Wayne Grudem on Roman Catholicism | Systematic Theology, 2nd Edition
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 сер 2024
- Dr. Wayne Grudem (Distinguished Research Professor of Theology and Biblical Studies, Phoenix Seminary) lays out some differences between the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church and those of evangelical Protestantism.
Learn more at ps.edu.
To watch more videos about theology and Scripture, and other content produced by Phoenix Seminary, please like this video and subscribe to our channel.
Our Mission: Phoenix Seminary trains men and women for Christ-centered ministry for the building up of healthy churches in Phoenix and the world.
Your views on Augustine being a really great guy align with Catholicism.
Wayne Grudem talks about his encounter with a Roman Catholic nun named Mary.Tslking about purgatory,”you are in for an amazing surprise when you die”( or words to that effect) Later talking about praying with Catholics ,” you could see they had genuine faith in Christ”( or words to that effect)
Complete faith in Christ ,but requiring an “Alta christus” to give them the last rites doesn’t give the indication of a total trust in Christ as a saviour.
If I left my Church and joined the Roman Catholic Church and followed their teachings ,would it make any difference to my salvation?
Should we not be trying to save Catholics, or are they all going to have a pleasant surprise when they die?
Trying to save Catholics from what??
@@henrybayard6574 ..save them from their belief in a false Gospel. They don’t believe through Grace alone,Faith alone,Scripture alone,Christ alone for the Glory of God alone. I could add things like imputed righteousness etc but you get the reasoning ,I’m sure.
@@chrismachin2166 can you show me in scripture the words "faith alone" chapter and verse please.
@@henrybayard6574 The Muslim apologist would use the same sort of argument.
Certainly look at Romans chapter 4 4:8 .The Roman Catholic would hard to say who is the “Blessed Man “ in this passage. John 6 37:44 would be another passage they would go “to and fro” to try and get round the straight forward meaning of the text. John 6:65 is another straight forward statement by Christ. A long discussion would probably not get us far ,but hopefully I’ve mentioned some vital texts.
@@chrismachin2166 In other words the words faith alone NEVER appears in scripture except in the negative. James 2:24. It's funny you quote Romans 4:4-8. David is referencing Psalm 32 which is explained in Psalm 51. David was justified after repenting of his sins. Which means David was saved at first then lost his salvation but was justified again which should make you think??
I always get a kick out of how Evangelical Protestants always refer to Catholics as "ROMAN Catholics," as if it is some kind of pejorative.
Protestants are “Catholic”( when you understand the word Catholic)but don’t believe the false gospel of Roman Catholicism. The Reformation ( Luther,bondage of the Will,imputed righteousness,Grace alone,Faith alone,Christ alone,Scripture alone,Glory of God alone) was a major clarification of biblical revelation.
@@chrismachin2166 LOL!
@@tradcath2976 Your reply shows signs of intellectual maturity.
@@chrismachin2166 "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant." St. John Henry Newman. ; - )
@@tradcath2976 Good luck with Pope Frankie! Just ignore him,most Catholics do. Is that how it works?!
The following quote from Stephen L. Harris, Professor Emeritus of Humanities and Religious Studies at California State University- Sacramento, completes this point with a devastating argument.
*Jesus did not accomplish what Israel’s prophets said the Messiah was commissioned to do:* He did not deliver the covenant people from their Gentile enemies, reassemble those scattered in the Diaspora, restore the Davidic kingdom, or establish universal peace (cf.Isa. 9:6-7; 11:7-12:16, etc.). Instead of freeing Jews from oppressors and thereby fulfilling God’s ancient promises-for land, nationhood, kingship, and blessing- *Jesus died a “shameful” death, defeated by the very political powers the Messiah was prophesied to overcome.* Indeed, the Hebrew prophets did not foresee that Israel’s savior would be executed as a common criminal by Gentiles, *making Jesus’ crucifixion a “stumbling block” to scripturally literate Jews.* (1 Cor.1:23)
------------------------------------------------------------------
The end is near?
*The Bible’s New Testament contains a drumbeat of promises that Jesus is ready to return any day now, implying that it will happen so soon that it would be wise to keep it in mind when making any kind of life decision. But it didn’t happen.* The following is a sample of verses professing this theme:
Matt 10:23: [Jesus said to his disciples] *‘When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next;* ***for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel, before the Son of man comes’.*** (They fled through the towns but the Son of Man never came)
Matt 16:28: [Jesus said to the disciples], *‘Truly, I say to you,* ***there are some standing here*** *who will not taste death* before they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom’.
Mark 9:1: And he [Jesus] said to them [the disciples], *‘Truly, I say to you,* ***there are some standing here*** *who will not taste death* before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power’.
Mark 13:30: *[After detailing events up to end of world, Jesus says]* ‘Truly, I say to you, ***this generation will not pass away*** *before all these things take place’.*
Mark 14:62: And Jesus said ***[to the high priest - died 1st cent. AD]*** ‘You will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven’. (The high priest died and never saw the Son of Man)
Rom 13:12: The day is *at hand.*
1 Cor 7:29: The appointed time has grown very short; from now on, *let those who have wives live as though they had none.* (Funny thing to say if you didn’t think the end was imminent)
1 Cor 7:31: For the form of this world is *passing away.*
Phil 4:5: The Lord is *coming soon.*
1 Thess 4:15: *We who are alive, who are left* until the coming of the Lord.
Hebrews 1:2: *In these last days* he has spoken to us by a Son.
Hebrews 10:37: For yet a little while, and the coming one shall come and *shall not tarry.*
James 5:8: The coming of the Lord is *at hand.*
1 Peter 1:20: He [Christ] was destined before the foundation of the world but was made manifest at the *end of the times.*
1 Peter 4:7: The end of all things is *at hand.*
1 John 2:18: *It is the last hour;* and as you have heard that antichrist is coming.
Rev 1:1: The revelation of Jesus Christ (i.e., the end of the world)…to show to his servants what must *soon take place.*
Rev 3:11: [Jesus said] ‘I am *coming soon’.*
Rev 22:6: And the Lord…has sent his angel to show his servants what must *soon take place.*
Rev 22:20: [Jesus said] ‘Surely I am *coming soon’.*
*It is puzzling to understand why Christianity survived the failure of this prediction. It is not ambiguous.* This would be like a rich uncle who promises to give you $10,000 ‘very soon.’ Ten years pass and he still hasn’t given anything to you, but he still says he will do it very soon. Would you still believe that it will happen any day? No, you would realize that it is a false promise. *For some reason, Christians cannot comprehend that they have been scammed. Jesus is not coming back, not tomorrow, not next year, not ever. But they still think it will happen any day.*
www.kyroot.com/
*Watch* Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet, Historical Lecture - Bart D. Ehrman on UA-cam
Google *"13x Jesus was wrong in the Bible - Life Lessons"*
Google *"End Times - Evil Bible .com"*
Google *"The End of All Things is At Hand - The Church Of Truth"*
Google *"Resurrection - Fact or Myth - Omission Report"*
Google *"What’s Missing from Codex Sinaiticus, the Oldest New Testament? - Biblical Archaeology Society"*
Google *"The “Strange” Ending of the Gospel of Mark and Why It Makes All the Difference - Biblical Archaeology Society"*
Google *"ex-apologist: On One of the Main Reasons Why I Think Christianity is False (Reposted)"*
Google *"Why Jesus? Nontract (August 1999) - Freedom From Religion Foundation"*
Google *"272: JESUS’S 5200 AUTHENTIC WORDS - zingcreed"*
Google *"43: IS THE FOURTH GOSPEL FICTION? - zingcreed"*
Google *"Jesus Predicted a First Century Return Which Did Not Occur - by Alex Beyman - Medium"*
Google *"Jesus’ Failed Prophecy About His Return - Black Nonbelievers, Inc."*
“Jesus didn't accomplish the Messianic prophecies”:
Maybe Jesus fulfilled some of the prophecies while incarnate and will fulfill the rest when he returns.
The fact that Jesus was peaceful and not warlike as suggested in some parts of the prophets is a feature of the story that many people appreciate: he wasn't what they were expecting and he wasn't here to participate in violent earthly politics. Maybe he will be more warlike when he does come back. I believe there is an image in Revelation of him riding on a horse, but he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey.
I don't think that we have to think the prophetic revelations of the Messiah were inerrant. Not all Christians hold to a strong view of biblical inerrancy anyway.
Prophecy could be vague or mixed with error yet the good parts could still be prophecy.
Prophecy, or divine revelation in general might be a naturally caused (ie the ultimate cause is God, but he works strongly through cultural development that is the result of human free will), somewhat culturally contingent, and a vague, messy thing, yet there could still be fulfilled scriptural prophecies.
So even if Jesus didn't fulfill every Messianic hero dream of the Jews, it doesn't mean that he wasn't, in a deeper sense, the sort of hero that they were yearning and waiting for.
But maybe God does keep his revelation and his scriptures very clean and free from human errors and in fact all the prophecies were (or will be) fulfilled. I would have to study more to see.
But many Jews, from Jesus 12 closest disciples down to many Jews living today, believe that Jesus is the Messiah. Presumably most have read the prophecies.
So on the one hand the prophecies could be vague, yet partially genuine; or they could be wholly genuine.
It raises a lot of questions about the nature of divine revelation, prophecy, and holy scripture.
You are right that his is an important part of the Christian religion. It is right in the gospels that Jesus said that the old testament referent to him and that he considered himself to be the messiah. Christians have always taken that seriously.
For reading on prophecy and revelation:
the last 3 capers of C.S. Lewis' “Reflections on the Psalms”
Richard Swinburne - “Revelation: From Metaphor to Analogy”
**
“Jesus is a failed escatological preacher. He predicted the end of the world but it didn't happen so he's a fraud.”
Seems to me like the early church expected Jesus' imminent return and it didn't happen. I guess they got that wrong. The disciples are slow to understand the meaning of Jesus teaching, even when he's alive. Maybe they gradually figured it out later, after they wrote the gospels. I don't think that the gospels are 100% free of errors. I've heard people say, too, that the apostles believed in the imminent return personally but didn't teach it as doctrine, meaning they weren't sure of the timing.
Some language, even from Jesus, sounds like he's talking about an imminent return. But he also says that no one knows the time of his return. A lot turns on the details, and apparently a lot of solutions to the imminent-type verses are possible.
Many references to the Second Coming outside of the gospels that you cite could be a reference to the Second Coming in the future. Even if individual writers believed mistakenly thought the Return was near, they could still have been inspired to write about the Return that will happen in the future.
Some citations can be given possible explanations on a case-by-case basis:
Matthew 10:23 “The Son of Man coming” could be referring to Jesus becoming more public with his identity, the Transfiguration, the Entry to Jerusalem and the clearing of the temple, or the Post-Resurrection appearances, including the Ascension.
Same with Matthew 16:28 and Mark 13:30
Mark 13:30 could also be a reference to the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. N.T. Wright talks about that.
Mark 14:62 Maybe Jesus is referring to the traditional future-type interpretation Second Coming which God will let the priest see.
N.T. Wright - Series: The New Testament and the People of God (the destruction of the temple point is made in their, tho I can't find the page right now)
C.S. Lewis - The World's Last Night (just the one eponymous essay, not the whole book)
**
“Myths and the Resemblance of Christianity to Other Religions”
Many Christians acknowledge this and think that it points to some sort of vague and general revelation in the imagination of humanity.
We think that Jesus is the myth that proved to be true, because people really saw him rise from the dead. Jesus teaching, miracles, and resurrection were witnessed and so his claims were vindicated.
Christians who are worried about this are just historically ignorant, God bless 'em.
C.S. Lewis - The Grand Miracle
Louis Markos - Myth Made Fact
The Old Testament prophesied that only a remnant of Jews would be saved and that many Gentiles would be included as the people of God. And it prophesied his crucifixion. Does that fit with their expectations? No. He reigns as King of the Jews (David's throne) and has delivered the people of God from their enemies (the demons).
The Jews thought the messiah was coming to establish the nation of Israel as head over the whole earth, forever. An eternal global Jewish kingdom. But as was pointed out in the New Testament, that makes no sense because being a Jew never counted for anything seeing they were as condemned as Gentiles in the Old Testament. Instead, God was in covenant with both Jews and Gentiles who believed in him, loved him, feared him, and worked righteousness rather than wickedness, and Christianity brought this truth to light.
The reason Christianity continues is because of the ongoing miracles. But these evidences are veiled to unrepentant sinners so the fact that you don't see is not evidence the ongoing testimonies of people are false but is instead another miracle.
what now?
"When we say…Jesus Christ…was produced without sexual union, and was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended to heaven, ***we propound nothing new or different*** *from what you believe regarding those whom you call Sons of God. [In fact]…if anybody objects that [Jesus] was crucified, this is in* ***common*** *with the sons of Zeus (as you call them) who suffered, as previously listed [he listed Dionysus, Hercules, and Asclepius].* Since their fatal sufferings are all narrated as not similar but different, so his unique passion should not seem to be any worse."
*Note how Justin (Martyr) is less of a fool than modern Christian apologists. He admits that differences don’t matter.* Since each and every one of the suffering and dying gods are slain by different means, one cannot argue the mytheme requires exactly the same means of death. “But Osiris can’t have inspired the Jesus myth because Osiris wasn’t nailed to a cross” is a stupid argument. The mytheme is simply death. Being killed. Suffering and dying. The exact mode of death can vary freely. It makes no difference to the existence and influence of the mytheme. It’s simply the particular instantiation of a generic abstraction. *And Justin’s argument (that Satan invented these fake religions to confuse people) entails Justin agreed the mytheme existed: indeed, it was demonically promulgated, multiple times. Intentionally.*
*Likewise, Justin notices the mytheme is not virgin birth, but sexless conception. Of which many examples had already been popularized in pagan mythology (there just happens to also have been examples of actual virgin born gods as well). And by his argument (that the Devil was deliberately emulating the Jesus mytheme, in advance), Justin clearly accepted the same principle for “rising again” after death:* the particular exact metaphysics of the resurrection could, like the exact method of death or conception, vary freely. The mytheme consists solely of the abstraction: returning to life. Somehow. Some way. We will say bodily, at the very least. But what sort of body (the same one, a new one, a mortal one, an immortal one), didn’t matter. *If it had, Justin would have made the argument that “those gods” weren’t really resurrected. But that argument, never occurs to him. Nor did it to any other apologist of the first three centuries.*
*Ancient Christians well knew there was nothing new about their dying-and-rising god. Not in respect to the mytheme.* Their claims were solely that his particular instantiation of it was better, and the only one that actually happened. *They didn’t make up the stupid modern arguments that dying-and-rising god myths didn’t exist or weren’t part of a common mytheme everyone knew about. For example, in the same century, Tertullian, in Prescription against Heretics 40, makes exactly the same argument as Justin. Funny that. They had better access to the evidence than we do. They knew what was really and widely the case. We should listen to them.*
Google *"Dying-and-Rising Gods: It's Pagan, Guys. Get Over It. • Richard Carrier"*
Google *"Ehrman Errs: Yes, Bart, There Were Dying & Rising Gods - atheologica"*
Watch *"Dying & Rising Gods: A Response to William Lane Craig"* by Derreck Bennett at Atheologica.
Google *"Virgin Birth: It's Pagan, Guys. Get Over It. • Richard Carrier"*
Google *"5 Pagan Parallels to Jesus That Actually Aren’t Bullshit - Atheomedy"*
Google *"Christian Apologetics: The Art of Deceit - Atheomedy"*
Google *"Defending the Resurrection: It’s Easy if You Lie! - Atheomedy"*
Google *"Majority of Scholars agree: The Gospels were not written by Eyewitnesses - Escaping Christian Fundamentalism"*
A good site written by an actual Biblical scholar.
Google *"Contradictions in the Bible | Identified verse by verse and explained using the most up-to-date scholarly information about the Bible, its texts, and the men who wrote them -- by Dr. Steven DiMattei"*
Google *"How do we know that the biblical writers were* ***not*** *writing history? -- by Dr Steven DiMattei"*
Also:
Google *"How Did The Gospel Writers Know? - The Doston Jones Blog"*
Google *"Yes, the Four Gospels Were Originally Anonymous: Part 1 - The Doston Jones Blog"*
Google *"Gospels Not Written By Matthew, Mark, Luke or John - The Church Of Truth"*
troll
The declaration of righteousness is not alien but intrinsic. God's declaration is based on reality not a fiction. Catholicism is correct
cant belive you that in one sentence you proved him wrong! you must be from the catholic sect
Wayne you need to repent for signing that document with all those other Heretics. God bless you
What document did he sign?
Is it true that Rick Warren holds heretical views?
I've never read anything in Rick Warren's works that weren't solid .
@@brackinsteve thank you, I’m somewhat new to the reformed theology and just trying to get a gauge on things
@@justinhamblin4603 E.C.T I believe.
www.gty.org/library/Articles/A149/Evangelicals-and-Catholics-Together