@@jessebryant9233 By Bible based, do you mean the first 5 books, or the expanded 66 or maybe the 72 book collection? Should I include the 27 newer books termed the NT? Biblically I can't find a binding standard since there are about 70+ approximate collections and over 300 new books to choose from since the apostolic age, and although only a handful are commonly used, we can't seem to find a sound Biblical standard for which exact Bible to use. The Councils of Hippo, Carthage and Rome made official some 27 new testament writings known today, it wasn't a written rule; it has to be deduced by an organized instiitution with authority granted by God. Therefore, asking someone to prove that the Catholic Church is the True Church based on the Bible is like asking the same person to prove that the US government is the true government of America based on the US Constitution that ironically the US government itself signed. There is no credible standard involved and ends up in circular reasoning, so maybe the problem lies in the question itself and not the institution, nor the inerrant document involved. I'd rephrase the question: say, what would be 3 logical (or, if you'd prefer, Bible-based) reasons why you believe that the closed 27-book NT Bible we have right now is a credible collection (no more, no less) of Divinely-inspired documents apart from the credibility of its compilers?
@@chicken-911 all this legalism defs makes me want to convert to catholic faith... I thought the cross is what changes our hearts and minds.. granted, history legitimizes our faith as in we can depend on the fact jesus died and rose again... but we do not get hung up on “traditions of men” as per mark 7... be secure in Jesus final and finished atonement the law says DO this! The cross says “DONE” now believe and make disciples of all nations
@@willire8811 The point is that the only reason that Protestants believe the writings of the New Testament are the word of God is because they were compiled and codified by several councils of Catholic bishops who all believed in the "tradition of men". If these bishops were correctly guided by the Holy Spirit in choosing the proper canon of scripture, when did they lose their authority?
Before becoming Catholic, I was a Muslim who slowly, through much research and prayer, transitioned to Christianity. I began attending an Evangelical Church and I had purchased many of James White's books and watched many of his videos. Until one day I caught notice of his Cockiness because of his privileged acquired level of education. That behavior led me to a Journey that motivated me to deeply study the History of the Church. Today, I'm a Proud Catholic! Instead of James White inspiring my growth and discipleship, it almost encouraged me to return to Islam. Cockiness can be very hazardous to one's privileged virtue of Knowledge on Inspiring many. James need to bring it down a notch and get off his high powered arrogance.
Thanks Trent my son loves listening to you. He used to be a street thug and lived a life of drugs and alcohol and fighting but he’s had s major conversion and now is discerning the priesthood. Please pray for him. Thank you for defending our beautiful precious faith. 👍❤️☘️
Mr. White helped lead me to reject Protestantism in general and Reformed theology in particular. Thank you for all your hard work Trent! Your debate with Mr. White regarding Salvation was a turning point.
I remember the first time I heard him debate. He introduced himself as a 4th generation Calvinist preacher. I instantly knew that this guy has never had a critical thought in his life. He has dedicated his entire life to condescendingly defending the heresy that he grew up with. He could witness a Eucharistic miracle firsthand and he still wouldn't believe it. The Calvinist KoolAid tastes too good for him to leave it.
@@sdboyd Calvinists usually don't have anything to talk about beyond Calvinism, which leads one to question whether they worship Christ or John Calvin.
James White is like Pharaoh with a hardened heart. He’s obviously very intelligent and has a deeper understanding of Catholicism than most Protestant apologists. But in all the years I’ve listened to him, I’ve never seen any evidence of a humble heart. I pray for his conversion.
Sure, the catholic church has never been prideful. All leaders around the world dont kiss the Pope's hand. So humble a church that hides the scriptures from the elect.
Trent, I am a LCMS Lutheran who enjoys listening to Catholic Radio. I enjoy and always learn and am prodded to search the scriptures and think by your apologetic presentations. Thanks for these videos. God bless.
Thank you for this presentation and I just want to share with you a lovely Eucharistic experience I had some years ago. I was on a day of prayer here in Dublin Ireland where I live. During the afternoon the priest brought the Blessed Sacrament down among the people in the monstrance and he happened to stop at the edge of the pew where I was. As he raised the Sacred Host in blessing I became aware of a spiritual presence over me. I looked up at the Sacred Host and raised my hand out towards it. As I did this a spiritual fire flowed down and went through my chest into my heart. For the next few moments I found myself burning in a fire of Love and Life itself
If still some Protestant has not been convinced that James White only tries to twist the early christians doctrines, you have to ask yourself a single question: has James ever tried to vindincate any of the Fathers of the Catholic Church as the Fathers of his doctrine or does he simply pretend to make them ambiguous and generic? Nobody in his sane mind would argue on St. Justin taking him out of context of his description of the sacrificial mass like James White did with his half baked "where is the priest?" rethoric. One can argue to him with the following question: where is any of this that St. Justin extensively described in his calvinist/evangelical cult?
@Zachary Trent Yes, he slandered her. He also refused to support her when she revealed she had been abused by their father, and lied about having a PhD. He’s a real treat!
Thanks a ton Trent! There at the end where you let Dr. White explain that his own ideology is paraphrased by “no matter what the fathers say, I’m going to take my interpretation of scripture from bits of Luther and Calvin” is crucial for Christians to understand when listening to modern Protestants debate orthodox Christianity. They’re operating on a completely different hermeneutic than we are. I believe breaking that down is the key to convincing Protestants of the truth of the Church.
Spot man brother. I use the iceberg analogy: we argue with protestants about the top 10% we can see, when the actual disagreement is far more fundamental.
that’s a really good analogy. That’s why I think even the sola scriptura debate doesn’t dive deep enough into the root of the issue most of the time. You’ve got to get to them to realize that their epistemology probably isn’t consistent if they would take an author from 3550 as more authoritative about what it was like to live through Covid lockdowns, rather than a letter written by someone who will be born in the next ten years. Most Protestants don’t see it that way because they never connect how they interpret the Bible to a specific tradition. In their mind they read the Bible through no lens at all. Protestants think we’re the only ones who look through the lens of tradition. We do, and we recognize it. Most of them can’t recognize they’re doing the same thing but rather than looking at the Bible through the lens of the Church and it’s fathers, they’re looking at the Bible through the lens of the reformers.
True story. I have had many discussions with Pentecostals and have come to realise that they have no theological foundation to their theology but sola scriptura and raw emotion.
As an Orthodox catechumen (to be baptised this year!) I'll end up arguing with my family and I'll say "does it not trouble you that [doctrine like eternal security or baptism as just a symbol] was unknown for most of Christian history and is today only held by a small minority of denominations?" And they'll say "yes". I find the arrogance staggering.
Thing is that Protestants used to go for the Eucharist not so long ago and they used to have there own Rosary prayer which was mostly from the Lutheran church people
His criticisms of Catholicism is on the same level as the JWs criticisms of the Blessed Trinity. They’ll show something in the Apostolic Church Fathers or in Scripture and say, “Where is this talk of the Trinity? Where is the word Trinity? etc etc” Just as the JWs have this caricature of the Trinity so another JW(James White) has of the Mass.
He is speaking from a standpoint t of not knowing. With all the snarkiness and insufferable Protestant condescension we see from all his little minions of social media .
Any title that Starts with" James White doesn't like.... " I immediately click on it. Someone should write a book on the things James White disagree s with great beginner apologetics book.
Yes! Make it into a large Coffee table style book. The front cover will have an artsy close up picture of a bicycle seat with an MP3 player and bow tie on it.
Even during the Mass nowadays, we have a public confession of sins. We say “through our fault, through our fault...” And the priest on various occasions throughout the Mass says “forgive us our sins”
Oof, now THAT was devastating White: Trent says this, but if you actually look at the Church Fathers you’ll see that there’s no mention of any of this stuff. Trent: Really? how hard did you look?
White's method is basically reduced to this: present absence of evidence as if were a real rebuttal against any catholic doctrine. White will bring up any early christian writting and argue that every doctrine (purgatory, communion of saints, the papacy, the Eucharist) should be explicitly found in that document. Not to mention that he'd never apply this very same rule to himself because he knows very well most protestant doctrines can't be traced back further than XVI century
I used to be Reformed in my beliefs, as such, I recently seen a group of individuals agree that they did not believe as the earliest church fathers believed. I was surprised that they readily admitted this.
Since James White won't come on Reason and Theology, it would be great if White came on your show for a dialogue. You and Michael Lofton share a similar kind but intellectually rigorous demeanor.
I've been aware of White's work for many years now ever since I listened to a tape of his debate with Patrick Madrid on Sola Scripture. I've noticed that as time goes by, White's arguments get more and more desperate while his tone gets more and more dismissive. This is a recipe for either a very rude awakening - or a mental breakdown. Not sure which will come first.
We read in the Holy Bible that: "While they were eating, Jesus took bread, spoke a blessing and broke it, and gave it to the disciples, saying, “Take and eat; THIS IS MY BODY.” Then He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. THIS IS MY BLOOD of the COVENANT, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." [Matthew 26: 26-28][Mark 14: 22-25]; [Luke 22: 19-20]; [1 Cor 11: 17-34] and [John 6: 35-68] So, the Bible CLEARLY says that Jesus solemnly proclaimed "This IS my Body", and "This IS My Blood" in all texts referenced above. Knowing for sure what that these were the true words proclaimed by Jesus with regards to His Body and His Blood, how come that some of us Christians today deny this Biblical Truth and argue that they speak as if Jesus said: "This IS NOT My Body" or "This is a SYMBOL of My Body". Likewise, Jesus is also interpreted by non-believers as if He said: "This IS NOT My Blood" or "This is a SYMBOL of My Blood" and go against what the Bible states so clearly to make themselves believe that Jesus only spoke of a Symbol!? If we go to [John 6: 30-68] we can clearly see that the problem with His disciples IS NOT A PHYSICAL ONE i.e. "His True Flesh" and "His True Blood"; they knew perfectly well that Jesus was NOT speaking of a SYMBOL or USING A METAPHOR! They all agreed that Jesus was speaking literally about His true Body so much so that they complained saying: “How can this man GIVE US HIS FLESH to eat?” [John 6: 52] No hint of any Symbol or metaphor! So, in accordance with the Holy Bible, we can safely say that the problem of his disciples was a SPIRITUAL ONE; They simply DID NOT BELIEVE that Jesus could perform such a thing, [as non-Catholics still believe today: that Jesus can't do such a thing] it clearly is a matter of lack of FAITH in what Jesus had just proclaimed; they simply DID NOT BELIEVE, even though they had just witnessed the Miracle of the five loaves and two fishes, THEY STILL DID NOT BELIEVE THAT JESUS COULD DO SUCH A THING, and in the same manner, many, even today, even if perhaps well-intentioned, still accept this theory to deny the BIBLE TRUTH about the Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist as proclaimed by the Catholic Church, in agreement to the teaching of the Holy Bible itself but still agree with the disciples who during Jesus's lifetime complained: THIS IS A DIFFICULT TEACHING. WHO CAN ACCEPT IT?” Again we see a LACK OF FAITH IN JESUS without any hinting that Jesus might have been referring to a symbol in which case they would have had no problem believing in such a thing as a symbol. According to the Holy Bible, Jesus says clearly "This IS My Body" and "This IS My Blood." If Jesus said so who dares say otherwise? But when Jesus asked his twelve whether or not they too want to leave if they too believed in a symbol. ST. Peter on behalf of the other eleven, knowing that “All things are possible to him who believes!” [Mark 9: 23(b)] the Catholic Church agrees and confirms her belief as to the one St. Peter proclaimed, as an ACT OF FAITH even if difficult to explain how, we FAITHFULLY say: “Lord, to whom would we go? You have the words of eternal life. We BELIEVE and KNOW that YOU ARE THE HOLY ONE OF GOD" [John 6: 68-69] Contrary to what Jesus's disciples, during His lifetime LACKED TO BELIEVE, we proclaim an ACT OF FAITH in what Jesus promised us, and, Like Mary, believed: "that the Lord’s word to her will be fulfilled” [Luke 1:45] so do we believe that Our Lord's words to us are being fulfilled and will continue to be fulfilled up to the end of times. ...and by the way, the Bible declares the Holy Eucharist to be the "NEW COVENANT"
Except one thing: those in John 6 were thinking of the physical not on spiritual food that is Christ... Recall Christ to fed on food that the disciples did not know. As we read: master are you not hungry? And the Lord replies my food is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work. Our food is to feed off of Christ spiritually..Remember, God is Spirit and Truth therefore we feed and drink of the mana not as Moses did for they died but through Christ we eat and drink we will never die. For just as Christ who obeys the father remains in him so to us who obeys and feeds on Christ will remain in the father and the son! For it is the exact opposite the reason why those in John 6 went away because they were thinking only on the physical and not the spiritual. For those who live by the spirit will have life. But to those who live by the flesh will find death!
@@danielhaas9469 The problem with that interpretation is that Jesus never corrects the wrong notion by the people as they explicitly state it. Remember that in the same Gospel, in John 3, Nicodemus makes the same mistake by interpreting being born again as going back to the mother's womb (literal/physical). Jesus corrects this by saying that what he means is a spiritual rebirth through baptism (I'll later explain that even here there is a physical component involved). Elsewhere in the gospels, Jesus corrects his apostles for their wrong interpretation of them being the "salt of the world." Strangely, Jesus never tries to correct the misunderstanding here; what is present here is that Jesus asserts even further that it is his flesh that should be eaten (Note here that when Jesus earlier on when he talks about the Bread of Life says uses the Greek word esthio, which means "to eat," and soma, "body." But in v 54-56, the words used are more explicit, that Greek scholars would connote it to literal use rather than figurative. Instead of esthio, Jesus here uses sarx, which translates specifically "to gnaw or to munch." Soma is no longer used in his emphasis and instead he uses the word trojo, "flesh (used in greek denote an actual body part)," rather than soma. Greek speakers would rightfully interpret this literally in much less ambiguity than the english translations we use. Read in this way, we actually see why the so-called "misunderstanding between the physical and the spriritual" becomes prevalent. Instead of offering an explanation that he is simply talking about something spiritual and symbolic, Jesus uses more explicit language and confuses his disciples more. Using the language he used, one cannot blame why in the later verses of John 6 cannibalism would be first to enter their minds. And Jesus let them go in their confusion. And it makes sense. Just as we as God's image and likeness are both body and spirit, Christ offers us his Flesh and Blood in a manner perceptible by our physical bodies while also being Spiritual. Yes it is spiritual, but in no way here is it said by Jesus to be symbolic. I don't see why there is a necessity to separate the Spiritual from the Physical; as both truths are not necessarily apart from each other. I recognize that Jesus also explains the spirituality of the Bread of Life, but it does not disprove that he also talks here of a physical consumption of this Spiritual food. And also to add, the way Jesus corrects Nicodemus in John 3, he explains that being born again is of water and Spirit, which both contains spiritual and physical dimensions (I'd say, a Sacrament). How much more explicit does Jesus arrive to in this discourse, as he makes a deeper emphasis of the physical despite the spiritual element present, to the point of losing disciples in their morbid misunderstanding? It's not always an "either/or" situation in the Bible. In verses such as this, one has to discern that it might be an "and" statement.
I used to feel frustrated listening to him, but after seeing How to be Christian's videos I just find there to be something inherently funny about White
Mr. Horn, as a Protestant, I had watched a 3 hour debate with you and Mr. White about a year ago on whether or not you can lose your salvation. I must confess that I am slow in coming to conclusions about that one, but I found your perspective very eye opening, biblical and worthy of my time.
Be careful with what you do with that information because there are an abundance of Protestants who agree that you can lose your salvation … that doesn’t mean the Catholic Church is the right church… don’t be misled by false direction
@@faditawil1027 Jesus started Catholic church. He offers salvation only through his Catholic church. There is no salvation outside the Catholic church(with exception of invincibke ignorance). The soul you save could be your own.
Jesus did NOT offer salvation through Protestant church. Get you questions answered about Catholic faith. Call Catholic Answers 619-873-3480….become Catholic.
@@johnyang1420 thank you for leading me to a church that produced dogmas and doctrines that are found no where in the Bible and go directly in the way of the gospel and thank you for leading me to a biased program meant to encourage the catholic faith. I would rather stick with the gospel handed down by Jesus (Galatians 1:6-8). In all of what you said, you did not even mention the Bible. You Catholics believe the Bible is infallible anyway so why not encourage me to read the Bible instead of going to these man made sources.
I am not a Catholic although my wife was. I imagine that you enjoy how easy it is to rebut White almost as much as Dr Ken Wilson and Dr Leighton Flowers. I am convinced that although White doesn’t know what he thinks he does, he is infinitely confident of everything he doesn’t know. I hope that I have seemed respectful of you here even though I am a Christian and Protestant. I will be praying for all of you and I hope you will pray for me. 🙏🏻♾
@@Emper0rH0rde exactly. He needs to repent and stop doing apologetics. He treats non Calvinistic Protestants and specifically Catholics with utter condescension
JW is "confident in what he does not know" that is definitely not evident. Yes we pray for all people regardless of colour or creed. That's the Catholic faith.
@@patriciajohnson1894 I would say that it is more than evident that he is confident in what he doesn’t know. He is near constantly setting up straw man arguments for those who disagree with him. I was sarcastically criticizing the man, not complimenting him
@@jesuschristsaves9067 False Teachings of Roman Catholic Church. ua-cam.com/video/d1xZTPY98Oc/v-deo.html I've been a Roman Catholic for so many years. I've been into Roman Catholic School. I served in a Parish here in my country. I almost got into Roman Catholic Seminary. I saw every errors of Roman Catholicism! I am glad that I left Roman Catholicism for good! If you are truly wise. It is not good for you to stay in a Roman Catholic Church!
J.N.D. Kelly, a Protestant (Baptist) and the great patristic scholar had the intellectual honesty to show that the belief in the real presence in the Eucharist is very ancient and did not gradually develop over several centuries.
Based in the work of your "nemesis", How To Be Christian, I have a deep understanding of how unfortunately shallow James White's thinking process is. I hope everyone is praying for him.
I would also recommend Fr Benedict Groeschel debate on the Eucharist. Based on the tradition of the Church he did a marvelous job at presenting the arguments, his enciclopedic knowledge of all things religion helped a lot.
we should pray for james and others with large platforms that their hearts would softened toward the church and that they would know all of the virtues and fruits of the spirits.
I'm a Baptist myself, non reformed, but James White has the kind of personality that would turn me off from whatever he's presenting. His refutation of your talks are likely to push me to your position, he's just that grating.
According to more than one mental health expert, I lost my mind and reason listening to Protestants in my late teens around 1970. Thankfully, I was saved from mental illness when I became Catholic in 1986. My psychiatrists have insisted I remain Catholic. They always agreed with my statement, "Being Catholic might make you neurotic, but being Protestant will make you psychotic!" We have seen this psychosis recently on a grand scale in the pathological idiocy of so many Protestants standing behind the most corrupt liar in human history. I'll never forget the sight of totally wack-a-doodle Protestants in animal skins giving thanks for their 'victory' after they invaded the legislative chambers of the capitol on January 6, 2021. I'll never forget the animalistic hooting of their 'shaman.' These sons of Korah (Numbers 16 & Jude 11) want to lead us? May the earth open up and swallow them once more! It amazes me how Protestants can say that this inanimate object can rule over all Christians. By itself, that's bad enough. Yet they not only chop it up to suit themselves but ignore so much that is in there, stuff that aligns perfectly with common sense. I speak of the same common sense that says inanimate objects are incapable of solving disputes. Everyone with a brain bigger than a peanut knows any written document requires human experts to interpret it. Think of sports rules with umpires and referees or the Supreme Court with the Constitution. Let me expound further on this example of Protestant lunacy. The Jews, too, had dead, inanimate scripture. But nonetheless, Jesus said in Matthew 23:1-3 that the Jewish human leadership carried the same authority as Moses himself. He said to the Samaritan woman at the well that 'salvation is of the Jews.' He also acknowledged their authority when he told those he healed to show themselves to the priest. John 11:49-51 tells us of the prophetic gifts that God gave even the most corrupt high priest. Protestants throw these scriptures and many others in the garbage along with the good sense God gave them. Protestants would have us believe that under the dispensation of Grace and Truth, God lost the good organizing skills he showed in the last dispensation of Mosaic Law. They think they are insulting man's sin, but they are really insulting God. While they say that God will never leave them because of their sin, they insist that God left the very organization that gave us the Bible because of its sins. I pray every day for their salvation as I fear the hottest spots in hell are reserved for them. They are the worst kind of troublemakers.
Really appreciate your work and effort on this! Dr White helped me when I was at a fundamental Baptist church where the pastor is a King James Onlyist. King James Onlyists hold an extreme position that the KJV of the Bible is the only true Word of God for English speaking people. James White's debate easily proved that wrong. However, in his "rebuke" of Trent, he really seemed to be relying heavily on cheap shots such as arguing from silence, which is kind of lazy..... or, maybe he just didn't have much solid ground to stand on? 🤔
I can echo some of the comments below. Protestant apologists like White always occurred to me as coming off smug, even prideful. And as a Protestant at the time I didn't notice this until I saw them debate Catholic apologists like Trent, who remained so even keeled and calm. It was as if they had something else seeming to shore them up. It wasn't until I converted to Catholicism did I realize that it was their place in Holy Mother Church and the gravity her majesty provides to the believer that grounded them in peace. I speak of my own experience here only, but I would assume others feel similarly. There is something about the Catholic Church that anchors the believer, something I was unable to find in the protestant faith, regardless of how many churches I entered in search of it. Thank you for what you do Trent. You are a blessing to your Catholic brothers and sisters. May God continue to bless your efforts.
I was loyal to Dr. White too i listened to the dividing line for years but he’s become so negative and arrogant. I still dont know the difference between calvinism and reformed baptist…. Listened to trent and the other apologists on catholic answers for two months and i feel like i understand so much more.
For 10 years I was under the horrible Calvinist doctrines. Early last year I began understanding Scripture as it really is and started my journey out. Went to Provisionism (leighton flowers) then decided to not adhere to any strict denominational doctrine. I now stand more closely with Catholicism than I ever thought I would, but also found that same ground closely resembles Messianic Judaism. Part of the factors leading to this? Listening to these types of programs. Hearing the snarkiness alongside the false dichotomies and straw men, avoidance, etc of James White. Which led me to other viewpoints to try and test against Scripture. Again, which led to Leighton and The Counsel of Trent channel. Although I disagree with holding tradition as mostly equal to Scripture to form my faith, I do see the benefits and pitfalls of it. All that being said, I just have to say, thank you for being a channel that openly talks apologetics and helping in part, for my release from Calvinist doctrines. I am Sola Scriptura in dogma, tradition in understanding, and grace in faith. I now no longer have any qualms with fellowshipping with anyone who proclaims Jesus as the only way, by His grace, through faith in Him alone, as the only means of salvation.
Jeff Durbin and James White don't always seem sincere to me. Almost all of their arguments against Catholicism relies on begging the question if not circular logic in general and they have a terrible attitude towards not just people who disagree with them but they seem very harsh with people within their own communities. I've never been impressed by them.
@Zachary Trent, Dr White's arguments suffer from his disinterest in philosophy. You can have debates on epistemology without knowing philosophy, just not good ones.
James white will never be satisfied unless every current aspect of Catholic belief is clearly stated in every paragraph of every church father writing all the way back to the apostles.. while almost NONE of his core beliefs were held by ANYONE up until the time of Calvin.
What? Predeterminism, probably the cornerstone doctrine of Calvinism, was often discussed in the early church. I don't believe in it, but I'm not going to deny it goes way back. See Origen attack that belief in De Principiis, Book 3, Chapter 1, point 8: > Let us begin, then, with those words which were spoken to Pharaoh, who is said to have been hardened by God, in order that he might not let the people go; and, along with his case, the language of the apostle also will be considered, where he says, Therefore He has mercy on whom He will, and whom He will He hardens. For it is on these passages chiefly that the heretics rely, asserting that salvation is not in our own power, but that souls are of such a nature as must by all means be either lost or saved; and that in no way can a soul which is of an evil nature become good, or one which is of a virtuous nature be made bad. And hence they maintain that Pharaoh, too, being of a ruined nature, was on that account hardened by God, who hardens those that are of an earthly nature, but has compassion on those who are of a spiritual nature.
@@fireandworms My point was James white doesn’t have the same standard for his own beliefs as he does for Catholic beliefs. It may have been discussed, but wasn’t held by the church, from the paragraph you sent it looks like it was shot down as heresy.
@@brianwahle40 Everything that Origen taught was anathematized by other Catholics, so no lol, it was not "shot down as heresy." Rather that's what happened to Origen's teachings generally speaking, though the Church today still believes some of his teachings without attributing him, such as the ransom theory of atonement. Augustine in contrast to Origen taught predeterminism, he is used often by Calvinists as evidence for the correctness of their views. I'm not a Calvinist by the way, I disagree with their views, but it's important to understand that like most major Protestant views they come from the early church.
@@PedroAntonioLea-PlazaPuig I thought so, not surprised. I live in France, I'm Irish. We were in Colombia in 2016 to visit my daughter , FANTASTIC, Bogota and Cartagena. Take care of yourself.
@@glennargento4849 I think that’s the one. I think he is not Catholic, but he attends mass. Maybe he is but i really don’t know. From what I can tell, Sam is probably trying to choose a church with an apostolic tradition, but he is almost always talking about Catholicism.
Let James White alone. He converts more people into Catholicism than my effort in the last 10 years. I saw in one post that he and Trent are tied. Let's keep it that way.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 📜 James White criticizes Trent Horn's talk at a Catholic Answers conference from a few years ago. 00:14 🗣️ Trent Horn plans to address criticisms of his talk by James White in this episode. 01:38 🕊️ James White is a Reformed Baptist apologist, defending Calvinist doctrines. 02:07 📚 Trent Horn's past engagement with James White at a conference on Calvinism and losing salvation. 02:48 🎙️ Trent Horn focuses on substantive elements of White's criticisms on the Dividing Line podcast. 03:46 🍞⛪️ White questions the concept of the Eucharist as sacrifice, pointing to Gregory the Great's time, countered by historical sources. 05:12 📜 Early sources like Saint Cyprian and scholars like William Webster attest to the concept of Eucharistic sacrifice predating Gregory the Great. 07:23 🕊️ White argues silence in early texts about specific practices, like eucharistic adoration, doesn't negate their development. 10:12 🛐 Trent Horn compares descriptions of the Eucharist by Justin Martyr to the modern Mass, noting similarities. 11:23 🙏 White's argument from silence on practices and doctrines lacks consistency as similar arguments could be made against his own views. 12:36 📖 Trent Horn examines Pope Galasias' use of terms like "nature" and "substance" in relation to the Eucharist. 14:09 🎚️ White's observations about early Christian practices and beliefs require contextual understanding and don't negate development. 15:29 🌄 White's argument about the absence of certain practices ignores the gradual evolution of Christian traditions. 16:56 🤝 Trent Horn points out parallels between the development of early Christian beliefs and the evolution of Protestant doctrines. 18:09 🕊️ Trent Horn discusses the development of concepts like the indelible mark, drawing parallels to the development of terms like "Trinity" and "Original Sin." 19:44 🎙️ Trent Horn addresses White's argument that early Christian practices didn't include confession before receiving the Eucharist. 20:49 🕊️ Trent Horn points out the gradual development of practices like confession and highlights the importance of historical context. 21:22 🍞🍷 The Didache discusses the worship of the gathered body, including the Eucharistic sacrifice, baptisms, preaching, prayers, singing, and confession. 22:04 🙏 James White argues against the existence of priests in the Didache, but scholars point out public confession of sins, implying a form of priesthood. 22:32 🛑 White's criticism of the Didache's lack of explicit priestly mention is an argument from silence, which doesn't negate the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist. 23:01 🎶 While White sees the entire worship service as a sacrifice of praise, Trent Horn suggests the Eucharist is the focal point and the breaking of bread as a form of sacrifice. 23:16 🙌 Ignatius of Antioch's "one eucharist, one altar" idea indirectly supports the concept of a ministerial priesthood, along with references in Corinthians and Malachi. 24:27 🧑🎓 Scholarly contributions recognize the Didache's implicit treatment of Eucharist as sacrifice, with the need for a pure conscience, implying confession. 25:39 📜 Confession of sins was generally public in early Christianity, indicating the involvement of elders or priests as mediators. 27:45 🛕 Paul's mention of tables in Corinthians points to sacrificial altars, suggesting a connection between the Eucharist and sacrifice. 29:42 🍞🍷 Trent Horn argues that early Church Fathers connected the Mass to the prophecy in Malachi 1, while James White questions the interpretation. 32:03 📚 Protestant scholars like Everett Ferguson and Harry Lowen acknowledge early belief in the real presence and the sacrificial nature of the Mass. 34:08 💬 James White implies that while Church Fathers believed in apostolic succession, he can accept their view without necessarily adopting it. 38:03 💬 Trent Horn proposes a debate on central authority-sola scriptura vs. apostolic succession-with James White or Jimmy Akin, addressing the foundation of beliefs.
Great video. In min 27:12 I like also to show the following verse that shows that table and altar are related in the vision of Ezekiel's new temple. Ezekiel 41:22 The altar was of wood, three cubits high, and its length two cubits; its corners, its base, and its sides were of wood. And he said to me, “This is the table that is before the LORD.”
Trent, you and Jimmy are my two top apologists right now. I'd love to see you two in a tag-team debate match vs two Protestants or two atheists. Pax ✌️
White argues against the Papacy, his understanding of the Bible, Church fathers, and tradition is the authoritative one. In other words, James White is the Pope.
James White is honest about only one thing. That he has created his own religion and does not care what the early Christians did. There are only two questions he needs to be asked. Since he has ejected what the early Christians believed, can he agree that he has created his own religion? Then ask him where he gets the authority to do so in the Bible. Beyond that, it is a waste of time to debate someone that has obviously created his own cult.
I gotta say Trent is knocking it outta the park. We should always assume the best of intentions from our intellectual opponents, but James White is either deliberately obfuscating the points Mr. Horn is making or Mr. White is oblivious to his own inconsistent standards for what qualifies as evidence. White reminds me of a guy I used to know who possessed a vast amount of knowledge but lacked the ability to reason through it.
Please forgive me I want to be charitable here. But years ago whenever I would listen to James White I would dismiss him as just another anti Catholic. But now it has become evident to me that it’s more than that. I think James suffers from some sort of psychological issue that manifests itself with the need to be right. I kind of feel bad for him. With the advent of the modern Catholic apologetical movement back in the mid to late 1980’s the Catholic Church has been proven to have the fullness of the faith. That doesn’t mean it’s perfect from a human standpoint, Heaven knows the Church has a lot of issues at the moment from the top down. But it always has,and yet, she still stands! I don’t like what goes on much of the time in the Church but I stay. You don’t abandon Jesus because of Judas or multiple Judas’s. I am praying for Mr. White.
Just a note: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is advertising on this video. Poor taste in my opinion. To your point: I have never heard Dr. White accept a logical, biblical argument supporting the Catholic church.
The catholic church is not the only church that believes in Jesus. It might be the most corrupted church based on their history, but dont gloat about clinging to a corrupted church.
I agree with your statements about White to some degree. But I would reexamine what you said about Catholic apologetics. Trent here has done a good job refuting the anti-Scriptural statements of Friar Casey, who is one of the most popular Catholic UA-camrs! That would indicate that Catholics are still stuck in the same old rut.
It takes a great deal of perseverance and the other gifts of the Spirit to correct the Protestant accusations by hardcore anti-Catholic such as White, even the softer tone ones like Ortlund, is that they are not really interested in being open to what is offered to them. The likes of White and his school of fellow Protestant apologists is that they are very insistent in only their own reading. For that reason I can only offer one thing to Catholic apologists, and that is my simple prayer, always. God does the rest in them. So I hope there will always be a silent army of prayers of the faithful to God for this particular ministry, in English and all other languages.
We know that the fathers never viewed the Eucharist as only spiritual or an ordinance but when you’re an ahistorical Calvinist baptist you have to skew your view of the fathers or dismiss them. Once again I find myself agreeing with Trent more than most Protestants. From your friendly neighborhood Lutheran.
@@lukehayner3202 I appreciate that brother, I love my Catholic brothers and sisters. I even went to a Dominican college and really enjoyed my time there but the confessional Lutheran church is home for me.
@@johnharkness6304 lol, I hear ya brother. Who knows where God may put us. If anything I hope the Catholic Lutheran dialogue will continue as we tend to have more in common than not.
First of all clever name for the channel props! On sola scriptura 27:07 - 27:42 it is tough to try and nail Protestants on not being able to get the sophisticated argument for the canon and sola scriptura from the early church fathers. The reason for this is because sola scriptura is really only meaningful if it holds even if people who call themselves Christians turn against it or do not affirm it. So in that sense the Protestant position isn't as crucially tied to tradition as the Catholic position. Now one could certainly argue that one still might expect to see the consistent denial of positions other than sola scriptura rather than their affirmation in the early church, but it doesn't have the same effect if say the opposite were true if say we would expect to see the consistent denial of sola scriptura rather than its affirmation. So in that sense there is an asymmetry here where tradition not supporting Catholicism is more important than it not supporting Protestantism. Also I think arguments from silence should be viewed a bit more consistently all around. So often whether or not an explicit doctrine represents the historical views of the church about that subject is the very thing being disputed by people from different traditions. So Protestant's do in fact argue that certain Protestant doctrines are present in parts of the early church even though specific explicit Protestant terms were not used at that time. So it seems that this tu quoque approach to arguments from silence, to me at least, seems to indicate a need to be more consistent about such arguments rather than arguing that if one's own position isn't explicit that yours is even less explicit. I am not even sure if such a point makes sense. I think attacking the basis for believing sola scriptura and highlighting the reasons why Tradition makes more sense as an authority is more promising personally.
Did you see his recent video on the perpetual virginity of Mary? It convinced me to stop listening to him. Half was basically an argument from silence, the other half just complaining about not being on the bible answer man anymore. For a guy who loves to dive in very specific greek terms, he didn't seem to want to on adelphoi. Clearly, his response was singularly informed by his own theological desires.
His talk on marys pv was very good. Hank, now Orthodox has to recant virtually everything he argued for in the past. Now hes reduced to the same ole rc talking points on Mary. Hanks arguments are as weak as any internet lay catholics. I hear the same arguments everyday. Hank brought nothing new to the arena.
@@ContendingEarnestly An argument from silence is when you try to prove your point via the absence of statements in historical documents. For example when he points out that Clement didn't write about he pv of Mary. Watch his video with that in mind and you'll see.
@@roymartin1385 *For example when he points out that Clement didn't write about he pv of Mary. Watch his video with that in mind and you'll see.* But thats not what he was even talking about. About the 26 minute mark, a little earlier for the context he is speaking of the gospels and other writings (including Clement) where you would never find them believing Mary running around Galilee with a number of men not related to her. Using the common arguments of rome where Jesus' brothers and sisters are really cousins or offspring of Joseph from another marriage, we're supposed to believe mary just ran around the country side with a bunch of older people not related to her? Thats the context, not the pv specifically. Its about the plain use of language and not having to do linguistic gymnastics to arrive at cousins or children from a previous marriage of Joseph. Unless you can provide another portion of the video?
If I remember correctly, I listen to a debate on UA-cam between mr. White and Patrick Madrid from decades ago. Our Catholic brother in Christ Mr. Madrid defeated him once already. Patrick and Trent should get together and seriously talk.
9:40 a Romanist would say: we do not receive (common) bread and (common) drink, but Jezus Christ our savior. Justin says: “For not AS common bread and common drink we receive these; but IN LIKE MANNER AS Jezus Christ our Saviour,” and that clearly implies that the bread indeed stays bread, but is consumed as if it is the body of Christ.
James White is a walking, talking fallacy machine, with a ton of arrogance. Dr. Flowers and friends, regularly hand him his head on a platter. But he just keeps going, and going. Makes me wonder if his show garners him substantial financial support.
What's the catholic view of the 3 Cappadocian fathers? Because in the orthodox church their theology is seemingly much more influential than in Catholicism
So some guy blocks me so I can't answer him. I guess that's one way to win the argument. Early bishops claimed primacy over their own cities until force began to be used.
Can you please provide a link, I cant find this anywhere? What section? St. Cyprian Letter 62 "they who are baptized in the Church are presented to the Bishops of the Church, and by our prayer and imposition of hands, they receive with the Holy Spirit and are perfected with the seal of the Lord."
James White would tell Jesus Christ Himself that He was wrong, if In a debate together! "Jesus, sadly you don't understand the proper Greek, and sadly you have fallen for the Trap of Rome!".
@@Wgaither1 I know James White would win in a debate against Jesus Himself, as James White knows more than Jesus! 😁 In James White's mind anyway! I have read several of the encyclicals of Pope Francis, and each page has dozens of Holy Scripture passages, a brilliant theologian!
@@Wgaither1 Yes,, Pope Francis is a brilliant Theologian! You are in my prayers as you journey toward Truth!, Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink
@@matthewbroderick8756 Pope Francis is many things but brilliant is not one of them. Nor is he holy. He will never be declared a saint. If you want to see brilliance read JPII. It's like comparing a midget to a professional athlete.
I hear James White and Trent Horn are currently tied for "Who can make more people Catholic".
Why do you believe people should be Catholic? What would be 3 good, Bible based reasons?
@@jessebryant9233
There are a thousand reasons that all amount to one reason:
Because its true. (and verifiably so)
@@jessebryant9233 By Bible based, do you mean the first 5 books, or the expanded 66 or maybe the 72 book collection? Should I include the 27 newer books termed the NT? Biblically I can't find a binding standard since there are about 70+ approximate collections and over 300 new books to choose from since the apostolic age, and although only a handful are commonly used, we can't seem to find a sound Biblical standard for which exact Bible to use.
The Councils of Hippo, Carthage and Rome made official some 27 new testament writings known today, it wasn't a written rule; it has to be deduced by an organized instiitution with authority granted by God. Therefore, asking someone to prove that the Catholic Church is the True Church based on the Bible is like asking the same person to prove that the US government is the true government of America based on the US Constitution that ironically the US government itself signed. There is no credible standard involved and ends up in circular reasoning, so maybe the problem lies in the question itself and not the institution, nor the inerrant document involved.
I'd rephrase the question: say, what would be 3 logical (or, if you'd prefer, Bible-based) reasons why you believe that the closed 27-book NT Bible we have right now is a credible collection (no more, no less) of Divinely-inspired documents apart from the credibility of its compilers?
@@chicken-911 all this legalism defs makes me want to convert to catholic faith...
I thought the cross is what changes our hearts and minds.. granted, history legitimizes our faith as in we can depend on the fact jesus died and rose again... but we do not get hung up on “traditions of men” as per mark 7... be secure in Jesus final and finished atonement the law says DO this! The cross says “DONE” now believe and make disciples of all nations
@@willire8811 The point is that the only reason that Protestants believe the writings of the New Testament are the word of God is because they were compiled and codified by several councils of Catholic bishops who all believed in the "tradition of men". If these bishops were correctly guided by the Holy Spirit in choosing the proper canon of scripture, when did they lose their authority?
Before becoming Catholic, I was a Muslim who slowly, through much research and prayer, transitioned to Christianity. I began attending an Evangelical Church and I had purchased many of James White's books and watched many of his videos. Until one day I caught notice of his Cockiness because of his privileged acquired level of education. That behavior led me to a Journey that motivated me to deeply study the History of the Church. Today, I'm a Proud Catholic! Instead of James White inspiring my growth and discipleship, it almost encouraged me to return to Islam. Cockiness can be very hazardous to one's privileged virtue of Knowledge on Inspiring many. James need to bring it down a notch and get off his high powered arrogance.
Praise be Jesus
Welcome home Lou! 🙏🏽😇
Welcome home! Does it feel good?
It's rare to see Muslim->Catholic testimonies. Was your family supportive of your decision? Did you get any pushback? Sorry if I seem intrusive.
Well said.
Thanks Trent my son loves listening to you. He used to be a street thug and lived a life of drugs and alcohol and fighting but he’s had s major conversion and now is discerning the priesthood. Please pray for him. Thank you for defending our beautiful precious faith. 👍❤️☘️
Has your son heard Fr Don Calloway story? Very inspiring!
@@j2muw667 yeah he loves Fr. Don as well he thinks he's very funny. Please pray for him Jenifer. Thank you and thanks for your concern. God bless.
Woow.. blessings and prayers for your son..
Wow . Praise God and His blessed mother!
@@R6FTW59
What a miracle!
It is no surprise to God, He knew him before he was born.
God bless.
Mr. White helped lead me to reject Protestantism in general and Reformed theology in particular. Thank you for all your hard work Trent! Your debate with Mr. White regarding Salvation was a turning point.
Same. Once you see through James’s fallacies it’s evident when he’s got nothing of value to say.
We need to pray for James!
I remember the first time I heard him debate. He introduced himself as a 4th generation Calvinist preacher. I instantly knew that this guy has never had a critical thought in his life. He has dedicated his entire life to condescendingly defending the heresy that he grew up with. He could witness a Eucharistic miracle firsthand and he still wouldn't believe it. The Calvinist KoolAid tastes too good for him to leave it.
@@sdboyd Calvinists usually don't have anything to talk about beyond Calvinism, which leads one to question whether they worship Christ or John Calvin.
4th Generation Calvinist Preacher.... *ruuuunnnns* 🏃♀️🏃♀️🏃♀️🏃♀️
James White is like Pharaoh with a hardened heart. He’s obviously very intelligent and has a deeper understanding of Catholicism than most Protestant apologists. But in all the years I’ve listened to him, I’ve never seen any evidence of a humble heart. I pray for his conversion.
Calvinists are not known for being humble Lol
@@T_frog1 true statement
@@T_frog1 Same as Orthodox. They suffer from the same root sin of Pride.
@@T_frog1 true indeed!
Sure, the catholic church has never been prideful. All leaders around the world dont kiss the Pope's hand. So humble a church that hides the scriptures from the elect.
Listening to James white makes me love my Catholic faith even more. I hope that one day he may come home to the Catholic Church.
only if he is true to the truth
His sister did. She became Roman Catholic
Don’t count on James White or any true Christians to come over to the Catholic Church🤔
Amen to that
Can't happen. He's too self assured & confident in his belief system
Thank you James White for continuing to reinforce my belief in the truth, beauty, and goodness of the Catholic Faith.
He strayed me away from Catholicism. Almost became a Catholic till James encouraged me to do more research.
Even other Protestants think white’s theology is nuts. Double predestination is from Satan but calvinists like white accept it
Ex-Catholic Exposes the TWISTED Teachings of the Catholic Church | Mike Gendron
ua-cam.com/video/jdlczbO5Csc/v-deo.html
@@timetravlin4450hopefully, Trent Horn has helped you understand the real teachings of the Catholic Church.
Trent, I am a LCMS Lutheran who enjoys listening to Catholic Radio. I enjoy and always learn and am prodded to search the scriptures and think by your apologetic presentations. Thanks for these videos. God bless.
Thank you for this presentation and I just want to share with you a lovely Eucharistic experience I had some years ago. I was on a day of prayer here in Dublin Ireland where I live. During the afternoon the priest brought the Blessed Sacrament down among the people in the monstrance and he happened to stop at the edge of the pew where I was. As he raised the Sacred Host in blessing I became aware of a spiritual presence over me. I looked up at the Sacred Host and raised my hand out towards it. As I did this a spiritual fire flowed down and went through my chest into my heart. For the next few moments I found myself burning in a fire of Love and Life itself
Wow! Amazing, it's Jesus🙏💕
Trent's whole demeanor in the opening 30 seconds just scream "Welllllll, here we go again with James White." 🤣
If still some Protestant has not been convinced that James White only tries to twist the early christians doctrines, you have to ask yourself a single question: has James ever tried to vindincate any of the Fathers of the Catholic Church as the Fathers of his doctrine or does he simply pretend to make them ambiguous and generic?
Nobody in his sane mind would argue on St. Justin taking him out of context of his description of the sacrificial mass like James White did with his half baked "where is the priest?" rethoric. One can argue to him with the following question: where is any of this that St. Justin extensively described in his calvinist/evangelical cult?
Ex-Catholic Exposes the TWISTED Teachings of the Catholic Church | Mike Gendron
ua-cam.com/video/jdlczbO5Csc/v-deo.html
James might be a fantastic Catholic apologist some day, we'd love to have him. Stranger things have happened.
@Zachary Trent Yes, he slandered her. He also refused to support her when she revealed she had been abused by their father, and lied about having a PhD. He’s a real treat!
Catholics whisper about abuse please.
@@marksandsmith6778 No one whispering here…
@@TheBadTrad no because youre proud of the abuse
?
@@marksandsmith6778 What an idiotic thing to say. Shows exactly the kind of person you are.
Thanks a ton Trent! There at the end where you let Dr. White explain that his own ideology is paraphrased by “no matter what the fathers say, I’m going to take my interpretation of scripture from bits of Luther and Calvin” is crucial for Christians to understand when listening to modern Protestants debate orthodox Christianity. They’re operating on a completely different hermeneutic than we are. I believe breaking that down is the key to convincing Protestants of the truth of the Church.
Spot man brother. I use the iceberg analogy: we argue with protestants about the top 10% we can see, when the actual disagreement is far more fundamental.
that’s a really good analogy. That’s why I think even the sola scriptura debate doesn’t dive deep enough into the root of the issue most of the time. You’ve got to get to them to realize that their epistemology probably isn’t consistent if they would take an author from 3550 as more authoritative about what it was like to live through Covid lockdowns, rather than a letter written by someone who will be born in the next ten years.
Most Protestants don’t see it that way because they never connect how they interpret the Bible to a specific tradition. In their mind they read the Bible through no lens at all. Protestants think we’re the only ones who look through the lens of tradition. We do, and we recognize it. Most of them can’t recognize they’re doing the same thing but rather than looking at the Bible through the lens of the Church and it’s fathers, they’re looking at the Bible through the lens of the reformers.
True story. I have had many discussions with Pentecostals and have come to realise that they have no theological foundation to their theology but sola scriptura and raw emotion.
Ex-Catholic Exposes the TWISTED Teachings of the Catholic Church | Mike Gendron
ua-cam.com/video/jdlczbO5Csc/v-deo.html
As an Orthodox catechumen (to be baptised this year!) I'll end up arguing with my family and I'll say "does it not trouble you that [doctrine like eternal security or baptism as just a symbol] was unknown for most of Christian history and is today only held by a small minority of denominations?"
And they'll say "yes". I find the arrogance staggering.
Challenging Trent to a debate...Dr. James White I do believe you are shakin’ hands with danger (guitar rift).
Now that's funny 😅
Brownnoser
*Riff
You should look at James White's debate with other notable ROMAN Catholics
In their past debates Trent imo destroyed White lolol
When the Protestants denied the Eucharist, it was game over...
Thing is that Protestants used to go for the Eucharist not so long ago and they used to have there own Rosary prayer which was mostly from the Lutheran church people
His criticisms of Catholicism is on the same level as the JWs criticisms of the Blessed Trinity.
They’ll show something in the Apostolic Church Fathers or in Scripture and say, “Where is this talk of the Trinity? Where is the word Trinity? etc etc”
Just as the JWs have this caricature of the Trinity so another JW(James White) has of the Mass.
When James White is attacking you, you know you're on the right path
Ex-Catholic Exposes the TWISTED Teachings of the Catholic Church | Mike Gendron
ua-cam.com/video/jdlczbO5Csc/v-deo.html
He is speaking from a standpoint t of not knowing. With all the snarkiness and insufferable Protestant condescension we see from all his little minions of social media .
God bless all the catholic apologists, may God reward them in heaven.
Any title that Starts with" James White doesn't like.... " I immediately click on it. Someone should write a book on the things James White disagree s with great beginner apologetics book.
I'm like you!
I would buy that book😄
Yes! Make it into a large Coffee table style book. The front cover will have an artsy close up picture of a bicycle seat with an MP3 player and bow tie on it.
Ha! Completely agree. It's click bait for me. I will watch just about anything vs. James White.
i dont think theres enough paper for such a book xD
Even during the Mass nowadays, we have a public confession of sins. We say “through our fault, through our fault...” And the priest on various occasions throughout the Mass says “forgive us our sins”
Oof, now THAT was devastating
White: Trent says this, but if you actually look at the Church Fathers you’ll see that there’s no mention of any of this stuff.
Trent: Really? how hard did you look?
White's method is basically reduced to this: present absence of evidence as if were a real rebuttal against any catholic doctrine.
White will bring up any early christian writting and argue that every doctrine (purgatory, communion of saints, the papacy, the Eucharist) should be explicitly found in that document.
Not to mention that he'd never apply this very same rule to himself because he knows very well most protestant doctrines can't be traced back further than XVI century
I used to be Reformed in my beliefs, as such, I recently seen a group of individuals agree that they did not believe as the earliest church fathers believed. I was surprised that they readily admitted this.
Ex-Catholic Exposes the TWISTED Teachings of the Catholic Church | Mike Gendron
ua-cam.com/video/jdlczbO5Csc/v-deo.html
Since James White won't come on Reason and Theology, it would be great if White came on your show for a dialogue. You and Michael Lofton share a similar kind but intellectually rigorous demeanor.
Two of the best around right now
Yo man, I really like your username🙏🏼😁
Most of James White’s videos have comments turned off, because he doesn’t like people poking holes in his incorrect theology.
He's living in an echo chamber. The like dislike feature is also turned off
there is no need to poke holes. because it is empty.
He's a coward
Roman Catholicism has a lot of errors hahaha. I am glad i left RC .
samuel aguilar mind telling me some?
I've been aware of White's work for many years now ever since I listened to a tape of his debate with Patrick Madrid on Sola Scripture. I've noticed that as time goes by, White's arguments get more and more desperate while his tone gets more and more dismissive. This is a recipe for either a very rude awakening - or a mental breakdown. Not sure which will come first.
We read in the Holy Bible that: "While they were eating, Jesus took bread, spoke a blessing and broke it, and gave it to the disciples, saying, “Take and eat; THIS IS MY BODY.” Then He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. THIS IS MY BLOOD of the COVENANT, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." [Matthew 26: 26-28][Mark 14: 22-25]; [Luke 22: 19-20]; [1 Cor 11: 17-34] and [John 6: 35-68] So, the Bible CLEARLY says that Jesus solemnly proclaimed "This IS my Body", and "This IS My Blood" in all texts referenced above. Knowing for sure what that these were the true words proclaimed by Jesus with regards to His Body and His Blood, how come that some of us Christians today deny this Biblical Truth and argue that they speak as if Jesus said: "This IS NOT My Body" or "This is a SYMBOL of My Body". Likewise, Jesus is also interpreted by non-believers as if He said: "This IS NOT My Blood" or "This is a SYMBOL of My Blood" and go against what the Bible states so clearly to make themselves believe that Jesus only spoke of a Symbol!?
If we go to [John 6: 30-68] we can clearly see that the problem with His disciples IS NOT A PHYSICAL ONE i.e. "His True Flesh" and "His True Blood"; they knew perfectly well that Jesus was NOT speaking of a SYMBOL or USING A METAPHOR! They all agreed that Jesus was speaking literally about His true Body so much so that they complained saying: “How can this man GIVE US HIS FLESH to eat?” [John 6: 52] No hint of any Symbol or metaphor!
So, in accordance with the Holy Bible, we can safely say that the problem of his disciples was a SPIRITUAL ONE; They simply DID NOT BELIEVE that Jesus could perform such a thing, [as non-Catholics still believe today: that Jesus can't do such a thing] it clearly is a matter of lack of FAITH in what Jesus had just proclaimed; they simply DID NOT BELIEVE, even though they had just witnessed the Miracle of the five loaves and two fishes, THEY STILL DID NOT BELIEVE THAT JESUS COULD DO SUCH A THING, and in the same manner, many, even today, even if perhaps well-intentioned, still accept this theory to deny the BIBLE TRUTH about the Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist as proclaimed by the Catholic Church, in agreement to the teaching of the Holy Bible itself but still agree with the disciples who during Jesus's lifetime complained: THIS IS A DIFFICULT TEACHING. WHO CAN ACCEPT IT?”
Again we see a LACK OF FAITH IN JESUS without any hinting that Jesus might have been referring to a symbol in which case they would have had no problem believing in such a thing as a symbol.
According to the Holy Bible, Jesus says clearly "This IS My Body" and "This IS My Blood." If Jesus said so who dares say otherwise? But when Jesus asked his twelve whether or not they too want to leave if they too believed in a symbol. ST. Peter on behalf of the other eleven, knowing that “All things are possible to him who believes!” [Mark 9: 23(b)] the Catholic Church agrees and confirms her belief as to the one St. Peter proclaimed, as an ACT OF FAITH even if difficult to explain how, we FAITHFULLY say: “Lord, to whom would we go? You have the words of eternal life. We BELIEVE and KNOW that YOU ARE THE HOLY ONE OF GOD" [John 6: 68-69]
Contrary to what Jesus's disciples, during His lifetime LACKED TO BELIEVE, we proclaim an ACT OF FAITH in what Jesus promised us, and, Like Mary, believed: "that the Lord’s word to her will be fulfilled” [Luke 1:45] so do we believe that Our Lord's words to us are being fulfilled and will continue to be fulfilled up to the end of times.
...and by the way, the Bible declares the Holy Eucharist to be the "NEW COVENANT"
Beautiful comment & well explained.
@@SuperrBoyful James White looks like a psychopath
This verse is even more explicit if read in the original Greek.
Except one thing: those in John 6 were thinking of the physical not on spiritual food that is Christ...
Recall Christ to fed on food that the disciples did not know. As we read: master are you not hungry? And the Lord replies my food is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.
Our food is to feed off of Christ spiritually..Remember, God is Spirit and Truth therefore we feed and drink of the mana not as Moses did for they died but through Christ we eat and drink we will never die.
For just as Christ who obeys the father remains in him so to us who obeys and feeds on Christ will remain in the father and the son!
For it is the exact opposite the reason why those in John 6 went away because they were thinking only on the physical and not the spiritual. For those who live by the spirit will have life. But to those who live by the flesh will find death!
@@danielhaas9469 The problem with that interpretation is that Jesus never corrects the wrong notion by the people as they explicitly state it. Remember that in the same Gospel, in John 3, Nicodemus makes the same mistake by interpreting being born again as going back to the mother's womb (literal/physical). Jesus corrects this by saying that what he means is a spiritual rebirth through baptism (I'll later explain that even here there is a physical component involved). Elsewhere in the gospels, Jesus corrects his apostles for their wrong interpretation of them being the "salt of the world." Strangely, Jesus never tries to correct the misunderstanding here; what is present here is that Jesus asserts even further that it is his flesh that should be eaten (Note here that when Jesus earlier on when he talks about the Bread of Life says uses the Greek word esthio, which means "to eat," and soma, "body." But in v 54-56, the words used are more explicit, that Greek scholars would connote it to literal use rather than figurative. Instead of esthio, Jesus here uses sarx, which translates specifically "to gnaw or to munch." Soma is no longer used in his emphasis and instead he uses the word trojo, "flesh (used in greek denote an actual body part)," rather than soma. Greek speakers would rightfully interpret this literally in much less ambiguity than the english translations we use.
Read in this way, we actually see why the so-called "misunderstanding between the physical and the spriritual" becomes prevalent. Instead of offering an explanation that he is simply talking about something spiritual and symbolic, Jesus uses more explicit language and confuses his disciples more. Using the language he used, one cannot blame why in the later verses of John 6 cannibalism would be first to enter their minds.
And Jesus let them go in their confusion. And it makes sense. Just as we as God's image and likeness are both body and spirit, Christ offers us his Flesh and Blood in a manner perceptible by our physical bodies while also being Spiritual. Yes it is spiritual, but in no way here is it said by Jesus to be symbolic. I don't see why there is a necessity to separate the Spiritual from the Physical; as both truths are not necessarily apart from each other. I recognize that Jesus also explains the spirituality of the Bread of Life, but it does not disprove that he also talks here of a physical consumption of this Spiritual food.
And also to add, the way Jesus corrects Nicodemus in John 3, he explains that being born again is of water and Spirit, which both contains spiritual and physical dimensions (I'd say, a Sacrament). How much more explicit does Jesus arrive to in this discourse, as he makes a deeper emphasis of the physical despite the spiritual element present, to the point of losing disciples in their morbid misunderstanding?
It's not always an "either/or" situation in the Bible. In verses such as this, one has to discern that it might be an "and" statement.
Trent is my hero when it comes to many things, charity in particular. I gotta work on that when it comes to "Dr." White.
I used to feel frustrated listening to him, but after seeing How to be Christian's videos I just find there to be something inherently funny about White
Boy am I ever glad that I am not reformed. Really appreciate your attitude and teaching style Trent! Thank you.
Ex-Catholic Exposes the TWISTED Teachings of the Catholic Church | Mike Gendron
ua-cam.com/video/jdlczbO5Csc/v-deo.html
James White is a perfect example of Charisma being prioritized over intelligence and wisdom.
Ex-Catholic Exposes the TWISTED Teachings of the Catholic Church | Mike Gendron
ua-cam.com/video/jdlczbO5Csc/v-deo.html
I love how Trent never backs down.
Well done Trent. Keep fighting the good fight! God bless.
Ex-Catholic Exposes the TWISTED Teachings of the Catholic Church | Mike Gendron
ua-cam.com/video/jdlczbO5Csc/v-deo.html
This whole episode could rightfully be retitled "The Hypocrisy of James White"
Mr. Horn, as a Protestant, I had watched a 3 hour debate with you and Mr. White about a year ago on whether or not you can lose your salvation.
I must confess that I am slow in coming to conclusions about that one, but I found your perspective very eye opening, biblical and worthy of my time.
Fantastic! Chech out Why We Are Catholic by Trent Horn ....God bless you!
Be careful with what you do with that information because there are an abundance of Protestants who agree that you can lose your salvation … that doesn’t mean the Catholic Church is the right church… don’t be misled by false direction
@@faditawil1027 Jesus started Catholic church. He offers salvation only through his Catholic church. There is no salvation outside the Catholic church(with exception of invincibke ignorance). The soul you save could be your own.
Jesus did NOT offer salvation through Protestant church. Get you questions answered about Catholic faith. Call Catholic Answers 619-873-3480….become Catholic.
@@johnyang1420 thank you for leading me to a church that produced dogmas and doctrines that are found no where in the Bible and go directly in the way of the gospel and thank you for leading me to a biased program meant to encourage the catholic faith. I would rather stick with the gospel handed down by Jesus (Galatians 1:6-8). In all of what you said, you did not even mention the Bible. You Catholics believe the Bible is infallible anyway so why not encourage me to read the Bible instead of going to these man made sources.
It was last night when I realized that my Latin teacher goes to church with Trent.
White talks with a haughtiness that makes me grimace. Trent Horn - slaying it once more.
I am not a Catholic although my wife was. I imagine that you enjoy how easy it is to rebut White almost as much as Dr Ken Wilson and Dr Leighton Flowers. I am convinced that although White doesn’t know what he thinks he does, he is infinitely confident of everything he doesn’t know. I hope that I have seemed respectful of you here even though I am a Christian and Protestant. I will be praying for all of you and I hope you will pray for me. 🙏🏻♾
James white has become a lot like Muslim debaters. He didn't keep himself on guard and let their demons catch hold of him
@@Kevin5279 White is far more gracious and respectful to Muslims than he is to his own Christian brothers and sisters.
@@Emper0rH0rde exactly. He needs to repent and stop doing apologetics. He treats non Calvinistic Protestants and specifically Catholics with utter condescension
JW is "confident in what he does not know" that is definitely not evident. Yes we pray for all people regardless of colour or creed. That's the Catholic faith.
@@patriciajohnson1894 I would say that it is more than evident that he is confident in what he doesn’t know. He is near constantly setting up straw man arguments for those who disagree with him. I was sarcastically criticizing the man, not complimenting him
This bloke, James White, knows Catholic dogma and doctrine better than someone like me who is a cradle Catholic. May he come into the Faith.
Bigger miracles have happened. He really loves the Calvinist Kool-Aid more than he loves seeking truth.
It's not what he knows, it's what he thinks he knows that just ain't true.
he doesn't, check out Shamounian.
Yeah. He knows a lot, but his commitment to Calvinism makes him blind to the the truths of Catholicism. Let's pray for him
Better yet.....may YOU learn YOUR faith!
Trent, you’re great 👍🏾. The thought of debating you gives White cold sweats.
Trent Horne Teaches false doctrines. Roman Catholicism has a lot of errors. I am glad i left it.
@@samuelaguilar9668
Who determines what is false?
@@jesuschristsaves9067 False Teachings of Roman Catholic Church.
ua-cam.com/video/d1xZTPY98Oc/v-deo.html
I've been a Roman Catholic for so many years. I've been into Roman Catholic School. I served in a Parish here in my country. I almost got into Roman Catholic Seminary. I saw every errors of Roman Catholicism! I am glad that I left Roman Catholicism for good! If you are truly wise. It is not good for you to stay in a Roman Catholic Church!
J.N.D. Kelly, a Protestant (Baptist) and the great patristic scholar had the intellectual honesty to show that the belief in the real presence in the Eucharist is very ancient and did not gradually develop over several centuries.
Based in the work of your "nemesis", How To Be Christian, I have a deep understanding of how unfortunately shallow James White's thinking process is. I hope everyone is praying for him.
James White vs James White on John 6 is still the funniest thing I've seen in apologetics.
White sounds like an atheist when he tries to debunk things like the Eucharist and the perpetual virginity of Mary.
I would also recommend Fr Benedict Groeschel debate on the Eucharist. Based on the tradition of the Church he did a marvelous job at presenting the arguments, his enciclopedic knowledge of all things religion helped a lot.
Trent doing what Trent does best.
Trent, I appreciate your careful attention to answering these arguments. I love you and your wife. God bless you both.
Good job on this Trent! “The Case for Catholicism” is a great book! I highly recommend it.
Ex-Catholic Exposes the TWISTED Teachings of the Catholic Church | Mike Gendron
ua-cam.com/video/jdlczbO5Csc/v-deo.html
James White's flaws/errors have strengthen my faith in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. ✝✝✝
Great presentation...Glory to God.
we should pray for james and others with large platforms that their hearts would softened toward the church and that they would know all of the virtues and fruits of the spirits.
I'm a Baptist myself, non reformed, but James White has the kind of personality that would turn me off from whatever he's presenting. His refutation of your talks are likely to push me to your position, he's just that grating.
According to more than one mental health expert, I lost my mind and reason listening to Protestants in my late teens around 1970. Thankfully, I was saved from mental illness when I became Catholic in 1986. My psychiatrists have insisted I remain Catholic. They always agreed with my statement, "Being Catholic might make you neurotic, but being Protestant will make you psychotic!"
We have seen this psychosis recently on a grand scale in the pathological idiocy of so many Protestants standing behind the most corrupt liar in human history. I'll never forget the sight of totally wack-a-doodle Protestants in animal skins giving thanks for their 'victory' after they invaded the legislative chambers of the capitol on January 6, 2021. I'll never forget the animalistic hooting of their 'shaman.' These sons of Korah (Numbers 16 & Jude 11) want to lead us? May the earth open up and swallow them once more!
It amazes me how Protestants can say that this inanimate object can rule over all Christians. By itself, that's bad enough. Yet they not only chop it up to suit themselves but ignore so much that is in there, stuff that aligns perfectly with common sense. I speak of the same common sense that says inanimate objects are incapable of solving disputes. Everyone with a brain bigger than a peanut knows any written document requires human experts to interpret it. Think of sports rules with umpires and referees or the Supreme Court with the Constitution. Let me expound further on this example of Protestant lunacy.
The Jews, too, had dead, inanimate scripture. But nonetheless, Jesus said in Matthew 23:1-3 that the Jewish human leadership carried the same authority as Moses himself. He said to the Samaritan woman at the well that 'salvation is of the Jews.' He also acknowledged their authority when he told those he healed to show themselves to the priest. John 11:49-51 tells us of the prophetic gifts that God gave even the most corrupt high priest. Protestants throw these scriptures and many others in the garbage along with the good sense God gave them.
Protestants would have us believe that under the dispensation of Grace and Truth, God lost the good organizing skills he showed in the last dispensation of Mosaic Law. They think they are insulting man's sin, but they are really insulting God. While they say that God will never leave them because of their sin, they insist that God left the very organization that gave us the Bible because of its sins. I pray every day for their salvation as I fear the hottest spots in hell are reserved for them. They are the worst kind of troublemakers.
January 6th was not about religion, "their shaman" isn't anything to do with the protestant faith.
You’re a real good man Trent
Really appreciate your work and effort on this! Dr White helped me when I was at a fundamental Baptist church where the pastor is a King James Onlyist. King James Onlyists hold an extreme position that the KJV of the Bible is the only true Word of God for English speaking people. James White's debate easily proved that wrong. However, in his "rebuke" of Trent, he really seemed to be relying heavily on cheap shots such as arguing from silence, which is kind of lazy..... or, maybe he just didn't have much solid ground to stand on? 🤔
Right on Trent! This was solid!
I can echo some of the comments below. Protestant apologists like White always occurred to me as coming off smug, even prideful. And as a Protestant at the time I didn't notice this until I saw them debate Catholic apologists like Trent, who remained so even keeled and calm. It was as if they had something else seeming to shore them up. It wasn't until I converted to Catholicism did I realize that it was their place in Holy Mother Church and the gravity her majesty provides to the believer that grounded them in peace. I speak of my own experience here only, but I would assume others feel similarly. There is something about the Catholic Church that anchors the believer, something I was unable to find in the protestant faith, regardless of how many churches I entered in search of it. Thank you for what you do Trent. You are a blessing to your Catholic brothers and sisters. May God continue to bless your efforts.
I was loyal to Dr. White too i listened to the dividing line for years but he’s become so negative and arrogant. I still dont know the difference between calvinism and reformed baptist…. Listened to trent and the other apologists on catholic answers for two months and i feel like i understand so much more.
For 10 years I was under the horrible Calvinist doctrines. Early last year I began understanding Scripture as it really is and started my journey out. Went to Provisionism (leighton flowers) then decided to not adhere to any strict denominational doctrine. I now stand more closely with Catholicism than I ever thought I would, but also found that same ground closely resembles Messianic Judaism.
Part of the factors leading to this? Listening to these types of programs. Hearing the snarkiness alongside the false dichotomies and straw men, avoidance, etc of James White. Which led me to other viewpoints to try and test against Scripture. Again, which led to Leighton and The Counsel of Trent channel.
Although I disagree with holding tradition as mostly equal to Scripture to form my faith, I do see the benefits and pitfalls of it.
All that being said, I just have to say, thank you for being a channel that openly talks apologetics and helping in part, for my release from Calvinist doctrines. I am Sola Scriptura in dogma, tradition in understanding, and grace in faith.
I now no longer have any qualms with fellowshipping with anyone who proclaims Jesus as the only way, by His grace, through faith in Him alone, as the only means of salvation.
Jeff Durbin and James White don't always seem sincere to me. Almost all of their arguments against Catholicism relies on begging the question if not circular logic in general and they have a terrible attitude towards not just people who disagree with them but they seem very harsh with people within their own communities. I've never been impressed by them.
I think they’re sincere. I grew up protestant. This is just Calvinists in general. Stubborn headed jerks lol
thank you Trent, another lecture on TRUTH!
Sam Shamoun is destroying James White’s arguments
Sam Shamoun is ignoring James White's arguments. I'm not as confident as you that that means he's destroying them.
@@spurcalluth6300 whatever makes you happy buddy
@@tomgjokaj3716, the truth makes me very happy, thanks. And thank you for your support.
@Zachary Trent, Dr White's arguments suffer from his disinterest in philosophy. You can have debates on epistemology without knowing philosophy, just not good ones.
@@spurcalluth6300 Who is that? I never heard of him.
Trent Horn is always superb.
Trent dominating as usual.
It is a testament to the proficiency and efficacy of Trent Horn's work that James White debates him.
Its not you, Trent. James White doesn't like Catholicism. It makes it too hard to be the Pope.
James needs our prayers!
@@SuperrBoyful You're right. I shouldn't be flippant. I just can't help but point out the motivated reasoning I see so often in these cases.
God: Love Me with all your mind.
Catholics: No, don't do that! That's illegal! You're trying to be the pope!
@@spurcalluth6300 Protestants: Here is what *I* think the holy scripture really means.
Catholics: Here is what God revealed it to mean.
@@spurcalluth6300
where is love, in sola fide?
James white will never be satisfied unless every current aspect of Catholic belief is clearly stated in every paragraph of every church father writing all the way back to the apostles.. while almost NONE of his core beliefs were held by ANYONE up until the time of Calvin.
Sounds unreasonable to me.
What? Predeterminism, probably the cornerstone doctrine of Calvinism, was often discussed in the early church. I don't believe in it, but I'm not going to deny it goes way back. See Origen attack that belief in De Principiis, Book 3, Chapter 1, point 8:
> Let us begin, then, with those words which were spoken to Pharaoh, who is said to have been hardened by God, in order that he might not let the people go; and, along with his case, the language of the apostle also will be considered, where he says, Therefore He has mercy on whom He will, and whom He will He hardens. For it is on these passages chiefly that the heretics rely, asserting that salvation is not in our own power, but that souls are of such a nature as must by all means be either lost or saved; and that in no way can a soul which is of an evil nature become good, or one which is of a virtuous nature be made bad. And hence they maintain that Pharaoh, too, being of a ruined nature, was on that account hardened by God, who hardens those that are of an earthly nature, but has compassion on those who are of a spiritual nature.
@@fireandworms My point was James white doesn’t have the same standard for his own beliefs as he does for Catholic beliefs. It may have been discussed, but wasn’t held by the church, from the paragraph you sent it looks like it was shot down as heresy.
@@brianwahle40 Everything that Origen taught was anathematized by other Catholics, so no lol, it was not "shot down as heresy." Rather that's what happened to Origen's teachings generally speaking, though the Church today still believes some of his teachings without attributing him, such as the ransom theory of atonement.
Augustine in contrast to Origen taught predeterminism, he is used often by Calvinists as evidence for the correctness of their views. I'm not a Calvinist by the way, I disagree with their views, but it's important to understand that like most major Protestant views they come from the early church.
@@fireandworms hey cool man
Trent! Please! Where can I get your books in spanish?
In Spain 😆 just kidding, sorry.
@@johnharkness6304 in that case I rather travel to the US to get them ...that would be a shorter trip since I live in South America lol
@@PedroAntonioLea-PlazaPuig I thought so, not surprised. I live in France, I'm Irish. We were in Colombia in 2016 to visit my daughter , FANTASTIC, Bogota and Cartagena. Take care of yourself.
I have a very hard time listening to james White... but I really enjoy trent so I'll watch.
Did you check out Sam Shamoun's response to James White on this? pretty awesome!
Which video is that, is it his vid “James White distorts Justin Martyr”? Is Sam Catholic now?
Yep saw it, he calls out James White and says he badly misrepresented Trent.
@@glennargento4849 No, he’s Assyrian Church of the East.
@@glennargento4849 I think that’s the one. I think he is not Catholic, but he attends mass. Maybe he is but i really don’t know. From what I can tell, Sam is probably trying to choose a church with an apostolic tradition, but he is almost always talking about Catholicism.
Great job Trent!!!
Let James White alone. He converts more people into Catholicism than my effort in the last 10 years. I saw in one post that he and Trent are tied. Let's keep it that way.
Just woke up and your comment made me laughed 🤣
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 📜 James White criticizes Trent Horn's talk at a Catholic Answers conference from a few years ago.
00:14 🗣️ Trent Horn plans to address criticisms of his talk by James White in this episode.
01:38 🕊️ James White is a Reformed Baptist apologist, defending Calvinist doctrines.
02:07 📚 Trent Horn's past engagement with James White at a conference on Calvinism and losing salvation.
02:48 🎙️ Trent Horn focuses on substantive elements of White's criticisms on the Dividing Line podcast.
03:46 🍞⛪️ White questions the concept of the Eucharist as sacrifice, pointing to Gregory the Great's time, countered by historical sources.
05:12 📜 Early sources like Saint Cyprian and scholars like William Webster attest to the concept of Eucharistic sacrifice predating Gregory the Great.
07:23 🕊️ White argues silence in early texts about specific practices, like eucharistic adoration, doesn't negate their development.
10:12 🛐 Trent Horn compares descriptions of the Eucharist by Justin Martyr to the modern Mass, noting similarities.
11:23 🙏 White's argument from silence on practices and doctrines lacks consistency as similar arguments could be made against his own views.
12:36 📖 Trent Horn examines Pope Galasias' use of terms like "nature" and "substance" in relation to the Eucharist.
14:09 🎚️ White's observations about early Christian practices and beliefs require contextual understanding and don't negate development.
15:29 🌄 White's argument about the absence of certain practices ignores the gradual evolution of Christian traditions.
16:56 🤝 Trent Horn points out parallels between the development of early Christian beliefs and the evolution of Protestant doctrines.
18:09 🕊️ Trent Horn discusses the development of concepts like the indelible mark, drawing parallels to the development of terms like "Trinity" and "Original Sin."
19:44 🎙️ Trent Horn addresses White's argument that early Christian practices didn't include confession before receiving the Eucharist.
20:49 🕊️ Trent Horn points out the gradual development of practices like confession and highlights the importance of historical context.
21:22 🍞🍷 The Didache discusses the worship of the gathered body, including the Eucharistic sacrifice, baptisms, preaching, prayers, singing, and confession.
22:04 🙏 James White argues against the existence of priests in the Didache, but scholars point out public confession of sins, implying a form of priesthood.
22:32 🛑 White's criticism of the Didache's lack of explicit priestly mention is an argument from silence, which doesn't negate the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist.
23:01 🎶 While White sees the entire worship service as a sacrifice of praise, Trent Horn suggests the Eucharist is the focal point and the breaking of bread as a form of sacrifice.
23:16 🙌 Ignatius of Antioch's "one eucharist, one altar" idea indirectly supports the concept of a ministerial priesthood, along with references in Corinthians and Malachi.
24:27 🧑🎓 Scholarly contributions recognize the Didache's implicit treatment of Eucharist as sacrifice, with the need for a pure conscience, implying confession.
25:39 📜 Confession of sins was generally public in early Christianity, indicating the involvement of elders or priests as mediators.
27:45 🛕 Paul's mention of tables in Corinthians points to sacrificial altars, suggesting a connection between the Eucharist and sacrifice.
29:42 🍞🍷 Trent Horn argues that early Church Fathers connected the Mass to the prophecy in Malachi 1, while James White questions the interpretation.
32:03 📚 Protestant scholars like Everett Ferguson and Harry Lowen acknowledge early belief in the real presence and the sacrificial nature of the Mass.
34:08 💬 James White implies that while Church Fathers believed in apostolic succession, he can accept their view without necessarily adopting it.
38:03 💬 Trent Horn proposes a debate on central authority-sola scriptura vs. apostolic succession-with James White or Jimmy Akin, addressing the foundation of beliefs.
Great video. In min 27:12 I like also to show the following verse that shows that table and altar are related in the vision of Ezekiel's new temple.
Ezekiel 41:22 The altar was of wood, three cubits high, and its length two cubits; its corners, its base, and its sides were of wood. And he said to me, “This is the table that is before the LORD.”
Trent, you and Jimmy are my two top apologists right now. I'd love to see you two in a tag-team debate match vs two Protestants or two atheists.
Pax ✌️
White argues against the Papacy, his understanding of the Bible, Church fathers, and tradition is the authoritative one. In other words, James White is the Pope.
the papacy is a worldly succession.
the Papacy was subverted by the Franks and Freemasons.. thats why i chose Orthodoxy. Jay Dyer, Ubi Petrus, and therealmedwhite helped me a lot
@@ThomasG_Nikolaj "The gats of hell shall not prevail"
@@WhyCatholicdotCom yes, they'll never prevail against orthodoxy. They already have against Roman catholicism
@@ThomasG_Nikolaj that makes zero sense lol
James White not liking something is a good sign you are on the right path
James White is honest about only one thing. That he has created his own religion and does not care what the early Christians did. There are only two questions he needs to be asked. Since he has ejected what the early Christians believed, can he agree that he has created his own religion? Then ask him where he gets the authority to do so in the Bible. Beyond that, it is a waste of time to debate someone that has obviously created his own cult.
I gotta say Trent is knocking it outta the park. We should always assume the best of intentions from our intellectual opponents, but James White is either deliberately obfuscating the points Mr. Horn is making or Mr. White is oblivious to his own inconsistent standards for what qualifies as evidence. White reminds me of a guy I used to know who possessed a vast amount of knowledge but lacked the ability to reason through it.
Please forgive me I want to be charitable here. But years ago whenever I would listen to James White I would dismiss him as just another anti Catholic. But now it has become evident to me that it’s more than that. I think James suffers from some sort of psychological issue that manifests itself with the need to be right. I kind of feel bad for him. With the advent of the modern Catholic apologetical movement back in the mid to late 1980’s the Catholic Church has been proven to have the fullness of the faith. That doesn’t mean it’s perfect from a human standpoint, Heaven knows the Church has a lot of issues at the moment from the top down. But it always has,and yet, she still stands! I don’t like what goes on much of the time in the Church but I stay. You don’t abandon Jesus because of Judas or multiple Judas’s. I am praying for Mr. White.
I will pray for Mr White but Lord knows I can not stand listening to him and other anticatholics. My soul is weak.
Just a note: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is advertising on this video. Poor taste in my opinion. To your point: I have never heard Dr. White accept a logical, biblical argument supporting the Catholic church.
The catholic church is not the only church that believes in Jesus. It might be the most corrupted church based on their history, but dont gloat about clinging to a corrupted church.
I agree with your statements about White to some degree. But I would reexamine what you said about Catholic apologetics. Trent here has done a good job refuting the anti-Scriptural statements of Friar Casey, who is one of the most popular Catholic UA-camrs! That would indicate that Catholics are still stuck in the same old rut.
@@DM-vt9xbIslam also believes in Jesus. So what?
It takes a great deal of perseverance and the other gifts of the Spirit to correct the Protestant accusations by hardcore anti-Catholic such as White, even the softer tone ones like Ortlund, is that they are not really interested in being open to what is offered to them. The likes of White and his school of fellow Protestant apologists is that they are very insistent in only their own reading. For that reason I can only offer one thing to Catholic apologists, and that is my simple prayer, always. God does the rest in them. So I hope there will always be a silent army of prayers of the faithful to God for this particular ministry, in English and all other languages.
We know that the fathers never viewed the Eucharist as only spiritual or an ordinance but when you’re an ahistorical Calvinist baptist you have to skew your view of the fathers or dismiss them. Once again I find myself agreeing with Trent more than most Protestants.
From your friendly neighborhood Lutheran.
Come on over to the Catholic Church man!
@@lukehayner3202 I appreciate that brother, I love my Catholic brothers and sisters. I even went to a Dominican college and really enjoyed my time there but the confessional Lutheran church is home for me.
@@Athabrose Come on brother, people move home lots of times. There's an empty place in some Catholic Church with your name on it😃
@@johnharkness6304 lol, I hear ya brother. Who knows where God may put us. If anything I hope the Catholic Lutheran dialogue will continue as we tend to have more in common than not.
@@Athabrose I will be praying for you.
First of all clever name for the channel props!
On sola scriptura 27:07 - 27:42 it is tough to try and nail Protestants on not being able to get the sophisticated argument for the canon and sola scriptura from the early church fathers. The reason for this is because sola scriptura is really only meaningful if it holds even if people who call themselves Christians turn against it or do not affirm it. So in that sense the Protestant position isn't as crucially tied to tradition as the Catholic position. Now one could certainly argue that one still might expect to see the consistent denial of positions other than sola scriptura rather than their affirmation in the early church, but it doesn't have the same effect if say the opposite were true if say we would expect to see the consistent denial of sola scriptura rather than its affirmation. So in that sense there is an asymmetry here where tradition not supporting Catholicism is more important than it not supporting Protestantism.
Also I think arguments from silence should be viewed a bit more consistently all around. So often whether or not an explicit doctrine represents the historical views of the church about that subject is the very thing being disputed by people from different traditions. So Protestant's do in fact argue that certain Protestant doctrines are present in parts of the early church even though specific explicit Protestant terms were not used at that time. So it seems that this tu quoque approach to arguments from silence, to me at least, seems to indicate a need to be more consistent about such arguments rather than arguing that if one's own position isn't explicit that yours is even less explicit. I am not even sure if such a point makes sense. I think attacking the basis for believing sola scriptura and highlighting the reasons why Tradition makes more sense as an authority is more promising personally.
Did you see his recent video on the perpetual virginity of Mary? It convinced me to stop listening to him. Half was basically an argument from silence, the other half just complaining about not being on the bible answer man anymore. For a guy who loves to dive in very specific greek terms, he didn't seem to want to on adelphoi. Clearly, his response was singularly informed by his own theological desires.
His talk on marys pv was very good. Hank, now Orthodox has to recant virtually everything he argued for in the past. Now hes reduced to the same ole rc talking points on Mary. Hanks arguments are as weak as any internet lay catholics. I hear the same arguments everyday. Hank brought nothing new to the arena.
@@ContendingEarnestly Argument from silence is far from "very good"
@@roymartin1385 Be more specific.
@@ContendingEarnestly An argument from silence is when you try to prove your point via the absence of statements in historical documents. For example when he points out that Clement didn't write about he pv of Mary. Watch his video with that in mind and you'll see.
@@roymartin1385
*For example when he points out that Clement didn't write about he pv of Mary. Watch his video with that in mind and you'll see.*
But thats not what he was even talking about. About the 26 minute mark, a little earlier for the context he is speaking of the gospels and other writings (including Clement) where you would never find them believing Mary running around Galilee with a number of men not related to her. Using the common arguments of rome where Jesus' brothers and sisters are really cousins or offspring of Joseph from another marriage, we're supposed to believe mary just ran around the country side with a bunch of older people not related to her? Thats the context, not the pv specifically. Its about the plain use of language and not having to do linguistic gymnastics to arrive at cousins or children from a previous marriage of Joseph.
Unless you can provide another portion of the video?
If I remember correctly, I listen to a debate on UA-cam between mr. White and Patrick Madrid from decades ago. Our Catholic brother in Christ Mr. Madrid defeated him once already.
Patrick and Trent should get together and seriously talk.
9:40 a Romanist would say: we do not receive (common) bread and (common) drink, but Jezus Christ our savior. Justin says: “For not AS common bread and common drink we receive these; but IN LIKE MANNER AS Jezus Christ our Saviour,” and that clearly implies that the bread indeed stays bread, but is consumed as if it is the body of Christ.
He says that it is the flesh and blood of Christ, not a symbol
Sheesh, I thought that lawn care was tough, this line of work must be utterly exhausting! 😱
I d like to see Trent put back MacArthur in his place. He has so much disrespect for the Catholic faith, and he tells so many falsities.
7:10 - “the notion of a mass as a sacrifice existed centuries before Gregory the Great”
8:58 and 9:33 - Justin Martyr
James White is a walking, talking fallacy machine, with a ton of arrogance. Dr. Flowers and friends, regularly hand him his head on a platter. But he just keeps going, and going. Makes me wonder if his show garners him substantial financial support.
Good job Trent
Haha! He's still sour over you beating him over the 'Can a Christian lose their salvation live debate! 😆
Trent I would love to see you address what he said about your talk on Augustine and Pelagius
Christs words in John 6. Was was what converted me to.catholicism. Christs.words r the only truth.
James White is a leading Catholic evangelist 👍
the more he talks the more people will convert to Catholicism
@@anthonytan7134 if he could just be honest it wouldn't be so bad. But he constantly misrepresents the historical facts.
We can go to the PAUP!
"Yes, but in a qualified sense..."
@@jack_skeean NUANCEEEE
What's the catholic view of the 3 Cappadocian fathers? Because in the orthodox church their theology is seemingly much more influential than in Catholicism
Calvinists are great at one thing, pushing people away from Calvinists churches
Lol, as if the Calvinist conception of God wasn't repugnant enough! It also manifests in the attitude of its followers... 😅
So some guy blocks me so I can't answer him. I guess that's one way to win the argument. Early bishops claimed primacy over their own cities until force began to be used.
Wouldn’t the first mass offered by Christ be a sacrifice, and every mass since? I think yes.
Can you please provide a link, I cant find this anywhere? What section? St. Cyprian Letter 62 "they who are baptized in the Church are presented to the Bishops of the Church, and by our prayer and imposition of hands, they receive with the Holy Spirit and are perfected with the seal of the Lord."
Sola Whitea
Classic!
What is funny with James White is that he didn't know that even the Orthodox Church also believed in the Sacrificial Priesthood.
James White would tell Jesus Christ Himself that He was wrong, if In a debate together! "Jesus, sadly you don't understand the proper Greek, and sadly you have fallen for the Trap of Rome!".
I would love to see a debate with Dr James White and Pope Francis. Who do you think would win?
@@Wgaither1 I know James White would win in a debate against Jesus Himself, as James White knows more than Jesus! 😁 In James White's mind anyway!
I have read several of the encyclicals of Pope Francis, and each page has dozens of Holy Scripture passages, a brilliant theologian!
@@matthewbroderick8756 a brilliant theologian lol
@@Wgaither1 Yes,, Pope Francis is a brilliant Theologian! You are in my prayers as you journey toward Truth!, Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink
@@matthewbroderick8756 Pope Francis is many things but brilliant is not one of them. Nor is he holy. He will never be declared a saint. If you want to see brilliance read JPII. It's like comparing a midget to a professional athlete.
Reason and Theology brought me here