. Christ willingly offered Himself to take the punishment of those sins (that believers deserve) through dying on the cross. Let me know I made mistake or caricatured your gospel! Is the above scriptural?: 1. Are we justified by faith alone according to Scripture? The phrase "justified by faith" appears four times in New Testament (Rom. 3:28, 5:1, Gal. 2:16, 3:24). New Testament was written in Greek and the one in Rom. 3:28 is in Greek passive present tense while the rest are in Greek passive aorist tense . Both tenses do not indicate once for all justification. If Scripture teaches faith-alone justification, then the Holy Spirit would inspire Paul to write the phrase "justified by faith" in Greek passive perfect tense. Unlike that of English Greek perfect tense indicates the action described by the verb (to be justified) was completed in the past with continuing effect to the present. 2. Scripture denies double imputation in Eze. 18:20 (ESV): “The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.” 3. Scripture says that we lose righteousness by sinning or we cannot be righteous and sinner at the same time. Eze. 33:12-13 (ESV) says: “The righteous shall not be able to live by his righteousness when he sins. Though I say to the righteous that he shall surely live, yet if he trusts in his righteousness and does injustice, none of his righteous deeds shall be remembered, but in his injustice that he has done he shall die." Death here refers to hell, not physical death. 4. By declaring believers as righteous who remain sinners and punishing Christ for the sins He did not commit on the cross, God did abomination according to what Scripture says in Pro. 17:15 (ESV): “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the LORD.”
I'm afraid you are missing the point of the video, which wasn't to argue what the gospel IS, but that for Protestants who believe in justification by faith alone, they cannot say Catholics are Christians BECAUSE they reject justification by faith alone. I'm afraid you are coming at this from the wrong angle. A PROTESTANT cannot say Catholics are Christians, BECAUSE they believe in a different Gospel, & therefore a different Christ, according to Scripture. This is no different than Messianic Jews in Jesus' time not being Christians, despite looking for the Christ, BECAUSE they believed in a different Christ - based not on Scripture alone, but on their extrabiblical traditions.
I was an unbeliever until I was given faith from God, since that time I have been a believer. But I am only a believer because I was given to know the Truth. It wasn't anything that I had done that caused God to give me faith, I can only assume that my heart must have been open to receive from God, and God knew things about my heart, that I did not know, and that is why He chose to give me life in Christ. This all came with the complete righteousness of God being revealed in me. So I was fortunate to be given to understand how God sees us as righteous in Christ, and not how we see ourselves when we measure our righteousness according to the law. the doctrine of eternal punishment in hell is a lie that the self righteous tickle their ears with, in order to boost their own righteousness and gloat in themselves.
@@BornAgainRN You wrote "A PROTESTANT cannot say Catholics are Christians, BECAUSE they believe in a different Gospel, & therefore a different Christ, according to Scripture." That is exactly why I questioned whether the gospel you believe is the Gospel according to Scripture. You must prove it before you can accuse others of believing a different gospel.
@@ophiuchus9071 To answer your three points: 1. Catholics do believe that faith in Christ is gift from God - we neither need to do something nor be good persons to receive that gift. 2. How can God, who is omniscience, fails to see/know your unrighteousness being hidden under the righteousness of Christ - that is imputation teaching of the Reformers. 3. Catholics believe that we are made righteous by grace through Christ as Scripture says in Rom. 5:19. We do not believe that we can become righteous by ourselves.
@@justfromcatholic 2. How can God, who is omniscience, fails to see/know your unrighteousness being hidden under the righteousness of Christ - that is imputation teaching of the Reformers. end quote Ok I will admit I have never been involved in the church world but I have discernment regarding truth and the lie. The lie is exposed by that motive of self seeking glory and the truth is found in Christ through faith How can God? this is how God can... Isaiah 43:25 “I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more.
only those who have been resurrected to life in Christ by being born of the Spirit are Christians. A person attending the right church and joining a religion, no matter how accurate their doctrine is, does not qualify that person as a Christian belonging to Christ. Romans 8:9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.
2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here Galatians 6:15 Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation. For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. Psalm 75:7 It is God who judges: He brings one down, he exalts another. Revelation 3 8 I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. 9 I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars-I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. the Revealing 21:1-4 Then I saw “a new heavenly covenant and a new people of God on the earth,” for the first heavenly covenant and the first people of God on the earth had passed away,
If Tridentine Catholicism is not Christian, then Arminianism/semi-Pelagianism isn't either. The Arminian gospel doesn't actually save, you must have a right will and right choices to stay saved. The justified state can be lost at any moment and then you have to repent again so that righteousness is re-imputed to oneself. How is that essentially different from Trent? Losing by mortal sin the state of grace or losing by some act of sin the imputed righteousness of Christ, which in the Arminian gospel doesn't save you any more than the Roman sacramental state of grace.
What amazes me about Protestants is how they can diligently study the Bible their entire lives and STILL get it so terribly wrong ... while claiming that the Holy Spirit is guiding them. 😅😂
@@AndrewLane-pm2ro OK, that’s your personal view, but it really has nothing to do with what I posted, or the reason why I posted it. All you’re doing is pontificating, not responding to an argument.
Gavin claims something like faith alone. Whenever he is cornered in a debate about the Gospel or real salvation, he crumbles over and over again. He calls it "easy believism" and considers it one of his "first rank" issues.
@@raphaelfeneje486Then what does he mean by "easy belieism"? He called it a first rank issue meaning it's the most dangerous heresy. That you can't know you're saved just because you believe the Gospel.
Have you ever thought of humbly thanking God for your Roman Catholic upbringing by which you heard the word of God that brought you to faith? Have you ever paused to thank God for his faithfulness to his promise of forgiveness and new life in Christ which begun in your baptism? It is also totally disingenuous to lump Roman Catholics together with non-Trinitarians sects like Mormons or JWs.
@@aussiebloke51 I thank God every day for saving me, because there is nothing I could do on my own, or even cooperate with God with my salvation since I was spiritually dead. Spiritually dead people can’t even cooperate with their salvation because they’re spiritually blind. I actually appreciate my Catholic upbringing, because I was able to tell the difference between the gospel of salvation from scripture verses the false gospel that Rome teaches. Keep in mind, that groups like Jehovah’s Witnesses, and even trinitarians like SDAs who actually believe in the trinity, some of them are not Christians if they’re worshiping Jesus as Michael the Archangel, because they’re worshiping a created being. And they would be equally offended by you calling you “disingenuous“ for claiming they are not Christians. Just because someone believes in the deity of Christ and the Trinity that does not automatically make them Christians. There’s more to it than that.
@@aussiebloke51 The Scriptures disagree we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, that we believe in our heart that Jesus is Lord, lol. Those ARE Scriptures.
@@BornAgainRN you must have had a bad experience. Surely, you know that all are fallen. The Catholic church has always stated "it is a church of saints ,& sinners".
@@rexlion4510 I would love to have a discussion with him about this, but it’s totally up to him. I actually have a tremendous amount of respect for Dr. Ortlund, agreeing with probably 90-95% with him on other topics, but I strongly disagree with him that Catholics are Christians, based on the authority of Scripture. Time will tell.
Consider also that the Reformers may have considered Roman Catholic as Christians because of being before the Council of Trent that fotmally and specifically anathematized the gospel.
@@marknotestine424 there is definitely a difference between pre-and post-council of Trent Roman Catholicism, just as there is a huge difference between pre-and post Vatican II Roman Catholicism, which the latter became much more inclusive towards non-Catholics.
I read all the canons promulgated at the Council of Trent. In none of those canons is the Gospel anathematized. However, there are multiple places where the various protestant heresies are anathematized. And these protestant heresies, which protestants still believe and teach, deny what the New Testament teaches. This "BornAgainRN" is a heretic. He's not a Christian.
@marknotestine424, Ask yourself the question: Would the Lord Jesus Christ ask you whether you are a Catholic or a Protestant? or Would The Lord Jesus Christ ask you if you believed in Him in His death and resurrection from the dead for your sins and why you did not obey Him by being a Born-again Christian and Temple of God?
I understand the nervousness of not wanting to draw the circle of salvation too large, and every person should be as diligent as they can to make sure they are in it. But I would say that a fundamental trust in Christ as Savior can atone for a measure of works or self-righteousness, and even us who verbally renounce it often have secret spiritual pride.
@@Dizerner The main point I was attempting to make is that if a Protestant believes in the gospel of justification by faith alone which is supported by scripture that makes them a Christian. And that’s because they are accepting the atoning work of Christ is sufficient for their salvation. However, even though Catholics believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins, they do not accept the atoning work of Christ was sufficient and believe they have to somehow contribute to their salvation. Therefore protestants and Catholics are believing in different gospel and therefore a different Christ, which is what I flushed out in this video. If you haven’t watched the whole presentation, I would encourage you to do so to get a better and clearer understanding of what my argument is. Unfortunately most Catholics have not done this and instead chosen to attack and not be “gentle and reverent“ like the apostle peter commands us to.
@@BornAgainRN I think you are uncharitably reading their positions a lot, and even if you are in some measure correct, I know for a fact that the majority of RCC I have interacted with would put the essential merit on Christ alone, and that IS trusting in grace, essentially. And the sin you are pointing out-the essential sin of self-righteous or trusting in one's works-although we both may verbally renounce, since as a good Calvinist that I assume you are, you recognize we have a sin nature and our heart is deceitful above all things, we know that every moment we fall short of the perfect standard of perfect faith in Christ alone, and our sin nature tends towards pride and self-reliance constantly in some measure. You see what some people become-and this is a real ironic twist and a real shame-is what I call "Grace Pharisees." If others don't trust in grace as purely and perfectly as these Grace Pharisees think they do, if others don't reach their perfect level of faith alone in grace, then they are eager to condemn them and put Grace Law on them that they have to have good enough faith. But an imperfect faith still saves-a faulty faith still saves-a sinful dirty rag faith still saves-a self-righteous faith still saves, because there is a measure of trust in Christ, and we all fall short of perfect trust, it is a standard no one meets at any time, no man ever has, or ever will, purely trust in Christ's merit alone with no secret spiritual pride in anything. So an essential admission that Christ is the one who wins the merit and pays the price, is enough to put saving faith in an atonement. Aside from the terrible errors of Calvinistic thought, which I will leave be for now since it is not the topic here.
Christ came to fulfill the law Not to remove it ,James wrote Faith and Works ( love , deeds ) is what Jesus wants not Paul who never walked with Jesus but only the 12 Apostles , Christ promised 12 chairs in Heaven , 12 tribes of Isral not 13 , Jesus said he wll never come back until the end of times ,Paul said he seen Christ in the light , he lied 3 time on how he met Jesus , their are Protestant writers who go against Paul .
A couple of questions, if you don't mind: 1. You claim that you obtain "eternal justification" at the moment of your profession of faith, and then after that, you repent of your sins. Tell me, what's the point of repenting of your sins if you've already gained "eternal justification"? If you've obtained "eternal justification", there's no need to repent - you can sin all you like and still be eternally justified. 2. If you obtain "eternal justification" thru your profession of faith, why does Paul warn believers (ie, those with faith and are therefore, according to you, eternally justified) in Gal 5:19-21 and 1Cor 6:9-10 that their sins can result in them not inheriting the kingdom of God? Sounds like sin can turn your "eternal justification" into eternal damnation!
@@AndrewLane-pm2ro The moment of salvation involves a series of instantaneous steps. First, the Holy Spirit regenerates a persons heart, so they can accept the free gift of faith in order to believe, and once that happens they realize they have sinned against a holy God, which results in repentance which is also the work of the Holy Spirit. So from beginning to end, the entire process of salvation that happens in a moment is the work of God. When the apostle Paul talks about those who do not have the fruit of the spirit, he’s addressing unbelievers who will not inherit the kingdom of God. He’s not talking about genuine believers, because they have the fruit of the spirit, not the fruit of the flesh.
What makes you so sure that you have correctly interpreted the scriptures and that you understand the true gospel? Your interpretation of the gospel is novel. From my understanding of history, no one taught it in antiquity, the first people to teach this interpretation of the scriptures are protestants. I know of no ancient Christian sect that taught or believed the same gospel you do, neither catholic, orthodox, etc. If what you say is true then it means that there were no Christians from some time shortly after the lives of the apostles until after Martin Luther, about 1400 years or so. When you talk about lost salvation, what do you mean? Are you saying that if a Christian on his death bed rejects God and blasphemes him, he is still saved? Or are you saying that if you accidentally sin you are still saved? It's my understanding that catholics believe there are two categories of sin, sin that leads to death (mortal) and sin that doesn't (venial). That they believe that if someone commits a venial sin, or commits a mortal sin without full knowledge, they do not forfeit their salvation. That only those that commit mortal sin purposefully with full knowledge of their actions forfeit their salvation.
@@richardditty5318 Jesus expected the average Jew to know what Scripture meant when He asked them “Have you not read?” Ecclesiastical hierarchies like Roman Catholicism & the Watchtower claim only they can infallibly interpret Scripture. But do we really need a magisterium to explain to us what “Jesus weptL means? So if the average Jew could understand the gospel based on Scripture, so can we. Jesus said there is only ONE sin that leads to death - blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, while Rome says there are numerous “mortal” sins that can. So Rome contradicts Scripture. There have always been Christians since the time of Christ. The Reformers simply recovered it from the false gospel Rome had been teaching since it went apostate.
@@BornAgainRN How do you know that Jesus expected the average Jew to know the scriptures? That seems ridiculous considering how much books cost in antiquity. For example, a bible printed on velum in the middle ages would cost several years wages of a day laborer. Not to mention that the average Jew was illiterate and uneducated. In the first century the scriptures were kept on scrolls which were only read to the congregation on the Sabbath. When Jesus asked them "have you not read?" he was speaking to the Pharisees and Sadducees, the religious scholars of the Jews, which would be the equivalent of a Christian Priest or Bishop, people who are formally trained in Religious law. It's my understanding that Jesus expected the religious leaders to understand the scriptures and use this understanding to correctly teach the congregation because the Jews had a priestly religious system with a magisterium. There's a huge difference between understanding what "Jesus wept" means, and understanding the finer points of justification by faith. You're making an apples to oranges comparison. You side stepped my main criticism and question which is, where in antiquity after the time of the apostles did these Christians exist that believed as you believe? What were they called? Where are their writings? I cant find them. You claim that the reformers, so called, recovered the true gospel. From whom did they recover it and when was it lost? Jesus did not say there was only one sin that leads to death, he said that there was only one sin that wouldn't be forgiven, which is blasphemy of the holy spirit. This passage of scripture doesn't refute the Catholic interpretation of 1 John 5. You didn't answer my question about what you think a catholic believes when they say you can lose your salivation. And apparently a magisterium is needed to interpret scripture because that's how every religion works, including ancient Judaism and Protestant religions. The Amish, Anglicans, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Methodists, and many others have a magisterium. If you go to a Pentecostal church they say you're not saved unless you speak in tongues. If you go to a Baptist church they say you're not saved unless you've said the Jesus prayer and made him your personal lord and savior. If you go to a Church of Christ they say you're not saved unless you get baptized, others say baptism doesn't save and is a symbol. A Lutheran would tell you that the bread and wine consubstantiate into the flesh and blood of Christ, an Evangelical will tell you it's just a symbol. They all claim to have the "true gospel" but they all teach very different things. They can't all be correct. It seems the best way to see who is correct is to look towards antiquity and see what Christian leaders taught throughout history. When that is done none of these reformist teachings can be found.
@@richardditty5318 Didn't you know that the Jews memorized the Tanakh for generations and in this way passed on the words to the next generations? A person who thinks he is wise first learns to drink milk because solid food is too much too heavy for the stomach.
for centuries Protestants and Catholics failed to reach out to each other in the spirit of Agape, but in these days of learning and much study in which both camps have had much opportunity to understand the one true faith, you now come along with words which belong to the days of Reformation in which ignorance won over Wisdom
@@simonwesteng3610 Sounds like most Catholics who left comments here, you didn’t even bother to watch the video, but just troll. Otherwise you would’ve addressed the specific points made in the video.
@@BornAgainRN Now that we shall both celebrate the Incarnation of our Lord into the world, "the Word of Life" born of Mary and laid in an `eating trough` (manger) for all the `house of bread` (Bethlehem) to see and to adore. So let us meditate upon this great gift to all who believe. For when the time came for Him to leave, His closest friends were left distraught. Then He told them, "I will not leave you as orphans: I will come to you. Though unbelievers will not see Me, you who believe will `see` Me. And so I will be `with you` always, till the end of the age. I am the living Bread of Life who gives true life to the world. If anyone believes and thus gladly eats of My Body and My Blood, he will have Life in him (ref John 6:57). Alas, just as many left Him after He had said these things (6:66), likewise, the Reformation broke away from the apostle's belief in the `Real Presence` by which we are united to the Word of Life and He with us. Take note of this, my brothers, for Jesus said "Not everyone who says to Me, `Lord, Lord`, will enter the Kingdom of God. Even though they may have prophesied in My name, driven out demons and performed miracles in My name, yet I will then tell them, "I never knew you nor know from where you came" With these things in mind, therefore, ask yourselves this: Are you from the `House of Bread`? Have you believed and so eaten from that humble manger which our Lord provided His Church at the Last Supper, especially for those who truly love Him?...
@@simonwesteng3610 Study the Bible and make sure you follow and obey the advice of The Lord Jesus Christ: become a Born again Christian! instead of a person who wants to be religious.
Thank you for this. Generally speaking I find Gavin to be a great thinker, a great teacher, and one of the Protestant heavy weights when it comes to apologetics. I think he has gone way too far in this last video though; while we should be kind and respectful to others, it is ultimately not kind to seek temporal unity at the cost of people's eternal souls. There may well be true followers of Christ among the RCs, but that will often be in spite of their teachings. Many among them, like yourself when you were younger, need to hear the true Gospel, and I am worried that Gavin's video might leave some RCs feeling content where they are instead of encouraging them to looking into what the Protestants are always banging on about; ultimately, that could rob someone of a relationship with Christ and therefore their salvation. Very dangerous.
@@HaggisOfDeath thank you for taking the time to actually watch this, unlike most Catholics here who didn’t even bother, but just leave trolling comments. A lot of these Catholics just left comments demonstrate the problem with people like Gavin arguing that they are Christians, and they get elated by this, because it tickles their ears. Roman Catholicism has become so inclusive, because it tells people what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear. And when any opposition based on the word of God is exposed to them, they refuse to listen and learn, and they get angry and attack. That really shows their fruit, and demonstrates they are not Christian. I am hoping that Gavin does watch this, since he encouraged people to respond to him towards the end of his video. And he’s not doing Catholics any favors by asserting they are Christian, including those who truly understand Roman Catholic doctrines that are bound to them, which are false and affect the gospel. Thanks again for the comment, and for taking the time to watch this. It’s much appreciated. God bless!
You might say the church was apostate for 1500 years until the reformers came along. But who is to say it isnt still apostate and we are waiting for God to raise up men to do the final reformation and reveal the true gospel that has been hidden from us?
@@notavailable4891 no, they were Christians before the reformation. And what you’re accusing me of, I’m not even insinuating in the video. Did you even bother to watch it, or are you just trolling? Your comment avoids addressing what’s actually argued in the video, in order to avoid addressing to issues made.
@@notavailable4891 no, there were genuine Christians before the reformation. But your comment avoids addressing the arguments made in the video, so you were committing a red herring. Did you even bother to watch the video, or are you just trolling?
Oh man.. Oh man.. I am so sorry I missed this live. He he. God bless you Steve. Don't worry if Catholics are Christian as well. You can still be a Protestant. It's your decision. Why would you start by saying that you think Gavin is a 'Biblical based Protestant Pastor', if you also think the main contention (the Gospel being justification by faith alone) is being compromised by Gavin's comment?
@@Old_Catholic first, it wasn’t live. It was pre-recorded and I uploaded it later. Second, Gavin can be a genuine Christian, but still be wrong about Catholics being Christian, because as I stated in the video, he shares the same faith that I do which is based on scripture. That’s what makes them at biblically-based.
@@BornAgainRN But he thinks that people who compromise the gospel are still Christian and you don't. You say that is the 'dividing line', if I understood you correctly. So, Gavin isn't sharing the same faith as you.
This is wild lol. “The church fathers disagreed with each other all the time” Yeah you know what they didn’t disagree on? Water baptismal regeneration and transubstantiation. I guess they were all preaching a false gospel…
@@coencampbell1007 first, you are conflating transubstantiation with real presence. The belief the former includes the latter, but not vice versa. They are not synonymous. Second, water baptismal regeneration was not a universal belief in the early church. Second, you would have to have every single writing of every single Christian in the early church, which is impossible, because we don’t possess them all. Even the ones we have, not everyone believed in it, such as Cyril of Jerusalem. But I’m afraid you’re missing my point, which is we should not be basing our faith on the early church fathers, because they did not agree on everything, including doctoral matters. Several early church fathers believed in justification by faith alone, while others didn’t. Therefore, a promise that cannot say that Catholics are Christians, too, since they believe in different gospels, and therefore different Christs.
@ I’m not conflating transubstantiation with real presence. The Church Fathers constantly used Aristotle’s 10 predicamentals in their theology, especially with the Trinity. They also applied this logic when talking about the sacrifice of the mass and cited Malachi 1:11 against Jews and gnostics as proof that Jesus actually had a body and was sacrificed and that that sacrifice is made present to us in the mass. This only works with transubstantiation. St. Cyril of Jerusalem emphasized the symbolic nature of the Eucharist but he obviously didn’t believe it was purely symbolic. As far as baptismal regeneration and the idea of mortal sin, I don’t even know why I need to defend this. As far as Catholics teaching a false gospel… do you not see where you’re the one coming later and preaching a false gospel? This becomes extremely obvious to anyone with basic knowledge of church history.
@@Jamesps34 no, and the New Testament never promises that anyone, including the church, is even capable of infallibly interpreting scripture. But that’s not what this video is about. You are creating a red herring in order to avoid addressing the actual issue.
Sure it is. You are using your interpretation of scripture to claim that 1500 years of Christianity didn’t exist or for 2000 years of Christianity for that matter and if you’re interpretation is not infallible, you could be wrong therefore I’m putting my interpretations of scripture in with the historical Church and the Church fathers and not with modern Protestantism many of whom can’t even agree on the basic tenants of Christianity, and much which Luther himself with probably disagree with today. I’ll stay with the visible unified Church and not the invisible “unified” churches.
@@BornAgainRN Hi there - can you see that if you believe that no-one is capable of infallibly interpreting scripture then logically you cannot use scripture to support any of your arguments as your interpretation could be wrong - how can you know that your interpretation is the correct one? thanks
@BornAgainRN Steve, you admitted that your interpretation of the gospel is not infalliable. Therefore, you have a chance that your beliefs are infact heresies and your "gospel", false. If you admitted that people who profess false gospels can't be assured of their salvation, how can you (who might be professing a false gospel ) be assured that you will be "saved" .Your position contradicts itself, mainly that you are assured of your salvation but you can't really be assured of your salvation. in charity, I ask you to reflect on yourself and repents. God bless
The scripture doesn't tell you the requirements of being a Christian but your fallible interpretation does. We need to hear it from the word of God himself if you put the Bible on top..
@@cephasmwila7537 I got news for you. The Roman Catholic Church does not infallibly interpret scripture, because the New Testament never promises anyone can do this. Besides, that’s not what this video is about. And yes, the New Testament does describe what a Christian is, which you would know if you’re bothered to actually watch it and not troll and make baseless comments and false accusations.
@BornAgainRN I have watched your video till to the end. It basically says if Catholics do not agree with our interpretation of scripture , they are not Christians. You think your interpretation is the right one because you think you have the right gospel. You even quote verses to support your position. Even the devil knows how to quote scripture. I am not saying your the devil, but people misinterpret the Bible the way the devil does. The new testament doesn't tells us who a Christian must be. It is us, we tell people that these are the requirements of being a Christian. Christianity as a whole proved it..
@@BornAgainRN Hi there - if as you assert that the New Testament never promises that anyone can infallibly interpret scripture then how can you use scripture to support your arguments in your videos as your interpretation could be incorrect according to your own reasoning - so using your logic how can we trust anyones interpretation of scripture? how can you assert that Roman Catholic interpretation of scripture is incorrect?
Catholics are not only Christians, they are True Christians as you stated the True Christian follows the True Jesus whom established her on Peter not Luther and whom Christ stated would prevail against evil (hence it still remains against the errors of Protestantism) and the true gospel which is always proclaimed first from Christ's Words and Actions, then through His Apostles and then the successor of the Apostles: the Church Christ Established the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church who shows us how our relationship is with the Bible and how it's interpreted. All with the aid of the wonderful Spirit, to the glory of God the Father with obedience and honour to the Son.
@@byronlewis1330 first, protestants do not establish their church on Luther, but on Christ. So right off the bat, you got that wrong. Second, I’m afraid you’ve completely missed the point of the video, which, since protestants don’t believe in the same gospel of Rome, but rather justification by faith alone, which was anathematized at the council of Trent, then protestants like Dr. Ortlund, can’t say in good conscience that Catholics are Christians too, since catholics and protestants do not believe in the same gospel and therefore not the same Jesus. For some reason, protestants understand the point of the video right away, while Catholics don’t and it has to be explained to them. The purpose of the video was not to argue who has the right gospel. It was about protestants, not declaring that Catholics are also Christians, since they don’t believe in the same gospel, and therefore not the same Jesus.
@@BornAgainRN sorry you are wrong as before Luther the doctrine of Faith Alone (a fiducia faith) was hardly known as Protestant theologian McGrath affirm in his book on Justification. Whether Protestants in good faith can't claim Catholics as Christians means nothing since Protestants didn't exist before Luther the servant of Satan. Hence Protestants don't follow the gospel of Jesus since he established his Church to preach the gospel and that gospel was not a faith alone gospel espoused by the deformers. Matthew 7:21.
@@byronlewis1330, QBornAgainRN is right in her/his explanation, but that can't be otherwise because you apparently don't understand what a Born again Christian is. You cannot overthrow a 'Temple of God' with human claims and so-called evidence. A blind person can't show a sighted person the way, can he?
@ROKBUZZCUT wrong again a born again Christian is a false Christian based on his Protestant man made traditions and the person speaking has a false Jesus and a false gospel, since the Catholic Church is divinely authorised under Peter by Our Lord and the gates of Hell still has not prevailed against it. But the over emphasis of 'born again' Christians is a satanic novelty based on evangelical misinterpretations of Scripture. For Catholics were always Born Again- of water baptism (a sacrament of faith) and of the Spirit as Jesus clarifies what Born Again is to Nicodemus in John 3:5.
3 дні тому+3
Where in the bible does it say that the Bible is the sole rule of faith? I can’t find a Protestant who can answer me that and don’t give me the same bible verses. They’re strawman at best and don’t teach sola Scriptura.
First, sola scriptura is not the topic of this video, so your question is a red herring. Second, it is not the sole role of faith, so you’re committing a strawman. Scripture is the only artifact of divine revelation revealed by God for Christian doctrine and truth (2 Timothy 3:16). So you have to begin by understanding what sola scriptura is, first. Otherwise you are rejecting something you have a misunderstanding of what it is. Passages like Mark 7 and Luke 16:29, demonstrate that scripture alone is sufficient for Christian doctrine and salvation. In Mark, Jesus rebukes the figures he reliance on Corban, which was “Secret oral tradition“ that the elevator to the same level as written scripture. And in Luke 16, Jesus stated that scripture was sufficient for avoiding the tortures of Hades. Nothing else what scripture is required for Christian doctrine and salvation. But all of this is a red herring, since it’s not addressing what’s in the video. And since Catholics and protestants both believe Scripture is God breathed and beneficial for doctrine, I make the argument from scripture that Catholics are not Christian. But it doesn’t sound like you took the time to watch the video. So once you begin there. I answered your question, so I would appreciate if you return the favor and watch this before making any more comments.
3 дні тому
@@BornAgainRN those passages say nothing about scriptures. Just stop
3 дні тому
@@BornAgainRN sola Scriptura Sola scriptura is a Latin phrase that means "by scripture alone" or "the Bible alone". It's a Christian theological doctrine that states that the Bible is the sole, infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. It’s a self refuting doctrine dude lol. 😆 If was infallible how come Protestants disagree with even stuff like baptism . Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, 21 for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.
Show me where the Bible says that the Roman Catholic is the sole rule of faith. Give me some verses in the Bible that were inspired by the word of God, not from the fallible man-made book of the Catechism and their false doctrines written many centuries after Pentecost and Paul's teaching and the true apostolic fathers.
3 дні тому
@@BornAgainRN by the way mark 7 and Luke 16:29 doesn’t say anything about scriptures being the sole rule of faith. Also it seems like you don’t know much about man made traditions compared to apostolic oral tradition or sacred tradition. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 1 Corinthians : 11: 2. Some passages
Holy Scripture teaches we must cooperate with God's saving grace and repent and bear fruit and forgive others and love one another and keep the commandments and persevere to the end to be saved! Protestants say this not true! Catholic teaching says it is! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink!
@@matthewbroderick6287 And just as you do in every video, your post has nothing to do with the actual topic I posted. Did you even bother to listen to it? Probably not based on your past trolling. And while you are correct that Roman Catholic teaching mandates all these extrabiblical “requirements” to be saved, scripture does not. Again, the topic is “Are Catholics Christians?” and the answer based on God breathed scripture is “no.”
@@matthewbroderick6287 I deleted some of your comments since you insulted me accusing me of lying. That will not tolerated on my channel. I have allowed you to make comments, because I believe in the freedom to post publicly, but if you continue to insult me on my channel, you will be banned permanently, which I don't desire to do. But I will also not tolerate insults towards me on my own channel.
My biggest issue with protestant soteriology is the idea that justification and sanctification are really distinct and justification does not actually sanctify and vice versa. This contradicts the teaching of the Bible in 2 Thes. 2:13 and Titus 3:5, among other verses that prove sanctification/regeneration does actually justify. There is no real distinction just like the One Christian Church (i.e., the Catholic Church) teaches. Just one of countless examples 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says, "But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers and sisters loved by the Lord, because God chose you as firstfruits to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth". This is why Protestant Theologian and Historian Alister McGrath admitted that the Protestant idea that justification and sanctification are two different processes were a nvoelty that notes a departure from the historical faith. He stated, "A fundamental discontinuity was introduced into the western theological A History of the Christian tradition where none had ever existed, or Doctrine ofJustification ever been contemplated, before." ALISTER E. McGRATH - Alister McGrath, Iustitia Dei, p. 217. Oxford University. I confess that I have seeked truth all along by studying the Scriptures, early fathers, as well as Theologians and I honestly can't in good conscience remain Protestant. I had to become Catholic/Christian
@@Jamric-gr8gr As I mentioned in the video, read Romans chapter 7 and Romans chapter 8, and you’ll see they are distinct. Even in Roman Catholicism “initial” justification is at the moment of baptism. So even Rome teaches that justification happens in a moment, at least initially. But where the conflation in Rome comes is they confuse justification before God which is instantaneous like in Romans 4 versus justification before men which is simply talking about fruit, which we find in James 2. While sanctification is a lifelong process of conforming to the image of Christ which ends at death at the moment of glorification. That’s why I said read Romans chapter 7 and Romans chapter 8. Justification is about becoming righteous before holy God, while sanctification is about growth and fruit.
@@BornAgainRN I have to say that I just reread Romans chapter 7 and 8 looking for the distinction you’re making, and I simply don’t find it. These chapters, much like Galatians chapter 3, are about the indwelling work of the Holy Spirit that happens apart from the “works of the law”, which from context in both places clearly refers to the mosaic ordinances given uniquely to the Jews. In Romans 8:2, which is a summary of what he’s just said in chapter 7, Paul says that we are freed from the law of sin and death by “the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus”. Similarly, in Galatians chapter 3 Paul is clearly talking about sanctification apart from “works of the law”: “Did you receive the Spirit from works of the law?” “Does, then, the one who supplies the Spirit to you and works mighty deeds among you do so from works of the law or from faith in what you heard?” When he does use the word “justify” and “justification” (Gal 3:8, 11), he does so without any apparent shift from the language of indwelling spirit to the language of alien righteousness, imputation, or other forensic notions.
@BornAgainRN First of all you stated that James 2 is what justifies in sight of men and not God. "(Referring to James 2)...Justification before men which is simply talking about fruit". No, absolutely not. Your total eisigesis of James 2 is refuted by the fact that James 2:21 (Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? KVJ) is referring to Genesis 22 where God Himself tested Abraham. This is why in the same chapter James describes that faith without works can't be salvific (How will that faith save him? James 2:14) meaning that the issue being discussed is something in relation to God (and men) rather than men only Moreover, although James 2 has an element of indication (i.e., showing that works will follow if the faith is genuine) but that is certainly NOT ALL JAMES 2 IS ABOUT. James 2:22 - 23 says " You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”[a] and he was called God’s friend" Notice that his "faith WAS MADE COMPLETE" by works (verse 22) and most significantly, Abrahm's works "FULFULED" (i.e., to make complete, fully realize or fully developing something and thus being satisfied. Literally in Greek, ἐπληρώθη which means to make full or complete. This word is repeatedly used in the N.T to describe the fulfilment of scriptural prophecy. ) his state of justification/being considered righteous. In other words, Abrahm's works actually contributed to his state of justification instead of merely vindicating/showing evidence of his righteousness. (If you fo A and and doing so fulfils B, then A actually contributes to B rather than only showing that A is the evidence of B.) In regards to Romans 4, consider first that the context of Romans 4 is about initial justification and or repentence and forgiveness of grave sins is by faith. If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about-but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”[a This is a reference to Abraham's covenant with God and his initial justification in Genesis 15. Romans 4:6 -8 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: 7 “Blessed are those whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the one whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”[b 8 ROMANS 4:7-8 IS REFERRENCE TO PSALM 32:1-2. KEEP THIS IN MIND As you can see, David's sola fide justification referenced by Paul as an example of justification by faith apart from works is his repentence from sin. This IS further proven when we actually read PSALM 32. After David said, Blessed are those whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the one whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”[b] (Psalm 32 cited by Romans 4:7-8) When I kept silent, my bones wasted away through my groaning all day long. 4 For day and night your hand was heavy on me; my strength was sapped as in the heat of summer.[b] 5 Then I acknowledged my sin to you and did not cover up my iniquity. I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord.” And you forgave the guilt of my sin.. This proves that David was justified by faith alone when he repented, and Romans 4 teaches that repentence/justification by faith. This has nothing to do with the fact that a believer must continue in goodness in order to be saved as affirmentioned James 2 and rest of the new testament teaches. Also, Justification and sanctification are not distinct Titus 3:5 2 Thesalonians 2:13 and salvation is a process 1 Timothy 4:16 Be diligent in these matters; give yourself wholly to them, so that everyone may see your progress. Watch YOUR LIFE and doctrine closely. PRESERVE in them, because IF YOU DO , you WILL save both yourself and your hearers.
If you believe mary can tell Jesus what to do as if he obeys his mother and she is the way to get on Jesus’s good side and the only way to receive salvation is by eating Jesus in the form of a cookie… I would question one’s salvation…
@@EricAlHarb Just out of curiosity, did you take the time to watch the video, or did you just leave a comment without taking the time to watch it first?
Protestants who teach the doctrine of Calvin "Once Saved Always Saved," the Roman Catholics who believe in a place called purgatory, and the Orthodox who pray to statues and the dead are not Christians but all lies that will send them to hell. The Bible says all liars will have their part in the lake of fire. It only takes one lie to end in hell.
@@jpd4676 the lake of fire is a Hebraic apocalyptic expression that the HS used to describe God's afflictions that are caused in the physical world. hell is a myth. The lake of fire judgment that John is given from Christ, is the same judgment that Ezekiel also warned Israel of in chapter 22 of his prophecy 17 Then the word of the Lord came to me: 18 “Son of man, the people of Israel have become dross to me; all of them are the copper, tin, iron and lead left inside a furnace. They are but the dross of silver. 19 Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: ‘Because you have all become dross, I will gather you into Jerusalem. 20 As silver, copper, iron, lead and tin are gathered into a furnace to be melted with a fiery blast, so will I gather you in my anger and my wrath and put you inside the city and melt you. 21 I will gather you and I will blow on you with my fiery wrath, and you will be melted inside her. 22 As silver is melted in a furnace, so you will be melted inside her, and you will know that I the Lord have poured out my wrath on you.’” The language is highly figurative and is symbolic, but the important thing to understand is that this is about God bringing His afflictions on Jerusalem. And this prophecy was fulfilled when Jerusalem was destroyed by Rome in the Roman Jewish wars of 66-70 AD. It was at that time when the OC world of Judea was judged by God and the temple and city and priesthood were destroyed. And was also the same judgment that Ezekiel 34 was prophesying. 34 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: this judgment of the sheep and the goats that Ezekiel prophesied in chapter 34 was fulfilled at that time when God installed Jesus Christ as His GOOD SHEPHERD 23 I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. 24 I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken. and Jesus confirmed He was that Shepherd John 10:11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The student of scripture needs to connect the dots of the prophecies and rightly divide the scriptures. again hell is a myth that has evolved from biased translators who were driven by a spirit of doubt and fear, and 'hell' is not in the original scriptures.
@@ophiuchus9071 No matter how many Bible scriptures you bring will not change the fact that hell exists and Jesus spoke ten times more about hell than heaven to His disciples. Are you going to call Jesus a liar? That is blasphemy, my friend. Repent or you likewise will perish. The Bible contains many references to hell. Heed to them. Matthew 25:46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life" Matthew 13:49-50 So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come forth, separate the wicked from among the just, 50 and cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” Hell is described as a furnace of conscious torment where the fire never goes out Mark 9:47-48 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire- 48 where ‘Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched.’ Hell is described as a place of excruciating misery where the worm does not die Jude 1:7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Hell is described as a prison of everlasting chains from which there is no hope of release 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, Those who do not know God and those who will not obey the gospel of Christ will be punished with everlasting destruction Revelation 21:8 But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” The cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur Matthew 5:22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire. Matthew 18:8-9 “If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the everlasting fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into [a]hell fire. Gehenna, the most common New Testament term translated as "Hell", is described as a place of punishment Matthew 8:12 But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Matthew 22:13 Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ Other passages mention darkness and "weeping and gnashing of teeth"
You didn't understand your own Catholic faith because if you truly understood it and everything it is founded on you would have never left the Catholic faith... Pray for your return home 🙏
@@westkyboy9760 thanks for not responding to the actual topic of the video, but instead making a baseless accusation, considering you know nothing about me. All you’re doing is pontificating, not contributing to a conversation.
@@Jamric-gr8gr It is ridiculous and disgraceful that you! dares to insult and' harm a Temple of God - a Born again Christian. How ignorant can a man be!
@@SonOfThineHandmaid first, this video has nothing to do with Mary. Second, the fact that you immediately thought about praying to Mary as opposed to God himself demonstrates Mary, rather than God is your priority. So in a sense, you proved my point in the video
@BornAgainRN oh I know the video is not about your reversion to the faith. That doesn't stop me praying about it. You can make whatever assumption pleases you about my priorities, which you don't have access to, only I know what my priorities really are. I'll continue to pray to Mary on your behalf👍
The Catholic Church is the bride of christ. Christ only has one bride. His church. Again where was Christianity in the first 1500 years? I always asked Protestants that question. The church never apostatized because that would call Christ a liar Matthew 16: 16-19 and Matthew 28: 20. Paul did warn though that heretics would try to pervert the gospel. Acts 20: 30 and from your own group, men will come foward perverting the truth to draw the disciples away from them. What does that sound like? 🤔 The church since the beginning has fought off heresies like Gnosticism, marcionism, montanism, etc.Why is Protestantism any different? We will know them by their fruits? Well sola Scriptura has let to thousands of Protestant sects each contracdicting each other. Doctrines like sola Scriptura and faith alone are not biblical. First answer me this where does it say that the bible is the sole rule of faith? Second what does the bible say is the pillar and foundation of truth?
Catholic and roman catholic are not the same things. There is no office of a papacy in the NT. its never mentioned. Sola Scriptura= the Scriptures alone are the inspired-inerrant Word of God. Therefore they are the ultimate authority for the Christian and the Christian church. There is no equal nor greater authority than the Scriptures. Salvation=faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone. (John 3:16; Romans 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:8-9)
Pope says all religions lead to heaven, pope changed sabbath to sunday. pope said you can pray to Mary. Church of Babylon more like. Also, there is but one God, the Father. Have a blessed day
To the anonymous poster that does not have a name, just out of curiosity, did you do you even watch the video? Because I didn’t even imply that the church was apostate for 1500 years. This demonstrates you’re just trolling and didn’t bother to even watch it. Watch the video first, because most of your relates questions will be addressed there.
3 дні тому
@@Justas399 it is the same thing Roman Catholics was a term used by Anglicans in the 1500s. Get real. Roman is a rite used in the church. There’s 23 rites they all make the Catholic Church. Learn about it. I dont expect you to know church history since your founder started your church in the 1500s while mine started his in A.D 33.
3 дні тому
@@Ryan_Nath no he didn’t! He as misquoted. He was bringkng ul paragraph of the catechism 841-843 read it if you have time also lumen gentium 16. He was talking about other faiths and their salvation.
In the event Dr. Ortlund wishes to discuss this topic further, I would respectfully like to extend a heart-felt & loving open invitation to him: 29:55
so are you saying there were no Christians until the protestant reformation?
Oh gosh 🤦🏻♀️
Great point
Exactly what he’s saying. Prots being Prots.
It's a blasphemy shame on him ....
No, there were Christians before the reformation. But they were persecuted from all corners.
Hello. Thank you for your kind video.
However, I'm concerned when you said that Protestants are sealed and can't lose salvation.
How would you interpret Galatians 5:19-22 which seem to contradict your view?
I have a question. Is your view that if one truly believes that he will necessarily show good fruits, or do you believe that no sins can vary one from heaven?
@@Jamric-gr8gr Galatians 6 is referring to fruit (or the lack of it).
@@Jamric-gr8gr if a person is a genuine Christian their faith will result in good works, and if they are sealed by the Holy Spirit they will go to heaven.
@@BornAgainRN thank you for the reply. Yes I am very much aware that. But focus on the verses that talk about the flesh.
The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
THOSE WHO DO THESE THINGS WILL NOT BE SAVED.
So I don't think the Bible teaches (along with other verses) that a justified believer can't lose his salvation.
By the way, I apologize for calling you a heretic the other day. I was having a bad day. I hope you can accept my apology.
Likewise,Just like you deal with comments that express hatred towards Protestants, I hope you can be charitable and do the same thing to comments that insult Catholics. Matthew 7:12 principle
@BornAgainRN Yes. I believe that too but I had to ask because a lot of Protestants I know believe that no amount of sins can bard one from heaven. I know that such a view is not a mainline Protestant view.
However, the possibility of a true believer losing salvation is clearly expressed I the N.T in my opinion. Notice in Galatians 5:21 those who commit such sins will go to Hell.
And St. Paul says "I warn YOU as I have warned YOU before that those who do these things (sins) will not inherit the kingdom of God.
In Galatians 3:26-27, we see that YOU is referring to people who have put on Christ and actually did believe.
Moreover, St. Paul himself says:
But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.
1 Corinthians 9:27
The Greek word for "castawat" here is used multiple times in the new testament to mean "reprobate" or somehow who's damned.
So the Bible teaches that Paul himself could lose salvation for not living properly.
This is why Romans 8:13 says For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.
The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? 43 It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. 44 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 45 But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk. 46 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.
In Luke 12:42-46 Jesis describes people who were his servants yet will be put with the unfaithful, clearly indicating the loss of salvation.
Thank God whatever you say has no authority and is not binding on any Christian, that includes Catholics, and your interpretation of the Bible is your own personal and Protestant interpretation out of thousands more!!
Amen!
@@atgred you are making a strawman and demonstrating you do not have a clue what protestants believe or what the reformation was about. You are just pontificating. Did you even watch the video? Probably not.
@@BornAgainRN the holy spirit doesn’t dwell in division. You didn’t answer my question. Where in the bible does it say that the bible is the sole rule of faith. Not one Protestant can answer that question.
Probably more like 10's of millions of interpretations.
Hey, do you align with Mike Gendron's view of Catholicism? Do you think his stance is correct? Why or why not? Thank you.
@@drewbydoo4828 I agree with how he takes the five solas and contrasts them with five opposing Catholic views of soteriology. I guess I’m wondering what specifically about his view of Catholicism. I would agree with him that the Roman Catholic Church is apostate, and they believe in a false gospel. Is there something specific you’re wondering about if I agree with him?
Fr Ripperger said the Catholic Church provides solely for salvation in Christ. Protestantism was created by men who never met Christ, nor chosen by Him. His Church was established 2,000 years ago.
Protestantism does not offer or provide the way to heaven. Non Catholics are saved not by various interpretations of the bible, but the Mystical Body of Christ.
@MavourneenKathleen-l5j Should we follow and obey the teachings of Fr Ripperger or The Holy Bible?
Catholicism offers no salvation, it is only a broad road to the kingdom of the ruler of this world; the greatest seducer and murderer from the beginning.
Study the Bible and pray to The Lord Jesus Christ.
Pray that you may be filled with His Holy Spirit and thereby discover and enter the Kingdom of God.
For whoever knocks at the door, the door will be opened for him.
Great response video Steve!
@@tonycostatorontoapologetic5307
Thank you Dr. Costa! I wanted to be respectful to Dr Ortlund, while at the same time being truthful. ❤️
@BornAgainRN indeed. I love Dr. Ortlund. He is a dear Brother.
So you're arguing that someone can believe and confess the entire Nicene creed, but because they don't have a precisely correct understanding of the theology of justification they are not even a Christian? I encourage you to think more carefully about what you're suggesting: It's not actual faith in God /Jesus which saves, it's the intellectual understanding of highly complex and much disputed religious doctrines which saves? How did you get to the idea that when Jesus referred to "those who do the will of God" in Mark 3:35 that what Jesus really meant was those who have a proper understanding of justification?
@@KingoftheJuice18 because the New Testament says song. Read 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, and Romans “ whoever calls upon the name of the lord shall be saved.“ ” if you believe Jesus died for our sins, and God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” It is simple Soteriology. It’s Rome that makes it complicated.
@BornAgainRN Show me one faithful Catholic who doesn't believe that Jesus died to save him from his sins or that God raised Jesus from the dead. Just one! It isn't "simple"; you put a ton of extra conditions on it, all of which amount to "you have to be an evangelical Protestant exactly like me to be saved".
@@BornAgainRN Yes, yes, there are many texts to choose from. And what about when Jesus says, "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who DOES the will of my Father who is in heaven"? Or when James says, "Faith without works is dead"? Or the beautiful parable of the sheep and the goats? "'Truly I tell you, just as you did not DO it to one of the least of these, you did not DO it to me.' And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." Surely you aren't suggesting that how you live as a Christian is completely irrelevant to salvation?
Thank you Steve. You express similar concerns to mine. My mother left the Catholic Church after she married my father and never looked back. I could not be more grateful. Pray that my other family members see the light of the true gospel, which we know as the power of God for salvation to all who believe, in which the righteousness of God is revealed, a righteousness that is by FAITH from first to last...
God bless Steve, and keep up the excellent work!
@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty thank you so much for the kind words! And most of my family are still Roman Catholic too and are not saved. So I continue to pray for them every day. And whenever we are in dialogues with Roman Catholics we have to remember the words of the apostle Peter to defend the faith with gentleness and reverence, which I genuinely attempted to do in this video with Dr. Ortlund who I believe is a brother in Christ, yet I believe he’s wrong about Catholics being Christians, based on the authority of scripture.
So glad to see someone responding to this. The vibe I got from Gavin when first exposed to him was milk toast fence sitter for the sake of adding more words in an already long conversation.
@@midnighthymn yes, I am seeing more ecumenism with protestants recently, including protestant pastors and apologists, beyond just catholics and protestants sharing some essential doctrines, such as the deity of Christ and the Trinity, as well as the virgin birth and Jesus dying for our sins and being risen from the dead.
@@BornAgainRN
If we believe all of that, Steve, in what way are we not Christians?
Is it Sola Fide? Is that the issue? If it is, just know Saint Paul doesn't teach that and the concept is foreign to the Bible.
Do you really find it moral on your part to reject the Christianity of billions on a false gospel that was invented wholesale between the 15th and 16th centuries?
@@BornAgainRN
We should have a debate on that issue, if so.
@@thepalegalilean I addressed this in the video. Did you even bother to watch it?? If so, why would you ask "in what way are we not Christians?"
As far as debating, lately you have been less than charitable in your comments, and some of your comments have been strawman. I don't really care to debate people who comment this way. I will also be deleting comments of other Catholics, which I don't care to do, since I believe in freedom to post publicly. But I will not tolerate insults (from other Catholics, not you) on my channel. So, please be careful how you comment.
But for now, I am not interested in debating you, as I have other fires on the burners. Maybe in the future.
@@BornAgainRN
Fair enough.
For every mentally lucid Protestant I can count 99 of them hallucinating about the Catholic Church. But God bless you all.
@@Raphael-t3l thanks for making an irrelevant comment, and not addressing anything made in the video. Thanks for playing.
@@BornAgainRN His point is accurate to a tee! Your comments and video is pure comedy that only a fool would believe. That’s why the Protestant faiths in America and the rest of the world are dwindling and the Catholic Church keeps growing!
@@BornAgainRN Catholics do not want to realize that insults to the accepted Sons of God and Temples of God have consequences for those who damage the Temples of God. And then they think they are doing their god a service?..!
Be steadfast and sober, for we know that The Word will return asap.
Where can I find Matt Slicks intercession of the saints debate ?
He uploaded the after show last night, but never uploaded the actual debate.
I didn’t even know that he was having such a debate.
@@animallover7072 I don’t think Matt uploaded the actual debate. It’s on William Albrecht’s channel. But Matt did do an after hours debate review, which I joined in about an hour into it. I’ll post the link in a separate reply here.
@animallover7072, here is the link to the after hours debate review on Matt Slick's channel:
ua-cam.com/users/livejWvHCq3_Gyc?si=6MkD5bAmjiFKng2O
@@BornAgainRN just went to William Albrechts channel and saw the video. I’ll watch the debate soon. It’s about time that Matt Slick finally debated that guy. Now we just need him to debate Trent Horn.
@animallover7072 and boy did William Albrecht destroy the man made traditions of Matt Slick! It was entertaining to see how many times Matt contradicts himself! Praying for his conversion! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
@@animallover7072 I also posted the link to Matt’s after hour debate review on Matt Slick‘s channel, which I participated in. Does the link show up on your end? If not, you might have to select “new comments“
FYI, many Christians, both Catholics and many Protestants teach that being born again of water and the Spirit refers to baptism. It’s called baptismal regeneration.
@@DarkHorseCrusader when I was younger, I was raised and educated Catholic, and I was even Lutheran for a short while. So I’m well aware that many protestants teach born again means water baptismal regeneration. However, Jesus expected Nicodemus who taught Israel from the Old Testament what “born of water and spirit“ meant. And the Old Testament did not teach Water baptismal regeneration, but rather whenever water was used symbolically with the spirit, it referred to simply the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, meaning a spiritual rebirth, not water baptismal regeneration, because the Old Testament did not teach that - look it up.
@@BornAgainRN Is your teaching on baptism, or any other theological question for that matter, infallible?
No offense, but if If I had to choose between what the early church taught on the subject versus some 21st century UA-cam flunky, the choice is clear.
BornAgainRN
Oh for the love of God, take a cold shower! Do you know of the great commission? Matt 28:19 seems clear to me. Were the early followers of christ martyred by Nero, considered christains? I would go so far as to say that those who gathered to celebrate the Eucharist in the catacombs of Rome were Catholic as in universal Christains.
@@DarkHorseCrusader No, nor does it need to be, since Jesus expected the average Jew to know what scripture means without them being able to infallibly interpret it. The new test but never promises anyone can infallibly interpret scripture, and even the Roman Catholic Church does that infallibly interpret scripture, despite claiming that it can. In fact, it is only claims to have interpreted six verses in the entire Bible, and they haven’t even done that right Carol which I demonstrate in other videos on my channel. Check out my Live section, where I demonstrate this.
True gospel according to who? Your interpretation? Catholic interpretation? Who has the truth?
Catholics.
@@alexs.5107 If you spent any time actually watching the video, you would’ve found out, and it’s not me, it’s not the Roman Catholic Church, and it’s not you.
@@BornAgainRN well which of the 30,000 sects do you follow? How do you know yours is the truth? You have to be a Baptist lol.
This is generally a very flimsy argument by RCs. I will concede that there are passages and verses in the Scriptures where context is important to the understanding, and therefore the correct interpretation could be missed. However, when it comes to Paul's letters, the express purpose is to clarify a point beyond doubt; he is teaching, he is rebuking, he is correcting, and he is trying to be as clear as possible due to the confusion that already exists. Of course understanding the context can give us a better grasp on what is going on; but no fair scholar would say that Protestants have misinterpreted Romans or Galatians or Hebrews, which all have a focus on teaching and touch upon what it means to follow Jesus, how we were saved, the terms of being saved, and so on.
Rather than plucking verses with completely different themes and topics, and trying to prove a different theory of justification or salvation through them; why do you not go to what was written specifically about justification and salvation? If you go there, you find the verses that we Protestants are always banging on about, and which lead us to the belief that we are saved by Christ Alone, by Grace Alone, through Faith Alone.
God bless you.
The definition of being Christ' disciples was given by Christ Himself in John 13:35 and it does not match with what you said in the video.
What makes you think you follow the Gospel according to Scripture? Let us examine the Gospel according to the Reformers, which you believe, and compare it with what Scripture says, NEITHER with what Church fathers said/wrote, NOR with any official statement from the Catholic Church.
The Gospel according to the Reformers:
How do sinful men find acceptance (or are justified) in the judgment of righteous God? The Reformers taught that Justification is by faith alone and through Justification an exchange took place between believers and Christ, known as double imputation. The believers got Christ’ righteousness imputed on them as if that righteousness were theirs while they remain sinners. Christ got believers’ entire sins (past, present, future) imputed on Him as if those sins were His while He remains sinless. There is no limit of either amount or type of believers' sins imputed on Him. Christ willingly offered Himself to take the punishment of those sins (that believers deserve) through dying on the cross.
Let me know I made mistake or caricatured your gospel!
Is the above scriptural?:
1. Are we justified by faith alone according to Scripture? The phrase "justified by faith" appears four times in New Testament (Rom. 3:28, 5:1, Gal. 2:16, 3:24). New Testament was written in Greek and the one in Rom. 3:28 is in Greek passive present tense while the rest are in Greek passive aorist tense . Both tenses do not indicate once for all justification. If Scripture teaches faith-alone justification, then the Holy Spirit would inspire Paul to write the phrase "justified by faith" in Greek passive perfect tense. Unlike that of English Greek perfect tense indicates the action described by the verb (to be justified) was completed in the past with continuing effect to the present.
2. Scripture denies double imputation in Eze. 18:20 (ESV): “The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”
3. Scripture says that we lose righteousness by sinning or we cannot be righteous and sinner at the same time. Eze. 33:12-13 (ESV) says: “The righteous shall not be able to live by his righteousness when he sins. Though I say to the righteous that he shall surely live, yet if he trusts in his righteousness and does injustice, none of his righteous deeds shall be remembered, but in his injustice that he has done he shall die." Death here refers to hell, not physical death.
4. By declaring believers as righteous who remain sinners and punishing Christ for the sins He did not commit on the cross, God did abomination according to what Scripture says in Pro. 17:15 (ESV): “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the LORD.”
I'm afraid you are missing the point of the video, which wasn't to argue what the gospel IS, but that for Protestants who believe in justification by faith alone, they cannot say Catholics are Christians BECAUSE they reject justification by faith alone. I'm afraid you are coming at this from the wrong angle. A PROTESTANT cannot say Catholics are Christians, BECAUSE they believe in a different Gospel, & therefore a different Christ, according to Scripture. This is no different than Messianic Jews in Jesus' time not being Christians, despite looking for the Christ, BECAUSE they believed in a different Christ - based not on Scripture alone, but on their extrabiblical traditions.
I was an unbeliever until I was given faith from God, since that time I have been a believer. But I am only a believer because I was given to know the Truth. It wasn't anything that I had done that caused God to give me faith, I can only assume that my heart must have been open to receive from God, and God knew things about my heart, that I did not know, and that is why He chose to give me life in Christ.
This all came with the complete righteousness of God being revealed in me. So I was fortunate to be given to understand how God sees us as righteous in Christ, and not how we see ourselves when we measure our righteousness according to the law.
the doctrine of eternal punishment in hell is a lie that the self righteous tickle their ears with, in order to boost their own righteousness and gloat in themselves.
@@BornAgainRN You wrote "A PROTESTANT cannot say Catholics are Christians, BECAUSE they believe in a different Gospel, & therefore a different Christ, according to Scripture." That is exactly why I questioned whether the gospel you believe is the Gospel according to Scripture. You must prove it before you can accuse others of believing a different gospel.
@@ophiuchus9071 To answer your three points:
1. Catholics do believe that faith in Christ is gift from God - we neither need to do something nor be good persons to receive that gift.
2. How can God, who is omniscience, fails to see/know your unrighteousness being hidden under the righteousness of Christ - that is imputation teaching of the Reformers.
3. Catholics believe that we are made righteous by grace through Christ as Scripture says in Rom. 5:19. We do not believe that we can become righteous by ourselves.
@@justfromcatholic 2. How can God, who is omniscience, fails to see/know your unrighteousness being hidden under the righteousness of Christ - that is imputation teaching of the Reformers.
end quote
Ok I will admit I have never been involved in the church world but I have discernment regarding truth and the lie.
The lie is exposed by that motive of self seeking glory and the truth is found in Christ through faith
How can God?
this is how God can...
Isaiah 43:25
“I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more.
only those who have been resurrected to life in Christ by being born of the Spirit are Christians. A person attending the right church and joining a religion, no matter how accurate their doctrine is, does not qualify that person as a Christian belonging to Christ.
Romans 8:9
You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.
2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here
Galatians 6:15
Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation.
For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed.
Psalm 75:7
It is God who judges: He brings one down, he exalts another.
Revelation 3
8 I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. 9 I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars-I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.
the Revealing 21:1-4
Then I saw “a new heavenly covenant and a new people of God on the earth,” for the first heavenly covenant and the first people of God on the earth had passed away,
If Tridentine Catholicism is not Christian, then Arminianism/semi-Pelagianism isn't either. The Arminian gospel doesn't actually save, you must have a right will and right choices to stay saved. The justified state can be lost at any moment and then you have to repent again so that righteousness is re-imputed to oneself. How is that essentially different from Trent? Losing by mortal sin the state of grace or losing by some act of sin the imputed righteousness of Christ, which in the Arminian gospel doesn't save you any more than the Roman sacramental state of grace.
What amazes me about Protestants is how they can diligently study the Bible their entire lives and STILL get it so terribly wrong ... while claiming that the Holy Spirit is guiding them. 😅😂
@@AndrewLane-pm2ro OK, that’s your personal view, but it really has nothing to do with what I posted, or the reason why I posted it. All you’re doing is pontificating, not responding to an argument.
@@BornAgainRN But he's right nonetheless.
@@BornAgainRN that's your personal view as well. your personal view that you're guided by the H.S. He's not wrong tho.
Gavin claims something like faith alone. Whenever he is cornered in a debate about the Gospel or real salvation, he crumbles over and over again. He calls it "easy believism" and considers it one of his "first rank" issues.
Cornered in a debate?? What does that mean?? Gavin believes in assurance of salvation. I don't know what you mean
@@raphaelfeneje486Then what does he mean by "easy belieism"? He called it a first rank issue meaning it's the most dangerous heresy. That you can't know you're saved just because you believe the Gospel.
Have you ever thought of humbly thanking God for your Roman Catholic upbringing by which you heard the word of God that brought you to faith?
Have you ever paused to thank God for his faithfulness to his promise of forgiveness and new life in Christ which begun in your baptism?
It is also totally disingenuous to lump Roman Catholics together with non-Trinitarians sects like Mormons or JWs.
@@aussiebloke51 I thank God every day for saving me, because there is nothing I could do on my own, or even cooperate with God with my salvation since I was spiritually dead. Spiritually dead people can’t even cooperate with their salvation because they’re spiritually blind.
I actually appreciate my Catholic upbringing, because I was able to tell the difference between the gospel of salvation from scripture verses the false gospel that Rome teaches.
Keep in mind, that groups like Jehovah’s Witnesses, and even trinitarians like SDAs who actually believe in the trinity, some of them are not Christians if they’re worshiping Jesus as Michael the Archangel, because they’re worshiping a created being. And they would be equally offended by you calling you “disingenuous“ for claiming they are not Christians.
Just because someone believes in the deity of Christ and the Trinity that does not automatically make them Christians. There’s more to it than that.
We have access by faith, we believe from the heart, water dunking/sprinkling on its own does nothing.
@Dizerner The scriptures disagree with you. 1 Peter 3.21
@@aussiebloke51 The Scriptures disagree we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, that we believe in our heart that Jesus is Lord, lol.
Those ARE Scriptures.
@@BornAgainRN you must have had a bad experience. Surely, you know that all are fallen. The Catholic church has always stated "it is a church of saints ,& sinners".
It would be great to see you and Gavin in a discussion on YT.
@@rexlion4510 I would love to have a discussion with him about this, but it’s totally up to him. I actually have a tremendous amount of respect for Dr. Ortlund, agreeing with probably 90-95% with him on other topics, but I strongly disagree with him that Catholics are Christians, based on the authority of Scripture. Time will tell.
Consider also that the Reformers may have considered Roman Catholic as Christians because of being before the Council of Trent that fotmally and specifically anathematized the gospel.
@@marknotestine424 there is definitely a difference between pre-and post-council of Trent Roman Catholicism, just as there is a huge difference between pre-and post Vatican II Roman Catholicism, which the latter became much more inclusive towards non-Catholics.
I read all the canons promulgated at the Council of Trent. In none of those canons is the Gospel anathematized. However, there are multiple places where the various protestant heresies are anathematized. And these protestant heresies, which protestants still believe and teach, deny what the New Testament teaches. This "BornAgainRN" is a heretic. He's not a Christian.
@marknotestine424, Ask yourself the question: Would the Lord Jesus Christ ask you whether you are a Catholic or a Protestant? or Would The Lord Jesus Christ ask you if you believed in Him in His death and resurrection from the dead for your sins and why you did not obey Him by being a Born-again Christian and Temple of God?
Hopefully, your competence as a RN exceeds your competence as a theologian.
@@MikePMAcc and I can see as a non-protestant, you made a typical trolling comment, that doesn’t even attempt to address anything said in the video.
I understand the nervousness of not wanting to draw the circle of salvation too large, and every person should be as diligent as they can to make sure they are in it.
But I would say that a fundamental trust in Christ as Savior can atone for a measure of works or self-righteousness, and even us who verbally renounce it often have secret spiritual pride.
@@Dizerner The main point I was attempting to make is that if a Protestant believes in the gospel of justification by faith alone which is supported by scripture that makes them a Christian. And that’s because they are accepting the atoning work of Christ is sufficient for their salvation. However, even though Catholics believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins, they do not accept the atoning work of Christ was sufficient and believe they have to somehow contribute to their salvation. Therefore protestants and Catholics are believing in different gospel and therefore a different Christ, which is what I flushed out in this video. If you haven’t watched the whole presentation, I would encourage you to do so to get a better and clearer understanding of what my argument is. Unfortunately most Catholics have not done this and instead chosen to attack and not be “gentle and reverent“ like the apostle peter commands us to.
@@BornAgainRN I think you are uncharitably reading their positions a lot, and even if you are in some measure correct, I know for a fact that the majority of RCC I have interacted with would put the essential merit on Christ alone, and that IS trusting in grace, essentially.
And the sin you are pointing out-the essential sin of self-righteous or trusting in one's works-although we both may verbally renounce, since as a good Calvinist that I assume you are, you recognize we have a sin nature and our heart is deceitful above all things, we know that every moment we fall short of the perfect standard of perfect faith in Christ alone, and our sin nature tends towards pride and self-reliance constantly in some measure.
You see what some people become-and this is a real ironic twist and a real shame-is what I call "Grace Pharisees." If others don't trust in grace as purely and perfectly as these Grace Pharisees think they do, if others don't reach their perfect level of faith alone in grace, then they are eager to condemn them and put Grace Law on them that they have to have good enough faith. But an imperfect faith still saves-a faulty faith still saves-a sinful dirty rag faith still saves-a self-righteous faith still saves, because there is a measure of trust in Christ, and we all fall short of perfect trust, it is a standard no one meets at any time, no man ever has, or ever will, purely trust in Christ's merit alone with no secret spiritual pride in anything.
So an essential admission that Christ is the one who wins the merit and pays the price, is enough to put saving faith in an atonement.
Aside from the terrible errors of Calvinistic thought, which I will leave be for now since it is not the topic here.
Christ came to fulfill the law Not to remove it ,James wrote Faith and Works ( love , deeds ) is what Jesus wants not Paul who never walked with Jesus but only the 12 Apostles , Christ promised 12 chairs in Heaven , 12 tribes of Isral not 13 , Jesus said he wll never come back until the end of times ,Paul said he seen Christ in the light , he lied 3 time on how he met Jesus , their are Protestant writers who go against Paul .
A couple of questions, if you don't mind:
1. You claim that you obtain "eternal justification" at the moment of your profession of faith, and then after that, you repent of your sins.
Tell me, what's the point of repenting of your sins if you've already gained "eternal justification"?
If you've obtained "eternal justification", there's no need to repent - you can sin all you like and still be eternally justified.
2. If you obtain "eternal justification" thru your profession of faith, why does Paul warn believers (ie, those with faith and are therefore, according to you, eternally justified) in Gal 5:19-21 and 1Cor 6:9-10 that their sins can result in them not inheriting the kingdom of God?
Sounds like sin can turn your "eternal justification" into eternal damnation!
@@AndrewLane-pm2ro The moment of salvation involves a series of instantaneous steps. First, the Holy Spirit regenerates a persons heart, so they can accept the free gift of faith in order to believe, and once that happens they realize they have sinned against a holy God, which results in repentance which is also the work of the Holy Spirit. So from beginning to end, the entire process of salvation that happens in a moment is the work of God.
When the apostle Paul talks about those who do not have the fruit of the spirit, he’s addressing unbelievers who will not inherit the kingdom of God. He’s not talking about genuine believers, because they have the fruit of the spirit, not the fruit of the flesh.
What makes you so sure that you have correctly interpreted the scriptures and that you understand the true gospel? Your interpretation of the gospel is novel. From my understanding of history, no one taught it in antiquity, the first people to teach this interpretation of the scriptures are protestants. I know of no ancient Christian sect that taught or believed the same gospel you do, neither catholic, orthodox, etc.
If what you say is true then it means that there were no Christians from some time shortly after the lives of the apostles until after Martin Luther, about 1400 years or so.
When you talk about lost salvation, what do you mean? Are you saying that if a Christian on his death bed rejects God and blasphemes him, he is still saved? Or are you saying that if you accidentally sin you are still saved? It's my understanding that catholics believe there are two categories of sin, sin that leads to death (mortal) and sin that doesn't (venial). That they believe that if someone commits a venial sin, or commits a mortal sin without full knowledge, they do not forfeit their salvation. That only those that commit mortal sin purposefully with full knowledge of their actions forfeit their salvation.
@@richardditty5318 Jesus expected the average Jew to know what Scripture meant when He asked them “Have you not read?” Ecclesiastical hierarchies like Roman Catholicism & the Watchtower claim only they can infallibly interpret Scripture. But do we really need a magisterium to explain to us what “Jesus weptL means? So if the average Jew could understand the gospel based on Scripture, so can we.
Jesus said there is only ONE sin that leads to death - blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, while Rome says there are numerous “mortal” sins that can. So Rome contradicts Scripture.
There have always been Christians since the time of Christ. The Reformers simply recovered it from the false gospel Rome had been teaching since it went apostate.
@@BornAgainRN How do you know that Jesus expected the average Jew to know the scriptures? That seems ridiculous considering how much books cost in antiquity. For example, a bible printed on velum in the middle ages would cost several years wages of a day laborer. Not to mention that the average Jew was illiterate and uneducated. In the first century the scriptures were kept on scrolls which were only read to the congregation on the Sabbath.
When Jesus asked them "have you not read?" he was speaking to the Pharisees and Sadducees, the religious scholars of the Jews, which would be the equivalent of a Christian Priest or Bishop, people who are formally trained in Religious law. It's my understanding that Jesus expected the religious leaders to understand the scriptures and use this understanding to correctly teach the congregation because the Jews had a priestly religious system with a magisterium.
There's a huge difference between understanding what "Jesus wept" means, and understanding the finer points of justification by faith. You're making an apples to oranges comparison.
You side stepped my main criticism and question which is, where in antiquity after the time of the apostles did these Christians exist that believed as you believe? What were they called? Where are their writings? I cant find them. You claim that the reformers, so called, recovered the true gospel. From whom did they recover it and when was it lost?
Jesus did not say there was only one sin that leads to death, he said that there was only one sin that wouldn't be forgiven, which is blasphemy of the holy spirit. This passage of scripture doesn't refute the Catholic interpretation of 1 John 5. You didn't answer my question about what you think a catholic believes when they say you can lose your salivation.
And apparently a magisterium is needed to interpret scripture because that's how every religion works, including ancient Judaism and Protestant religions. The Amish, Anglicans, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Methodists, and many others have a magisterium. If you go to a Pentecostal church they say you're not saved unless you speak in tongues. If you go to a Baptist church they say you're not saved unless you've said the Jesus prayer and made him your personal lord and savior. If you go to a Church of Christ they say you're not saved unless you get baptized, others say baptism doesn't save and is a symbol. A Lutheran would tell you that the bread and wine consubstantiate into the flesh and blood of Christ, an Evangelical will tell you it's just a symbol. They all claim to have the "true gospel" but they all teach very different things. They can't all be correct.
It seems the best way to see who is correct is to look towards antiquity and see what Christian leaders taught throughout history. When that is done none of these reformist teachings can be found.
@@richardditty5318 Didn't you know that the Jews memorized the Tanakh for generations and in this way passed on the words to the next generations?
A person who thinks he is wise first learns to drink milk because solid food is too much too heavy for the stomach.
Good video.
for centuries Protestants and Catholics failed to reach out to each other in the spirit of Agape, but in these days of learning and much study in which both camps have had much opportunity to understand the one true faith, you now come along with words which belong to the days of Reformation in which ignorance won over Wisdom
@@simonwesteng3610 Sounds like most Catholics who left comments here, you didn’t even bother to watch the video, but just troll. Otherwise you would’ve addressed the specific points made in the video.
Excellent comment.
@@BornAgainRN Now that we shall both celebrate the Incarnation of our Lord into the world, "the Word of Life" born of Mary and laid in an `eating trough` (manger) for all the `house of bread` (Bethlehem) to see and to adore. So let us meditate upon this great gift to all who believe.
For when the time came for Him to leave, His closest friends were left distraught. Then He told them, "I will not leave you as orphans: I will come to you. Though unbelievers will not see Me, you who believe will `see` Me. And so I will be `with you` always, till the end of the age.
I am the living Bread of Life who gives true life to the world. If anyone believes and thus gladly eats of My Body and My Blood, he will have Life in him (ref John 6:57). Alas, just as many left Him after He had said these things (6:66), likewise, the Reformation broke away from the apostle's belief in the `Real Presence` by which we are united to the Word of Life and He with us.
Take note of this, my brothers, for Jesus said "Not everyone who says to Me, `Lord, Lord`, will enter the Kingdom of God. Even though they may have prophesied in My name, driven out demons and performed miracles in My name, yet I will then tell them, "I never knew you nor know from where you came" With these things in mind, therefore, ask yourselves this:
Are you from the `House of Bread`? Have you believed and so eaten from that humble manger which our Lord provided His Church at the Last Supper, especially for those who truly love Him?...
@@simonwesteng3610 Study the Bible and make sure you follow and obey the advice of The Lord Jesus Christ: become a Born again Christian! instead of a person who wants to be religious.
Thank you for this. Generally speaking I find Gavin to be a great thinker, a great teacher, and one of the Protestant heavy weights when it comes to apologetics. I think he has gone way too far in this last video though; while we should be kind and respectful to others, it is ultimately not kind to seek temporal unity at the cost of people's eternal souls. There may well be true followers of Christ among the RCs, but that will often be in spite of their teachings. Many among them, like yourself when you were younger, need to hear the true Gospel, and I am worried that Gavin's video might leave some RCs feeling content where they are instead of encouraging them to looking into what the Protestants are always banging on about; ultimately, that could rob someone of a relationship with Christ and therefore their salvation. Very dangerous.
@@HaggisOfDeath thank you for taking the time to actually watch this, unlike most Catholics here who didn’t even bother, but just leave trolling comments.
A lot of these Catholics just left comments demonstrate the problem with people like Gavin arguing that they are Christians, and they get elated by this, because it tickles their ears. Roman Catholicism has become so inclusive, because it tells people what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear. And when any opposition based on the word of God is exposed to them, they refuse to listen and learn, and they get angry and attack. That really shows their fruit, and demonstrates they are not Christian.
I am hoping that Gavin does watch this, since he encouraged people to respond to him towards the end of his video. And he’s not doing Catholics any favors by asserting they are Christian, including those who truly understand Roman Catholic doctrines that are bound to them, which are false and affect the gospel.
Thanks again for the comment, and for taking the time to watch this. It’s much appreciated. God bless!
You might say the church was apostate for 1500 years until the reformers came along. But who is to say it isnt still apostate and we are waiting for God to raise up men to do the final reformation and reveal the true gospel that has been hidden from us?
No, the LDS finally got it right. Or if not LDS, must be the Muslim who finally got it right; the rest of Christianity were all wrong
He is literally on the same level as Mormons and JW's lol
On the basic level of protest they are all the same
@@notavailable4891 no, they were Christians before the reformation. And what you’re accusing me of, I’m not even insinuating in the video. Did you even bother to watch it, or are you just trolling? Your comment avoids addressing what’s actually argued in the video, in order to avoid addressing to issues made.
@@notavailable4891 no, there were genuine Christians before the reformation. But your comment avoids addressing the arguments made in the video, so you were committing a red herring. Did you even bother to watch the video, or are you just trolling?
@BornAgainRN There is a remnant of true Christians now, they are just waiting for the future, true reformation too.
Oh man.. Oh man.. I am so sorry I missed this live. He he. God bless you Steve. Don't worry if Catholics are Christian as well. You can still be a Protestant. It's your decision. Why would you start by saying that you think Gavin is a 'Biblical based Protestant Pastor', if you also think the main contention (the Gospel being justification by faith alone) is being compromised by Gavin's comment?
@@Old_Catholic first, it wasn’t live. It was pre-recorded and I uploaded it later. Second, Gavin can be a genuine Christian, but still be wrong about Catholics being Christian, because as I stated in the video, he shares the same faith that I do which is based on scripture. That’s what makes them at biblically-based.
@@BornAgainRN But he thinks that people who compromise the gospel are still Christian and you don't. You say that is the 'dividing line', if I understood you correctly. So, Gavin isn't sharing the same faith as you.
This is wild lol. “The church fathers disagreed with each other all the time”
Yeah you know what they didn’t disagree on? Water baptismal regeneration and transubstantiation. I guess they were all preaching a false gospel…
@@coencampbell1007 first, you are conflating transubstantiation with real presence. The belief the former includes the latter, but not vice versa. They are not synonymous. Second, water baptismal regeneration was not a universal belief in the early church. Second, you would have to have every single writing of every single Christian in the early church, which is impossible, because we don’t possess them all. Even the ones we have, not everyone believed in it, such as Cyril of Jerusalem.
But I’m afraid you’re missing my point, which is we should not be basing our faith on the early church fathers, because they did not agree on everything, including doctoral matters. Several early church fathers believed in justification by faith alone, while others didn’t. Therefore, a promise that cannot say that Catholics are Christians, too, since they believe in different gospels, and therefore different Christs.
@ I’m not conflating transubstantiation with real presence. The Church Fathers constantly used Aristotle’s 10 predicamentals in their theology, especially with the Trinity. They also applied this logic when talking about the sacrifice of the mass and cited Malachi 1:11 against Jews and gnostics as proof that Jesus actually had a body and was sacrificed and that that sacrifice is made present to us in the mass. This only works with transubstantiation. St. Cyril of Jerusalem emphasized the symbolic nature of the Eucharist but he obviously didn’t believe it was purely symbolic.
As far as baptismal regeneration and the idea of mortal sin, I don’t even know why I need to defend this.
As far as Catholics teaching a false gospel… do you not see where you’re the one coming later and preaching a false gospel? This becomes extremely obvious to anyone with basic knowledge of church history.
@@coencampbell1007 I doubt he'll respond to you. The man is a mental lightweight.
Curious, are your interpretations of scripture infallible?
@@Jamesps34 no, and the New Testament never promises that anyone, including the church, is even capable of infallibly interpreting scripture. But that’s not what this video is about. You are creating a red herring in order to avoid addressing the actual issue.
Sure it is. You are using your interpretation of scripture to claim that 1500 years of Christianity didn’t exist or for 2000 years of Christianity for that matter and if you’re interpretation is not infallible, you could be wrong therefore I’m putting my interpretations of scripture in with the historical Church and the Church fathers and not with modern Protestantism many of whom can’t even agree on the basic tenants of Christianity, and much which Luther himself with probably disagree with today. I’ll stay with the visible unified Church and not the invisible “unified” churches.
@@BornAgainRN Hi there - can you see that if you believe that no-one is capable of infallibly interpreting scripture then logically you cannot use scripture to support any of your arguments as your interpretation could be wrong - how can you know that your interpretation is the correct one? thanks
@BornAgainRN Steve, you admitted that your interpretation of the gospel is not infalliable. Therefore, you have a chance that your beliefs are infact heresies and your "gospel", false. If you admitted that people who profess false gospels can't be assured of their salvation, how can you (who might be professing a false gospel ) be assured that you will be "saved" .Your position contradicts itself, mainly that you are assured of your salvation but you can't really be assured of your salvation.
in charity, I ask you to reflect on yourself and repents. God bless
@@Jamesps34 thanks for this - I hope Steve will address your comment - this goes to the heart of the matter
🍿🥤 can't wait to watch!
The scripture doesn't tell you the requirements of being a Christian but your fallible interpretation does. We need to hear it from the word of God himself if you put the Bible on top..
@@cephasmwila7537 I got news for you. The Roman Catholic Church does not infallibly interpret scripture, because the New Testament never promises anyone can do this. Besides, that’s not what this video is about. And yes, the New Testament does describe what a Christian is, which you would know if you’re bothered to actually watch it and not troll and make baseless comments and false accusations.
@BornAgainRN I have watched your video till to the end. It basically says if Catholics do not agree with our interpretation of scripture , they are not Christians. You think your interpretation is the right one because you think you have the right gospel.
You even quote verses to support your position. Even the devil knows how to quote scripture. I am not saying your the devil, but people misinterpret the Bible the way the devil does.
The new testament doesn't tells us who a Christian must be. It is us, we tell people that these are the requirements of being a Christian.
Christianity as a whole proved it..
@@BornAgainRN Hi there - if as you assert that the New Testament never promises that anyone can infallibly interpret scripture then how can you use scripture to support your arguments in your videos as your interpretation could be incorrect according to your own reasoning - so using your logic how can we trust anyones interpretation of scripture? how can you assert that Roman Catholic interpretation of scripture is incorrect?
@Paul-wz5bq how many verses are officially interpreted by Rome?
@@mistertracey1 Hi there sorry not sure what your point is - can you elaborate thanks
Catholics are not only Christians, they are True Christians as you stated the True Christian follows the True Jesus whom established her on Peter not Luther and whom Christ stated would prevail against evil (hence it still remains against the errors of Protestantism) and the true gospel which is always proclaimed first from Christ's Words and Actions, then through His Apostles and then the successor of the Apostles: the Church Christ Established
the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church who shows us how our relationship is with the Bible and how it's interpreted. All with the aid of the wonderful Spirit, to the glory of God the Father with obedience and honour to the Son.
@@byronlewis1330 first, protestants do not establish their church on Luther, but on Christ. So right off the bat, you got that wrong. Second, I’m afraid you’ve completely missed the point of the video, which, since protestants don’t believe in the same gospel of Rome, but rather justification by faith alone, which was anathematized at the council of Trent, then protestants like Dr. Ortlund, can’t say in good conscience that Catholics are Christians too, since catholics and protestants do not believe in the same gospel and therefore not the same Jesus. For some reason, protestants understand the point of the video right away, while Catholics don’t and it has to be explained to them. The purpose of the video was not to argue who has the right gospel. It was about protestants, not declaring that Catholics are also Christians, since they don’t believe in the same gospel, and therefore not the same Jesus.
@@BornAgainRN sorry you are wrong as before Luther the doctrine of Faith Alone (a fiducia faith) was hardly known as Protestant theologian McGrath affirm in his book on Justification. Whether Protestants in good faith can't claim Catholics as Christians means nothing since Protestants didn't exist before Luther the servant of Satan. Hence Protestants don't follow the gospel of Jesus since he established his Church to preach the gospel and that gospel was not a faith alone gospel espoused by the deformers. Matthew 7:21.
Apologies - my criticism was intended for the original video. Not your comment.
@@byronlewis1330, QBornAgainRN is right in her/his explanation, but that can't be otherwise because you apparently don't understand what a Born again Christian is. You cannot overthrow a 'Temple of God' with human claims and so-called evidence.
A blind person can't show a sighted person the way, can he?
@ROKBUZZCUT wrong again a born again Christian is a false Christian based on his Protestant man made traditions and the person speaking has a false Jesus and a false gospel, since the Catholic Church is divinely authorised under Peter by Our Lord and the gates of Hell still has not prevailed against it. But the over emphasis of 'born again' Christians is a satanic novelty based on evangelical misinterpretations of Scripture. For Catholics were always Born Again- of water baptism (a sacrament of faith) and of the Spirit as Jesus clarifies what Born Again is to Nicodemus in John 3:5.
Where in the bible does it say that the Bible is the sole rule of faith? I can’t find a Protestant who can answer me that and don’t give me the same bible verses. They’re strawman at best and don’t teach sola Scriptura.
First, sola scriptura is not the topic of this video, so your question is a red herring. Second, it is not the sole role of faith, so you’re committing a strawman. Scripture is the only artifact of divine revelation revealed by God for Christian doctrine and truth (2 Timothy 3:16). So you have to begin by understanding what sola scriptura is, first. Otherwise you are rejecting something you have a misunderstanding of what it is.
Passages like Mark 7 and Luke 16:29, demonstrate that scripture alone is sufficient for Christian doctrine and salvation. In Mark, Jesus rebukes the figures he reliance on Corban, which was “Secret oral tradition“ that the elevator to the same level as written scripture. And in Luke 16, Jesus stated that scripture was sufficient for avoiding the tortures of Hades. Nothing else what scripture is required for Christian doctrine and salvation.
But all of this is a red herring, since it’s not addressing what’s in the video. And since Catholics and protestants both believe Scripture is God breathed and beneficial for doctrine, I make the argument from scripture that Catholics are not Christian. But it doesn’t sound like you took the time to watch the video. So once you begin there. I answered your question, so I would appreciate if you return the favor and watch this before making any more comments.
@@BornAgainRN those passages say nothing about scriptures. Just stop
@@BornAgainRN sola Scriptura
Sola scriptura is a Latin phrase that means "by scripture alone" or "the Bible alone". It's a Christian theological doctrine that states that the Bible is the sole, infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice.
It’s a self refuting doctrine dude lol. 😆 If was infallible how come Protestants disagree with even stuff like baptism .
Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation,
21
for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.
Show me where the Bible says that the Roman Catholic is the sole rule of faith. Give me some verses in the Bible that were inspired by the word of God, not from the fallible man-made book of the Catechism and their false doctrines written many centuries after Pentecost and Paul's teaching and the true apostolic fathers.
@@BornAgainRN by the way mark 7 and Luke 16:29 doesn’t say anything about scriptures being the sole rule of faith.
Also it seems like you don’t know much about man made traditions compared to apostolic oral tradition or sacred tradition.
2 Thessalonians 2:15
1 Corinthians : 11: 2. Some passages
Holy Scripture teaches we must cooperate with God's saving grace and repent and bear fruit and forgive others and love one another and keep the commandments and persevere to the end to be saved! Protestants say this not true! Catholic teaching says it is! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink!
@@matthewbroderick6287 And just as you do in every video, your post has nothing to do with the actual topic I posted. Did you even bother to listen to it? Probably not based on your past trolling. And while you are correct that Roman Catholic teaching mandates all these extrabiblical “requirements” to be saved, scripture does not. Again, the topic is “Are Catholics Christians?” and the answer based on God breathed scripture is “no.”
Don’t even pay him any mind Steve
@@matthewbroderick6287 I deleted some of your comments since you insulted me accusing me of lying. That will not tolerated on my channel. I have allowed you to make comments, because I believe in the freedom to post publicly, but if you continue to insult me on my channel, you will be banned permanently, which I don't desire to do. But I will also not tolerate insults towards me on my own channel.
@@BornAgainRN I believe he has been blocked by Gavin by doing the same thing... ironically.
Can't mix God's grace with your righteousness for salvation. It is the gift of God.
My biggest issue with protestant soteriology is the idea that justification and sanctification are really distinct and justification does not actually sanctify and vice versa. This contradicts the teaching of the Bible in 2 Thes. 2:13 and Titus 3:5, among other verses that prove sanctification/regeneration does actually justify.
There is no real distinction just like the One Christian Church (i.e., the Catholic Church) teaches.
Just one of countless examples
2 Thessalonians 2:13 says, "But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers and sisters loved by the Lord, because God chose you as firstfruits to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth".
This is why Protestant Theologian and Historian Alister McGrath admitted that the Protestant idea that justification and sanctification are two different processes were a nvoelty that notes a departure from the historical faith.
He stated, "A fundamental discontinuity was
introduced into the western theological
A History of the Christian
tradition where none had ever existed, or
Doctrine ofJustification
ever been contemplated, before."
ALISTER E. McGRATH
- Alister McGrath, Iustitia Dei, p. 217.
Oxford University.
I confess that I have seeked truth all along by studying the Scriptures, early fathers, as well as Theologians and I honestly can't in good conscience remain Protestant. I had to become Catholic/Christian
@@Jamric-gr8gr As I mentioned in the video, read Romans chapter 7 and Romans chapter 8, and you’ll see they are distinct. Even in Roman Catholicism “initial” justification is at the moment of baptism. So even Rome teaches that justification happens in a moment, at least initially. But where the conflation in Rome comes is they confuse justification before God which is instantaneous like in Romans 4 versus justification before men which is simply talking about fruit, which we find in James 2. While sanctification is a lifelong process of conforming to the image of Christ which ends at death at the moment of glorification. That’s why I said read Romans chapter 7 and Romans chapter 8. Justification is about becoming righteous before holy God, while sanctification is about growth and fruit.
@@BornAgainRN I have to say that I just reread Romans chapter 7 and 8 looking for the distinction you’re making, and I simply don’t find it. These chapters, much like Galatians chapter 3, are about the indwelling work of the Holy Spirit that happens apart from the “works of the law”, which from context in both places clearly refers to the mosaic ordinances given uniquely to the Jews.
In Romans 8:2, which is a summary of what he’s just said in chapter 7, Paul says that we are freed from the law of sin and death by “the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus”. Similarly, in Galatians chapter 3 Paul is clearly talking about sanctification apart from “works of the law”: “Did you receive the Spirit from works of the law?” “Does, then, the one who supplies the Spirit to you and works mighty deeds among you do so from works of the law or from faith in what you heard?”
When he does use the word “justify” and “justification” (Gal 3:8, 11), he does so without any apparent shift from the language of indwelling spirit to the language of alien righteousness, imputation, or other forensic notions.
Protestant soteriology is unbiblical rubbish. It was the main reason I became disillusioned with Protestantism and converted to Catholicism.
@BornAgainRN First of all you stated that James 2 is what justifies in sight of men and not God. "(Referring to James 2)...Justification before men which is simply talking about fruit".
No, absolutely not.
Your total eisigesis of James 2 is refuted by the fact that James 2:21 (Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? KVJ) is referring to Genesis 22 where God Himself tested Abraham. This is why in the same chapter James describes that faith without works can't be salvific (How will that faith save him? James 2:14) meaning that the issue being discussed is something in relation to God (and men) rather than men only
Moreover, although James 2 has an element of indication (i.e., showing that works will follow if the faith is genuine) but that is certainly NOT ALL JAMES 2 IS ABOUT. James 2:22 - 23 says " You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”[a] and he was called God’s friend" Notice that his "faith WAS MADE COMPLETE" by works (verse 22) and most significantly, Abrahm's works "FULFULED" (i.e., to make complete, fully realize or fully developing something and thus being satisfied. Literally in Greek, ἐπληρώθη which means to make full or complete. This word is repeatedly used in the N.T to describe the fulfilment of scriptural prophecy. ) his state of justification/being considered righteous. In other words, Abrahm's works actually contributed to his state of justification instead of merely vindicating/showing evidence of his righteousness.
(If you fo A and and doing so fulfils B, then A actually contributes to B rather than only showing that A is the evidence of B.)
In regards to Romans 4, consider first that the context of Romans 4 is about initial justification and or repentence and forgiveness of grave sins is by faith.
If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about-but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”[a
This is a reference to Abraham's covenant with God and his initial justification in Genesis 15.
Romans 4:6 -8 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
7 “Blessed are those
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the one
whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”[b
8
ROMANS 4:7-8 IS REFERRENCE TO PSALM 32:1-2. KEEP THIS IN MIND
As you can see, David's sola fide justification referenced by Paul as an example of justification by faith apart from works is his repentence from sin. This IS further proven when we actually read PSALM 32. After David said,
Blessed are those
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the one
whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”[b]
(Psalm 32 cited by Romans 4:7-8)
When I kept silent,
my bones wasted away
through my groaning all day long.
4 For day and night
your hand was heavy on me;
my strength was sapped
as in the heat of summer.[b]
5 Then I acknowledged my sin to you
and did not cover up my iniquity.
I said, “I will confess
my transgressions to the Lord.”
And you forgave
the guilt of my sin..
This proves that David was justified by faith alone when he repented, and Romans 4 teaches that repentence/justification by faith. This has nothing to do with the fact that a believer must continue in goodness in order to be saved as affirmentioned James 2 and rest of the new testament teaches.
Also, Justification and sanctification are not distinct Titus 3:5 2 Thesalonians 2:13
and salvation is a process
1 Timothy 4:16 Be diligent in these matters; give yourself wholly to them, so that everyone may see your progress. Watch YOUR LIFE and doctrine closely. PRESERVE in them, because IF YOU DO , you WILL save both yourself and your hearers.
@@Jamric-gr8gr Apparently, when Abraham obeyed God by offering to sacrifice his son Isaac, he did it to be justified in the eyes of men! 🤣😂😅
Ill say some within the Roman Catholic church are saved, however following the doctrine to the latter wouldn't make you a Christian
If you believe mary can tell Jesus what to do as if he obeys his mother and she is the way to get on Jesus’s good side and the only way to receive salvation is by eating Jesus in the form of a cookie… I would question one’s salvation…
@danib712 Read my comment again. There are Roman Catholics that don't indulge in a lot of Marian dogmas.
Hahaha… yeah I heard Jesus was a Muslim as well 😂😂😂…or a Calvinist depends on which heretic you ask
Well now that’s funny. I’m Orthodox and I’d say you aren’t Christians .
@@EricAlHarb Just out of curiosity, did you take the time to watch the video, or did you just leave a comment without taking the time to watch it first?
Protestants who teach the doctrine of Calvin "Once Saved Always Saved," the Roman Catholics who believe in a place called purgatory, and the Orthodox who pray to statues and the dead are not Christians but all lies that will send them to hell. The Bible says all liars will have their part in the lake of fire. It only takes one lie to end in hell.
@@jpd4676 the lake of fire is a Hebraic apocalyptic expression that the HS used to describe God's afflictions that are caused in the physical world. hell is a myth.
The lake of fire judgment that John is given from Christ, is the same judgment that Ezekiel also warned Israel of in chapter 22 of his prophecy
17 Then the word of the Lord came to me: 18 “Son of man, the people of Israel have become dross to me; all of them are the copper, tin, iron and lead left inside a furnace. They are but the dross of silver. 19 Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: ‘Because you have all become dross, I will gather you into Jerusalem. 20 As silver, copper, iron, lead and tin are gathered into a furnace to be melted with a fiery blast, so will I gather you in my anger and my wrath and put you inside the city and melt you. 21 I will gather you and I will blow on you with my fiery wrath, and you will be melted inside her. 22 As silver is melted in a furnace, so you will be melted inside her, and you will know that I the Lord have poured out my wrath on you.’”
The language is highly figurative and is symbolic, but the important thing to understand is that this is about God bringing His afflictions on Jerusalem. And this prophecy was fulfilled when Jerusalem was destroyed by Rome in the Roman Jewish wars of 66-70 AD.
It was at that time when the OC world of Judea was judged by God and the temple and city and priesthood were destroyed. And was also the same judgment that Ezekiel 34 was prophesying.
34 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:
this judgment of the sheep and the goats that Ezekiel prophesied in chapter 34 was fulfilled at that time when God installed Jesus Christ as His GOOD SHEPHERD
23 I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. 24 I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken.
and Jesus confirmed He was that Shepherd
John 10:11
“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
The student of scripture needs to connect the dots of the prophecies and rightly divide the scriptures.
again hell is a myth that has evolved from biased translators who were driven by a spirit of doubt and fear, and 'hell' is not in the original scriptures.
@@ophiuchus9071 No matter how many Bible scriptures you bring will not change the fact that hell exists and Jesus spoke ten times more about hell than heaven to His disciples. Are you going to call Jesus a liar? That is blasphemy, my friend. Repent or you likewise will perish.
The Bible contains many references to hell. Heed to them.
Matthew 25:46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life"
Matthew 13:49-50 So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come forth, separate the wicked from among the just, 50 and cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”
Hell is described as a furnace of conscious torment where the fire never goes out
Mark 9:47-48 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire- 48 where ‘Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched.’
Hell is described as a place of excruciating misery where the worm does not die
Jude 1:7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Hell is described as a prison of everlasting chains from which there is no hope of release
2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,
Those who do not know God and those who will not obey the gospel of Christ will be punished with everlasting destruction
Revelation 21:8 But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
The cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur
Matthew 5:22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.
Matthew 18:8-9 “If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the everlasting fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into [a]hell fire.
Gehenna, the most common New Testament term translated as "Hell", is described as a place of punishment
Matthew 8:12 But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Matthew 22:13 Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’
Other passages mention darkness and "weeping and gnashing of teeth"
So you are Catholic. All the same doctrine and pagan regalia.
You didn't understand your own Catholic faith because if you truly understood it and everything it is founded on you would have never left the Catholic faith... Pray for your return home 🙏
@@westkyboy9760 thanks for not responding to the actual topic of the video, but instead making a baseless accusation, considering you know nothing about me. All you’re doing is pontificating, not contributing to a conversation.
What part don’t you think he understood? Be specific.
You’re not saved.
@@T.Truthtella-n3i How do you know?
@@BornAgainRNBecause you reject Christ's Church.
Because you reject Christ's Church. I'll pray for you
@@Jamric-gr8gr It is ridiculous and disgraceful that you! dares to insult and' harm a Temple of God - a Born again Christian. How ignorant can a man be!
You are 100% correct.
So there were no Christians until the Protestant reformation?
@@Sumbaddy129 They'll claim their were, but they'll be heretical groups that taught things that were nothing like what the protestants believe.
@@Sumbaddy129 that's not even close to what said in the video. Did you even watch it BEFORE you posted this? Because your question is addressed in it.
Praying to Mary for your reversion to the true faith.
“reversion” you sound like a Muslim.
@@SonOfThineHandmaid first, this video has nothing to do with Mary. Second, the fact that you immediately thought about praying to Mary as opposed to God himself demonstrates Mary, rather than God is your priority. So in a sense, you proved my point in the video
@BornAgainRN oh I know the video is not about your reversion to the faith. That doesn't stop me praying about it. You can make whatever assumption pleases you about my priorities, which you don't have access to, only I know what my priorities really are. I'll continue to pray to Mary on your behalf👍
Christ taught us to pray to the Father in his name.
If he wanted us to pray to people instead of God, he would have mentioned it.
@@SonOfThineHandmaid 💯
The Catholic Church is the bride of christ. Christ only has one bride. His church. Again where was Christianity in the first 1500 years? I always asked Protestants that question. The church never apostatized because that would call Christ a liar Matthew 16: 16-19 and Matthew 28: 20. Paul did warn though that heretics would try to pervert the gospel. Acts 20: 30 and from your own group, men will come foward perverting the truth to draw the disciples away from them. What does that sound like? 🤔 The church since the beginning has fought off heresies like Gnosticism, marcionism, montanism, etc.Why is Protestantism any different? We will know them by their fruits? Well sola Scriptura has let to thousands of Protestant sects each contracdicting each other. Doctrines like sola Scriptura and faith alone are not biblical. First answer me this where does it say that the bible is the sole rule of faith? Second what does the bible say is the pillar and foundation of truth?
Catholic and roman catholic are not the same things. There is no office of a papacy in the NT. its never mentioned.
Sola Scriptura= the Scriptures alone are the inspired-inerrant Word of God. Therefore they are the ultimate authority for the Christian and the Christian church. There is no equal nor greater authority than the Scriptures.
Salvation=faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone. (John 3:16; Romans 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:8-9)
Pope says all religions lead to heaven, pope changed sabbath to sunday. pope said you can pray to Mary. Church of Babylon more like. Also, there is but one God, the Father. Have a blessed day
To the anonymous poster that does not have a name, just out of curiosity, did you do you even watch the video? Because I didn’t even imply that the church was apostate for 1500 years. This demonstrates you’re just trolling and didn’t bother to even watch it. Watch the video first, because most of your relates questions will be addressed there.
@@Justas399 it is the same thing Roman Catholics was a term used by Anglicans in the 1500s. Get real. Roman is a rite used in the church. There’s 23 rites they all make the Catholic Church. Learn about it. I dont expect you to know church history since your founder started your church in the 1500s while mine started his in A.D 33.
@@Ryan_Nath no he didn’t! He as misquoted. He was bringkng ul paragraph of the catechism 841-843 read it if you have time also lumen gentium 16. He was talking about other faiths and their salvation.