Remember, Catholics worship the Lord in the way that he said he wanted to be worshipped; by accepting his flesh and blood into themselves in holy communion; a process that -involves- the lighting of candles, but those candles are not a method of worship.
The candles represent -prayer intentions,- which according to Catholic doctrine, are much purer and more likely to produce fruit when delivered by one of the saints; especially the blessed mother. Thus, many candles does not equal worship.
The child needs to act properly in order to receive that gift, not because the ice cream is dependant on the child's good behavior, but because it will reward him only if he behaves well. If he receives the ice cream after having behaved badly, it will only teach him licentiousness, and God, being infinitely-good, could never do that.
On the subject of Mary, I think that a lot is made of this, mainly because, to the Catholic, worship is a very different thing that it is to a protestant.
I think he's absolutely right that the Church needs to be re-evangelized, and a standard of proper Catholic belief restored. He's also right that reading the bible can only lead to good outcomes.
On the subject of justification, however, he hasn't quite grasped the full distinctions here. Justification requires our actions, but that does not mean that we "earn" it in any way, in the same way that a child doesn't "earn" Christmas gifts just by avoiding time-outs.
So in that respect he is right, we do need evangelization. But all of Christianity, myself fully as well, need to be reformed to reflect Christ's agape love to all!!
His comments on Mary are spot on. The doctrine of Mariology is that she is to be honored, but is not divine in herself. But he is right that many of us Catholics take it to far, but I believe only because they are not taught. In the end, all peoples will see how much Jesus honors His own mother. As for evangelizing the CC...in a sense surely it is true. I am 23 and have been Catholic my whole life, but only at 22 came to a real meaningful relationship with Jesus my Lord. So in that respect, he
I am very happy with this video. I am Catholic and very much love Craig's work, so I am happy this wasn't a bash-fest, which is so common. Though I am not sure about his justification knowledge of the CC. I have always been taught that it is justification by faith in Christ alone, which in turn that faith and love for Christ produces works, both of charity and in power through the Spirit. You may say that's word play, but I think if pondered it would be much in line with Protestant beliefs....u
I'll give this video some credit as it did not come across as crass or anti-Catholic. It even has some good points that there are some Catholics who take it too far with Mary. But those are very few. Videos like this one are even more dangerous for Catholics who don't know their faith well enough as these guys come across as a voice of reason. The hardline anti-Catholics are easily recognized and dismissed as such.
From the first generation christians and before Martin Luther. The christians were united under one church The Roman Catholic Church. that's 1500 years united under one banner. The separation though painful is necessary for the growth of the Roman Catholic Church as well. Up until now we are still a Church in progress. I know that one day we all will be under one banner again. As a famous cartoon line "Till all are one!"
Dude, enough. I'm so tired of Roman Catholics merely assuming that their church was the first church like it's not debatable or something. Take that arrogance elsewhere.
dear brethren. then tell me a what was ahead of the roman catholic church? I would like to hear your arguments and present you case. It's not arrogance to think the Catholic church is the first. And why do you think of me arrogant? that is a judgement on your part. Do not judge unless you want to be judged. And kindly read the rest of my responses. like in calling for unity on all banners, and how our faith respects each other...is that arrogance? May God bless you
Firstly, we need to distinguish between catholic Church and Roman Catholicism.
Secondly, early writers like Clement of Rome and Augustine taught different than the modern RCC does. Clement taught sola fide, Augustine taught double predestination; both of these are considered anathema by the Council of Trent.
Thirdly, there is no evidence of a monarchical Roman bishop in the early days of the Church. Scholars note the office of Pope didn't arrive until much later.
The arrogance is in the mere assumption that your church is the first Church and that all other churches are only pieces that broke away from it. This is arrogance. And I see it among many Roman Catholics who take it as granted that their church is the first church as if there aren't significant amounts of historical facts to the contrary.
@AgApE010 I think you mean Catholic Church ...You would then have to reconcile -- for example -- The Greek Orthodox Church's recognition of the Roman Patriarch's claim to Primus Inter Pares as well as Constantinople. It's important to note, that the primacy of Rome is contingent upon another primacy and then and only then because of the words of Christ interpreted unanimously as they were by the four patriarchs. Are you familiar with the term "Primus Inter Pares" ?
I try to distinguish the term "catholic" (which the early Fathers used to mean "universal") from "Catholic," as in "Roman Catholic." The reason is that because RCs will often point to a quote from Ignatius of Antioch, for instance, in which he speaks of the "Catholic Church" and say "See? Ignatius says 'Catholic' and we're called 'Catholic' so this means us. Our church existed in Ignatius' day!"
@AgApE010 Oh, I'm entirely familiar with the definition and certainly it's justified supporting text from John 17:21 where the concept of "all" and "one" as a unified term was felt best expressed from the Gr. "katholikos" used by Ignatius in 110 as in he katholike ekklesia. is entirely correct as a reasonable frame of reference. Even a Protestant theologian, Kattenbusch interprets it's use to mean "one and only". St. Cyril (c.374) made note of the importance to this distinction as well
@AgApE010 I just thought you implied "small 'c' " as opposed to "big 'C' " Catholic to distinguish the Church from pre/post Luther. The Catholic Church properly interpreted includes the Eastern communions. I think many reference "c" distinctions to differentiate between the "spiritual" and "institutional" Church mistakenly defined as solely the Roman communion while ignoring the other 22 communions. Hopefully one day soon, John 17:21 becomes reality. This is the truest Catholic wish.
I understand that there are many Rites. I simply wasn't concerned with the details in the context of my previous discussion to which you now reply. But I also think the distinctions between catholic and Catholic(ism) are much more than spiritual and institutional. The former is an adjective, the latter a noun.
Rejoice! John 17:21 is a reality this very day! Though people point out the various denominations in Protestantism, they often fail to acknowledge the agreement on the essential doctrines of the Faith. I have no problem extending a hand of fellowship to the Lutheran, Baptist, Anglican, or Presbyterian. Catholicism, on the other hand, ousts anyone who disagrees on nearly any matter (case in point, the Sedevacantists). This begs the question: who is really the schismatic here?
You know what, I compare the discussions with Catholic and Protestant believers. We do respect (most of the time) our beliefs. Unlike the new Atheists who (in many times) often uses profane language and derogatory words against us. Compare how we discuss with each other and them, see and notice the difference.
Pope John Paul II says that we must be united, all christians, all denominations who calls Jesus Christ as the son of God. Against the adversity. That includes the New Atheist movement. We may not completely agree on all fronts. But even Ravi Zacharias says "In unity doesn't mean uniformity." We are brethren. Just like in a family like every brother and sister we argue and sometimes fight over things. But at the end we pick each other up and help each other.
I'm sure Jesus is in the Catholic Church, concerning how the Eucharist has become flesh. but who am I to say that a protestant can't go to heaven? Peace be with my brothers in Jesus.
It's not earning salvation as much as demonstrating faith. Jesus said be doers not just hearers. He said He would separate the sheep and goats - those who did His will.
@MrUrosSrb Brate, vjera bez djela je ništa, kao i djela bez vjere. Za spasenje ti trebaju i vjera i djela. Nije dovoljno samo vjerovati, treba životom i djelima slaviti Gospodina jer to je jedino pravedno.
As a Catholic, when it comes to faith and works, I think they are in union. G. K. Chesterton wrote that going to Church and professing your faith makes you as much a christian as standing in your garage makes you a car. And to say that it is solely grace is idiotic, because even if you're a scrooge like figure, still practicing your evil deeds and profess your love of Jesus... well, you get my logic.
As an Orthodox, I think Craig is right about justification. We affirm that our works are necessary for our salvation, since they constitute an aspect of our faith ("Faith without works is dead" James 2:26.), but they certainly don't merit our salvation! Our salvation comes as a gift from Almighty God who desires the salvation of all. We have our part to do, however. As Augustine put it, the God who created you without your consent will not save you without your consent.
@MrRichardwinkel I would first want to draw some distinctions between the Catholic and Orthodox approaches to Mary. While we Orthodox do indeed venerate and honor Mary as Theotokos, or Mother of God, and seek her intercessions, we reject any attempt to make her a co-redeemer with Christ, as some Catholic zealots have done, and we also reject the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Our Lady was a human being, born under the fall like any other person. (Cont...)
@MrRichardwinkel As for Dr. Craig's remarks, I think he is right in some things, but I also think he misunderstands the tradition of Marian devotion within the historical church. The veneration of the Mother of God, as with all the saints, is not something apart from our worship of Christ our Lord. Coming to Mary (or any saint) and seeking her intercessions only brings us closer to the Lord. She does not stand between us, but rather seeks to bring us closer to Him.
@TheOrthodoxSteven Thats wrong i think.Because i myself was baptised in orthodox church and stuff but,Faith Alone does all the job, not works.Just believe simple gospel that Jesus died for your sin and was buried and rose again for you.Believe in Jesus Christ for the free gift of eternal life.All there is to it.
@MrUrosSrb No, sorry. The Protestant doctrine of "sola fide" (or faith alone) is not only heretical but is contradicted by Scripture itself. In fact, the only place in the Scriptures where the phrase "faith alone" appears is in the Epistle of James, where it says, "Ye see then how that man is justified by works and NOT FAITH ALONE. For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead." -James 2:24, 26.
Faith and works are an integral unity, like body and spirit.
@TheOrthodoxSteven The word save occurs five times in James (1.21; 2:14; 4:12; 5:15, 20). In none of the four uses outside of our passage is eternal salvation in view. In his epistle James uses the word save to refer to deliverance from the death-dealing consequences of sin (cf. 1:15,21). A believer whose faith is not accompanied by works will not be saved from the consequences of his sinful behavior. He or she will experience difficulties which God sends.
We need to find a least common multiple and get back to one great community. Not against atheism, not against someone, but for our very faith. A roman catholic.
beware youtube user megazordman2 who been posts deragatory comments about christianity on videos. Please go to his channel youtube dot com slash megazordman2 and report him 100 times a day if necassary until youtube bans him. Stop letting these people get away with it.
Whatever your denomination, put it aside and thank the Lord that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ, for we need to stand together to confront a more disturbing problem for Christians in western society, the New Atheist movement.
Dr. Craig's Catholic friends have actually understood the Council of Trent statement well. Better even than Dr. Craig himself. We are not justified by good works by any means, but by the Grace of God. Good works are necessary for salvation (as Jesus puts so eloquently himself), but there is no talk of earning salvation.
@Lakester91 would be interested to know how you reconcile the two claims "Good works are necessary for salvation" and "there is no talk of earning salvation". Is it not as Paul said? "For by grace (unmerited favour) are ye saved by faith (pistis) and that not of yourselves. It is a gift of God, not of works lest any man should boast."?
Thanks for some interesting thoughts. I tend to be one of those Protestants who think that RCs are hopelessly deceived and not part of the Body of Christ. They perfectly conform to all the criteria for being a cult. But I also have some Catholic friends who I consider to be Christians. I just don't understand why they don't leave:-)
The justification point is very fitting - also exactly fits SDA teaching on jusification.
I like Dr. Craig, but the last bit of this discussion (about Mary) is very disappointing. True devotion to Mary, properly understood, can never distract from Jesus. Everything about Mary points to her son. In all things, Mary says that God's will should be done. There is no competition between Mary and Jesus, but devotion to Mary is just another dimension of a complete relationship with her Son.
@Dauphin35 I agree entirely. I feel the role of Mary within Catholicism has been misrepresented by Dr Craig. I too, like Dr. Craig, but felt somewhat disappointed that he chose to opinionate on what we as Catholics believe, rather than to stick to his original stance of accepting the variances between the different denominations of Christianity.
Whoever denies them denies Christ and the one sent Christ. They act as person Christi. Where's the anti Christ ~ Joseph Smith's, Martin Luther SEVERS the Christendom and continues to create fallible protestant denominations. OK, all you did was create doctrines in the 16th century and broke away from union with the bishops and start your own religions.
I have great respect for Dr. Craig. He is brilliant. I am Catholic. There are many problems I have found with Catholicism. One for example, prohibiting divorced people from accepting communion. In my opinion, the Catholic Church needs God's help. In conclusion, Dr. Craig is right. Let's focus on uniting us as Christians!
To any Protestants watching this video the only advice I can give as a Catholic is that they go and read about the early Church & and in particular the various writings & epistles from the first centuries that exist (Clement, Ignatious of Antioch etc.) and see if the early Church believed in Protestant doctrines such as Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, the Eucharist as just a symbol, the Church as a merely spiritual entity etc. NewAdvent - org - fathers
Our justification is not forensic, but truly ontological. For there to be a real relationship and partaking of God's nature, our acts must be truly our own while still acknowledge that they are grounded entirely in the grace of God. This is absolutely essential, as the idea of imputed grace and forensic justification is anathema to the Biblical doctrine of salvation and theosis.
As such, in view of the person regenerated in God's grace, we view our good works as being merited both condignly and congruently. Both as our own acts and the act of the Holy Spirit in us, non-competitively. This is necessarily in view of the doctrine of theosis, which is to say, in the words of St. Peter, that we become "partakers of the divine nature."
God is not a being and therefore he is non-competitive with secondary causes. As such, as a result of our regeneration and infusion with grace, our response to God's grace--which is itself only possible through grace--is both truly our own and comes about through the Holy Spirit operative through us. (This is something like the concept of double agency elaborated by the Anglican theologian of the last century, Austin Farrer.)
This issue of sola fide and the merit of works according to the Council of Trent relies on a distinction between condign and congruent merit. Essentially, the Catholic view is that, as a result of the fact that we believe in the infusion of grace (as opposed to the IMPUTATION of grace) we believe that the human person has truly been regenerated ontologically by the operation of the Holy Spirit...
10I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. 11My brothers, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephasa”; still another, “I follow Christ.”
I think the Catholic Church cannot be wrong: Jesus said to Peter that, paraphrasing, 'You are my rock, and on this rock I build my Church, ... and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Peter then, was the first pope of the Catholic (at this stage just Christian) Church. Thus if the Council of Trent was wrong, then the gates of hell have prevailed against the Church, and Jesus was a liar.
Of course, no one would call Him a liar, but Protestants in this way seem to do it indirectly...
@iwanttocrashmybike "VATICAN is a building,and organization with a long history of abuse" ~ I'd like to see a valuable site or sources for this judgment preferably non anti catholic. Also did we say that the Church is perfect? Look at martlut's vid on protestant pedophile cover ups. BTW infallibility is never to be confused with the pope being perfect on EVERYTHING. This is why pope john paul II goes to confession 1 a week. But when the pope raises the authority given to him from the succession~
@311veritas I don't think the Scriptures teach apostolic succession. Judas was replaced because he defected. There is no mention of James Zebedee being replaced when Herod killed him. The Twelve(plus Paul) played a unique role in laying the foundations of the Church. That role has ceased to exist. Nobody is writing Scripture today.
@311veritas So,the Vatican calling for a "One World Money System" isnt a omen?
Nor the Pope to pedo activity as it relates to Alester Crowelys teachings not even the concord between the Vatican and the Nazi Brownshirts or the Masonic symbology ...None of that to screams out to you? btw le goddess thing come from Ancient Pagan traditions,which ironically are interconnected as to Judaisms(Christianity)past as well also btw I suggest checking out my second boxed channel(Catholic Physicist)
@iwanttocrashmybike The Vatican isn't calling for a one world money system. A department of the Vatican merely published a policy paper suggesting it.
@iwanttocrashmybike Except the Pope didn't exercise his vocal cords. This was a random Vatican department publishing a policy paper that was under no orders from the Pope. Learn how the Vatican works please.
@iwanttocrashmybike Wrong. It's like a member of the Republican party (but not its leadership) creating a potential policy document. It means NOTHING.
@Ohyewildthong So this OWO being a prophecy from the bible itself(from which all functions come from) means NOTHING either,alright so then lets abolish all variations of Christianity and be done with it;-)
@Ohyewildthong XD,now I know your full of it,no one in their right mind would make such a claim when talking about the VATICAN the VATICAN is a building,and organization with a long history of abuse,documented left and right,it NOT only doesn't represent CATHOLICISM ,its basically Lucifers seat of power on Earth,bu by all means supply with your proofs of claim;-)
One question to any Biblical scholars out their (or anyone who's read the bible enough to answer my question): Call me crazy but I don't really see any Bible based need for a pope (with all due respect of course). Is their anything in the Bible that suggests that there is such a need? If so where in the bible can I find it?
Even if the Eastern/Oriental/Assyrian Orthodox and the Protestant denominations came to an agreement with Rome on all other points of doctrine (the sacraments, justification, Mariology, etc.), the one dogma which would kill any hope of reunion is papal infallibility. No church would budge on it.
That being said, I believe the justification issue is a matter of semantics, whether one goes with the Pauline or the Jacobean definition of faith. The Marian dogmas are much more problematic for me.
@ElasticGiraffe "The Marian dogmas are much more problematic for me." - As says: Coredemtrix ~ I agree. So we have 2 different terms: 1 Coredeemer, 2 Coredemtrix. We call Mary coredemtrix as she participated the MOST role than any creature to Gods redemption process. 2nd is The concept of Immaculate Conception. Mary needs a savior as she was saved BEFORE sin = sinless.
On justification, Catholic's easy formula:
Justification by grace alone THROUGH faith plus work.
@Godnogods1 I can accept co-redemptrix (which has not "yet" been dogmatized) in the sense that Mary facilitated the Redemption in the same way Eve facilitated the Fall. I do not accept the co-mediatrix title because Jesus is the singular mediator between God and Man; he is not so unapproachable that we need the special mediation of his mother, however gentle she was. Neither Eastern Orthodox nor Protestant Christians affirm the unbiblical, unpatristic doctrine of Mary's Immaculate Conception.
@Godnogods1 I accept the necessity of works of love for living faith, but I do not accept the fundamental Roman Catholic premise (unknown to the Eastern churches, which see the nature of sin differently) that works are necessity as penance to make satisfaction for our post-baptism sins, or else we'll end up in Purgatory to pay for them later. I don't accept that we need Masses as propitiatory re-sacrifices of Jesus' body and blood to infuse us with grace to cover our guilt for post-baptism sins.
@Godnogods1 We are baptized with water and indwelled by the Spirit to enter the new covenant and become part of his body. No more feelings of guilt or need for satisfaction. We answer our universal human calling--as the images of God--by abiding in him, and we gradually conform to the divine likeness through the work of the Spirit within us. The church is a mystical union. Works of evil draw us away from him and shipwreck our faith, but works of love draw us closer to him and perfect our faith.
@ElasticGiraffe "No more feelings of guilt or need for satisfaction" so where in the Bible. Read (2 Samuel 12:13-14), (2 Maccabees 12:39-46). "The church is a mystical union." what are these people who has the most credential whose taught by the apostles themselves:
Ignatius of Antioch, Pauly Carpus, Clement of rome, they all say in their letters:
@Godnogods1 I'm not even going to look up those references. You cite a book of the Old Testament and an intertestamental, non-canonical book to debunk my understanding of the new Messianic covenant.
Pauly Carpus? You mean Polycarp? I'm not claiming institutional churches do not or should not exist, but the invisible church--the communion of saints in Christ's spiritual body and bride--is more fundamental than its visible shells, and Paul did not refer to a ecclesiastical hierarchy.
@ElasticGiraffe spiritual communion is not to be interpreted as INVISIBLE. In fact it is joined through the current VISIBLE communion which happens in the mass every single hour. It actually proves this idea of the saints being saved in the old testament and the question against protestantism (non canonical non authoritative seculars) gous;
Go are they saved if you claim non biblically that the suffering is only present in one time.
Not to mention symbolic baptism, eternal security, cont
@Godnogods1 SPIRITUAL communion is INVISIBLE, but it is edified through and manifests in the worship and practices of the institutional churches. I have no idea how your idea of the mystical church as conceptually indistinguishable from the institutional church is supposed to validate the salvation of faithful Jews under the Old Covenant.
I don't believe baptism and the Eucharist are merely symbolic, nor do I affirm eternal security--the Calvinist doctrine of the "perseverance of the saints."
@Godnogods1 All over the Bible? >_> Most Catholics wouldn't even dare to make that claim. It is an unfortunate outgrowth of Augustinianism, a doctrine denied by Protestants and Jews AND the Eastern, Oriental, and Assyrian Orthodox Churches alike. Purgatory is exclusive to Roman theology. If "cheap grace" is the label you've come up with to deride all interpretations of grace that exclude Purgatory, then you need to read thinkers in other Christian traditions to broaden your theological horizons.
@ElasticGiraffe why not? If protestants and all the other severing joseph smiths you say are the most valid, you also continue to sever the body of Christ and it's done already all because Martin luther removed those books that contained the purgatory in the Bible. He attempted to interpolate the word "alone" in romans to fit his pseudo maniacal doctrine of sola fide. Protestant doctrines are no theology at all. those contains no grounds for early christian history.
@Godnogods Funny how the Eastern Orthodox accept more books than Roman Catholics, yet they too reject the doctrine of Purgatory. You might want to consider whose channel and video you're commenting on before you start lambasting your Protestant Christian brethren.
@ElasticGiraffe see no uploads on who you are but you're right. You are a protestant. Nothing more. Eastern Orthodox is not infallible? Where do we Roman Catholics received such authority? Any little pebble like your pastors, should not be given the keys of the kingdom of heaven. This is why Peter was in Rome and also passed down and esteemed among all the apostles . That is the fact the church is visible communion of saints through the mass. Who's sins they forgave they are forgiven cont
@ElasticGiraffe The Co-redemptive Doctrine (almost dogma) is only stating something obvious. Mary had free will. She was asked a yes or no question. Therefore, she was part in a linear fashion in part of saving mankind (but only through God). It does NOT mean that she had a equal part. It means only 'co' which really means 'with', not 'equal'. This is often a misunderstanding. Catholic theologians go on to state that had Mary said no, God would NOT have given mankind another chance.
@6630mcdo Like I said, I am perfectly okay with the "co-redemptrix" title as long as it isn't taken too far by those obsessively devoted to the mother of Jesus. The excuse for the dogmatization of Mary's immaculate conception was completely unbiblical, unapostolic, unpatristic, and based on obscenely bad--albeit popular and allegedly pious--reasoning. Orthodox think so; Protestants think so.
@ElasticGiraffe I see honoring Mary as a good thing. God would surely desire His mother to be honored, as you wish yours be. All truth is not in the bible. St. John writes not everything Jesus spoke was written down and could not be contain in all the books ever written. Some things were remember and used as tradition (not human tradition) but holy tradition.
@ElasticGiraffe If one believes God knew Mary would say yes and sees the responsibility given to her, one can only give reverence to her. God gave her something that He gave no one else in history, namely no original sin. If we could make our mothers perfect, we would. He could and He did. Papal infallibility is on faith and morals only. Do you think protestants would ever agree the pope to lead the Christian Church? If so, only if he was not given infallibility?
@6630mcdo Just one more thing about co-redemtrix--I do not believe God would not have given up on the whole of humanity just because a teenage girl wouldn't cooperate, but he also knew Mary would not refuse. As was the case with Esther, God would have raised up another woman to fill the role.
I think most Protestants prefer decentralized leadership, so they'd be more comfortable with the less authoritarian Eastern Orthodox model. Beyond infallibility the "Vicar of Christ" title would have to go.
@ElasticGiraffe Remember, God gave the choice to Eve and Adam! It seems unfair, but it was done. So, I believe it could be with Mary. Right, it is a grave sin to worship Mary, only God is worthy of worship.
@ElasticGiraffe St. Thomas Aquinas stated all truth comes from God. Some tend to think there are certain truth in science, math, religion, etc. Truth must never conflict regardless of the source. Of course, truth based on God cannot change; therefore, the dogmas of the Church cannot change if all truth comes from God. I hope all Christians unite one day. Anglicans are slowing uniting. Jews are suppose to realize Jesus was their Messiah during the last days - that's from Revelation.
@6630mcdo I believe Christians ought to honor Mary as well. Too many Protestants have "Mariophobia" on account of the Mariological excesses of Roman Catholicism, and they need to stop being so reactionary. One of the stumblingblocks which I image carries over from Scholasticism is that while Catholics strongly maintain a technical distinction between latria and hyperdulia, in practice the distinction is difficult to see. Not everything Jesus said was written in the NT, but neither are we in a...
@6630mcdo position to decree dogmas a thousand or two thousand years later which clearly was not apostolic teaching.
Apparitions are not uncommon (especially in Catholicism), and I don't doubt that people saw something--although some instances are highly dubious--but I don't believe it was the actual mother of Jesus.
I agree that there has been a lot of Christians departing from the most basic doctrines of the faith, but I find Vatican II's ecumenical spirit encouraging. Anglicans have always
@ElasticGiraffe Ever study Fatima? It appears to be true. The Catholic Church was very damaged from Second Vatican Council. So many are weak Catholic and lack knowledge, virtue, etc. It really has affected all Christians. There is a mass apostasy among many Christians such as denying reality of sin, hell, relative truth, all religions come from God, etc.
@6630mcdo been all over the board, from non-papal Catholics to Arminian centrists to anti-Catholic Calvinists. The EOC and OOC seem close to a merge, but I hope and pray it does not further alienate the Assyrian Church of the East, which is not exactly on good terms with the Cyril-loving Copts. I'd love to see the Methodists and Anglicans unite, but the sorry state of the Episcopal Church might make that problematic. John Wesley never broke off from Anglicanism and in fact said, "Schism is sin."
@ElasticGiraffe There are some things I do not understand on the Protestant view. One is the how to view the creation of the bible. The bible was approved in the Council of Hippo in 380 AD. The Church chose between 300+ possible gospels and books to place into the bible. How can the bible be infallible unless the Church is also infallible? The effect cannot be greater than the cause. Sure the gospels were infallible from God, but how were they gathered into one book? Please explain this to me.
@6630mcdo Evangelical Protestants believe the Bible is infallible because the authors were writing under the inspiration of the Spirit of God, not because it was "officially" approved by an infallible church hierarchy. I'm sure you know church councils have at times been overturned and old official doctrine condemned. The truth was maintained by the apostolic church, preserved by the post-apostolic church (cf. the canon lists of theologians like Origen), and then later officially recognized.
@ElasticGiraffe I agree the books were written through inspiration. But before the Bible was chosen from 300+ gospels and books in 380 AD, how would one know which books and gospels were infallible and which were not? There were no labels on the current gospels saying 'I'm infallible'. The Council of Hippo chose them.
The Catholic church teaches another gospel, not the gospel of Christ, and must be warned about by all bible believing Christians as commanded in scripture[Gal.1:8]
The works are a necessary consequence of living in grace. If you accept Jesus but don't follow your conversion with an apostolic duty emanating from the grace infused by the Holy Spirit, then you're not factually living in grace, you're living a fake grace. The signs of a true life in grace is your urge to perform apostolic works. So, it might sound shocking due to semantics, but salvation due to works is a valid doctrine ONLY if it comes as a sincere urge from the acceptance of Christ as savior
@dejesusluisx I agree that works will follow from true faith, but I think that to take that and say salvation is "due to works" is wrong. Romans 4:3-5 "What does Scripture say? 'Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.' Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness."
@acts541 I guess we are saying the same thing, is a semantics game. I wouldn't change the doctrine for just one simple reason: it may give the false impression that anyone can be saved just by saying: I believe in Jesus. That would only be the case if this person hadn't had the chance to live a normal life in grace. Is the grace received through the Lord what saves. Jesus was a message, the incarnated verb and a message is to be acted upon, to be lived. You can't live Jesus and not have works.
Only the work of Christ merits salvation ...the good works (holiness) that follow a believer is necessary but comes from regeneration or another words "the quickening of the Spirit" Ep 2:1 ( made alive)..Scripture ," the final authority, warns of doctrines that teach from the same principle that the jew was relying on Gal.5, (not kind of like, but exactly) the same thing as the Catholic church teaches concerning sacraments.
@nymphrenic Furthermore, the fathers are in complete disagreement with you that Christ gave the keys to Peter *alone*. You can't find one father who says that.
@TheFunkyTheist agreed, check out william websters book called "The church of rome at the bar of history" for quotes of the Fathers against romes doctrine
Which fathers, the Anglican/CoE fathers? Whom you've made your authority, of which they had no right to usurp for themselves?
Anyway, Peter's primacy was recognized by the *Catholic* Church fathers, and it takes all but a quick search to see that your assertion is false. But even if it weren't false, what do you suggest? We go off into the Anglican communion? Who made them an authority on anything? You did, and good luck finding a Church father that supports you on that.
@Jesrael1986M It is Peter who stuck up for Paul when people doubted Paul & twisted his letters, & he did this even though he was called out for hypocrisy by Paul. Peter isn't the lord/king or anything, he's the chief pastor whom Christ decided to build his church on, & charged him to feed his lambs even after Peter denied him 3 times. People can take issue w/his behavior, & participate, argue for their case, etc, but the authority of his office should be respected if they truly do trust Christ.
@nymphrenic Christ gave the keys to Peter indeed. However those keys were transmitted through Peter to the other apostles. Since Peter was no greater an apostle as the others, such as Paul, all the apostles had equal authority and power. The apostles at times disagreed with one another, yet they were able to still profess the same faith, gospel, and truth-- be cleansed with the same baptism-- and worship at the same alter on the Lord's day. I pray for ecumenical love. Christ will establish it!!
I find fault with Priests thinking they can absolve you of sin,when its pretty clear only Jesus can.Also the whole Mary as a Goddess,which is Paganism.
Also,not to bother people,but I have heard that the Vatican is the Beast the Anti-Christ will ride in on,note I said Vatican,not Catholicism itself,nor Catholics,unless some of you think your a building/organization....
@iwanttocrashmybike "Whatever u bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever u loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." There is nothing more profoundly satisfying & uplifting for a person burdened by grief, guilt or pain to confide or share that burden with someone they value. We call that Reconciliation. Whatever transgressions we perceive the church has committed over the millennia, it still survives in spite of them as Christ has promised.
@Prodigalfather1 Yeah,but you dont need some Ritual or Rites to share your feelings.Plus its like with the Lawyers:Civic Social Engineering,Jesus came to free us from all previous Religions.
So in effect they are(Vatican) denying Gods words.
Let's be clear the real enemy of Christ is militant atheism which gained new vigor and acceptance after 911. All religion has been universally tarred with the same brush reaked by militant Islamics. Lets also be clear that anyone can claim "God told me to do it" but that doesnt mean it's true. Hatred abounds on YT blogs but it can never come from God. Religion will NEVER be enforced on anyone. What is true, is the male ego & its need to dominate, control & manipulate the gullible.
While we may be Catholics or Protestants, let's not forget that we are Christians, and that we are all part of the body of Christ. As Paul warned time and time again, let's not let minor difference in doctrine divide this body, and let's not forget that our true master is Christ, not Peter, Luther, or anyone else.
What I don't like about Catholicism is that they removed the 2nd Commandment and there too much focus on the virgin Mary than on Jesus and even going as far as to say she is our mediator.
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? 24 Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?
As always, I love you Dr. Craig, but I was just wondering how on earth Protestants (who call themselves biblical) can possibly hope to maintain Sola Fide with these few verses.
James chapter two kinda makes "faith alone" unbiblical. This is coming from a Protestant. I take intercessory prayer and Mary veneration to be far more important.
God had 12(13?) tribes, all children of Abraham. Christ recognized 7 churches each with faults that needed to be over come. A tree has many branches but all branches are apart of the same trunk and same roots. The path is narrow, but could it be wide enough to see people on your left and right, if you happen to be in the center? I believe Christians can believe alot of different things, but as long as Christ is their foundation, He will do His work in them.
Dr. Criag is very respected apologist because he is reasonable ,and he knows the history of Christianity , he uses a lot of Saints works through the ages to defend Christianity in his debates . in fact I don't have problems with protestants like him at all , he can disagree with many of the church teachings , but agree on the basic things , the problem is with others who want to disagree , and don't want even to agree , those people are no different than the Taliban
I am a former Catholic, and I still love going to high mass. However, the confusion of some of the doctrines eventually drove me away...I felt uncompleted as a Christian in the Church. I remember telling my dear grandmother that I could talk to God without the help of the saints, and she recoiled.
As a Catholic, there was no regeneration for me. As a Protestant, Jesus renewed my spirit and made me a new creation, in His grace...not because I did anything but because He did everything!
Thx for the respectful segment. I disagree w/Craig on what divides us, he may think justification is it, but in my estimation it's authority when it comes to doctrine, and who has it and who doesn't.
Craig disagrees doctrinally with other sects in protestantism, true, but Craig's authority on what is doctrine and what isn't is just as authoritative as the protestant sects he disagrees with. I.E. Not authoritative.
Jesus gave the power of the keys to Peter, not Luther or Craig or anyone else.
I think neither Luther nor Craig justifies their own authority on their own abilities and/or knowledge, but by the Scriptures. I don't think the Man who proclaims the "Kingdom of God is not of this world" would give the key to this realm to yet another man, another worldly institution; that doesn't make sense, considering His views on moralistic religion and establishment. Thank's for your comment though, I understand the concern behind it.
Doesn't everyone w/an opinion. From Calvinists to atheists.
Christ built his Church on Peter & changed his name. God changing people's names has significance in the Bible.
Peter didn't use his own ability to determine gentiles can come into the church & to abrogate kosher laws, he received rev from God. Just like in Matt 16:16, Peter's God-given revelation on the truth of Jesus was right, whereas everyone else had only a worthless opinion.
John 10:27 "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me."
The only reliable access to Christ's voice is through the Scripture. Against them, all things should be tested (2 Tim 3:16-17). The Holy Spirit speaks through them more than any other means because the words therein have the power of Salvation (Rom 1:16).
As soon as we say, "It's the Bible and...", we open the door to anything (Magisterium, Tradition, Book of Mormon, Watch Tower, Spiritual experiences etc.)
Finally, no Catholic bashing! Yes. I can understand Dr. Craig's position on popular level understanding not being adequate but the evangelizing of the Church is being done as we speak! Check out Fr. Robert Barron at wordonfirevideo here on YouTube.
Well, I'm surprised to see WLC's research on the RC faith isn't as thorough as his apologetics for God's existence. It would be interesting to know what he thinks about Marian apparitions, particularly Fatima and the miracle of the sun.
Is the first time that Dr Craig disappoints me with their point of view, I think on the issue of Catholicism Dr. Craig is a neophyte. It is a great philosopher and I'm very surprised that Dr Craig does not know the Catholic doctrine, as we Christians, in the Catholic Church there is no possibility of salvation. I do not know if one view is philosophical, because theological. It is not. Although the Catholic Church calling itself Christian, has no true faith.
I think the catholic church and its corrupt past is what makes people turn away from it, also because its thought that the vatican is new babylon from the book of revelations, and that in theory all the popes are the antichrist waiting for their chance to destroy the world.
Wow, lots of discussion on this topic. I hope we can all agree to respectfully disagree and not use our denominational differences to further divide us. As Craig said, we are all Christians, and while I'm not a Catholic myself, I stand side by side with them united in our commitment to theism and against atheism. Plus, Catholics make great Biblical scholars :) (sorry I just had to add that as I'm a huge fan of the rigorous scholarship so many Catholics have produced).
Remember, Catholics worship the Lord in the way that he said he wanted to be worshipped; by accepting his flesh and blood into themselves in holy communion; a process that -involves- the lighting of candles, but those candles are not a method of worship.
The candles represent -prayer intentions,- which according to Catholic doctrine, are much purer and more likely to produce fruit when delivered by one of the saints; especially the blessed mother. Thus, many candles does not equal worship.
mytruepower2 1 week ago
The child needs to act properly in order to receive that gift, not because the ice cream is dependant on the child's good behavior, but because it will reward him only if he behaves well. If he receives the ice cream after having behaved badly, it will only teach him licentiousness, and God, being infinitely-good, could never do that.
On the subject of Mary, I think that a lot is made of this, mainly because, to the Catholic, worship is a very different thing that it is to a protestant.
mytruepower2 1 week ago
I think he's absolutely right that the Church needs to be re-evangelized, and a standard of proper Catholic belief restored. He's also right that reading the bible can only lead to good outcomes.
On the subject of justification, however, he hasn't quite grasped the full distinctions here. Justification requires our actions, but that does not mean that we "earn" it in any way, in the same way that a child doesn't "earn" Christmas gifts just by avoiding time-outs.
mytruepower2 1 week ago
So in that respect he is right, we do need evangelization. But all of Christianity, myself fully as well, need to be reformed to reflect Christ's agape love to all!!
Ndftblwannabe1 2 weeks ago
His comments on Mary are spot on. The doctrine of Mariology is that she is to be honored, but is not divine in herself. But he is right that many of us Catholics take it to far, but I believe only because they are not taught. In the end, all peoples will see how much Jesus honors His own mother. As for evangelizing the CC...in a sense surely it is true. I am 23 and have been Catholic my whole life, but only at 22 came to a real meaningful relationship with Jesus my Lord. So in that respect, he
Ndftblwannabe1 2 weeks ago 2
I am very happy with this video. I am Catholic and very much love Craig's work, so I am happy this wasn't a bash-fest, which is so common. Though I am not sure about his justification knowledge of the CC. I have always been taught that it is justification by faith in Christ alone, which in turn that faith and love for Christ produces works, both of charity and in power through the Spirit. You may say that's word play, but I think if pondered it would be much in line with Protestant beliefs....u
Ndftblwannabe1 2 weeks ago
Always admired Craig's graciousness.Wonderful Christian defender.
NilDesperandum777 3 weeks ago
I'll give this video some credit as it did not come across as crass or anti-Catholic. It even has some good points that there are some Catholics who take it too far with Mary. But those are very few. Videos like this one are even more dangerous for Catholics who don't know their faith well enough as these guys come across as a voice of reason. The hardline anti-Catholics are easily recognized and dismissed as such.
truthdoesnotchange66 4 weeks ago
From the first generation christians and before Martin Luther. The christians were united under one church The Roman Catholic Church. that's 1500 years united under one banner. The separation though painful is necessary for the growth of the Roman Catholic Church as well. Up until now we are still a Church in progress. I know that one day we all will be under one banner again. As a famous cartoon line "Till all are one!"
archangelcats 1 month ago
@archangelcats
Dude, enough. I'm so tired of Roman Catholics merely assuming that their church was the first church like it's not debatable or something. Take that arrogance elsewhere.
AgApE010 1 month ago
@AgApE010
dear brethren. then tell me a what was ahead of the roman catholic church? I would like to hear your arguments and present you case. It's not arrogance to think the Catholic church is the first. And why do you think of me arrogant? that is a judgement on your part. Do not judge unless you want to be judged. And kindly read the rest of my responses. like in calling for unity on all banners, and how our faith respects each other...is that arrogance? May God bless you
archangelcats 1 month ago
@archangelcats
Firstly, we need to distinguish between catholic Church and Roman Catholicism.
Secondly, early writers like Clement of Rome and Augustine taught different than the modern RCC does. Clement taught sola fide, Augustine taught double predestination; both of these are considered anathema by the Council of Trent.
Thirdly, there is no evidence of a monarchical Roman bishop in the early days of the Church. Scholars note the office of Pope didn't arrive until much later.
AgApE010 1 month ago
@AgApE010
before i answer any of your argument can you answer me this...
so where does my arrogance take place? so why say i'm arrogant?
archangelcats 1 month ago
Comment removed
AgApE010 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@archangelcats
The arrogance is in the mere assumption that your church is the first Church and that all other churches are only pieces that broke away from it. This is arrogance. And I see it among many Roman Catholics who take it as granted that their church is the first church as if there aren't significant amounts of historical facts to the contrary.
AgApE010 1 month ago
@AgApE010 I think you mean Catholic Church ...You would then have to reconcile -- for example -- The Greek Orthodox Church's recognition of the Roman Patriarch's claim to Primus Inter Pares as well as Constantinople. It's important to note, that the primacy of Rome is contingent upon another primacy and then and only then because of the words of Christ interpreted unanimously as they were by the four patriarchs. Are you familiar with the term "Primus Inter Pares" ?
NilDesperandum777 3 weeks ago
@NilDesperandum777
I try to distinguish the term "catholic" (which the early Fathers used to mean "universal") from "Catholic," as in "Roman Catholic." The reason is that because RCs will often point to a quote from Ignatius of Antioch, for instance, in which he speaks of the "Catholic Church" and say "See? Ignatius says 'Catholic' and we're called 'Catholic' so this means us. Our church existed in Ignatius' day!"
AgApE010 3 weeks ago
@AgApE010 Oh, I'm entirely familiar with the definition and certainly it's justified supporting text from John 17:21 where the concept of "all" and "one" as a unified term was felt best expressed from the Gr. "katholikos" used by Ignatius in 110 as in he katholike ekklesia. is entirely correct as a reasonable frame of reference. Even a Protestant theologian, Kattenbusch interprets it's use to mean "one and only". St. Cyril (c.374) made note of the importance to this distinction as well
NilDesperandum777 3 weeks ago
@AgApE010 I just thought you implied "small 'c' " as opposed to "big 'C' " Catholic to distinguish the Church from pre/post Luther. The Catholic Church properly interpreted includes the Eastern communions. I think many reference "c" distinctions to differentiate between the "spiritual" and "institutional" Church mistakenly defined as solely the Roman communion while ignoring the other 22 communions. Hopefully one day soon, John 17:21 becomes reality. This is the truest Catholic wish.
NilDesperandum777 3 weeks ago
@NilDesperandum777
I understand that there are many Rites. I simply wasn't concerned with the details in the context of my previous discussion to which you now reply. But I also think the distinctions between catholic and Catholic(ism) are much more than spiritual and institutional. The former is an adjective, the latter a noun.
AgApE010 3 weeks ago
@NilDesperandum777
Rejoice! John 17:21 is a reality this very day! Though people point out the various denominations in Protestantism, they often fail to acknowledge the agreement on the essential doctrines of the Faith. I have no problem extending a hand of fellowship to the Lutheran, Baptist, Anglican, or Presbyterian. Catholicism, on the other hand, ousts anyone who disagrees on nearly any matter (case in point, the Sedevacantists). This begs the question: who is really the schismatic here?
AgApE010 3 weeks ago
You know what, I compare the discussions with Catholic and Protestant believers. We do respect (most of the time) our beliefs. Unlike the new Atheists who (in many times) often uses profane language and derogatory words against us. Compare how we discuss with each other and them, see and notice the difference.
archangelcats 1 month ago
Pope John Paul II says that we must be united, all christians, all denominations who calls Jesus Christ as the son of God. Against the adversity. That includes the New Atheist movement. We may not completely agree on all fronts. But even Ravi Zacharias says "In unity doesn't mean uniformity." We are brethren. Just like in a family like every brother and sister we argue and sometimes fight over things. But at the end we pick each other up and help each other.
archangelcats 1 month ago
I'm sure Jesus is in the Catholic Church, concerning how the Eucharist has become flesh. but who am I to say that a protestant can't go to heaven? Peace be with my brothers in Jesus.
kubrox91 1 month ago
It's not earning salvation as much as demonstrating faith. Jesus said be doers not just hearers. He said He would separate the sheep and goats - those who did His will.
cmottes 2 months ago
Good works are the fruit, not the root!
WayTruthLifeLove 2 months ago 5
@WayTruthLifeLove Try explaining that to Lordship Salvationists...
MrUrosSrb 2 months ago
@MrUrosSrb Brate, vjera bez djela je ništa, kao i djela bez vjere. Za spasenje ti trebaju i vjera i djela. Nije dovoljno samo vjerovati, treba životom i djelima slaviti Gospodina jer to je jedino pravedno.
sototajeri 1 month ago
As a Catholic, when it comes to faith and works, I think they are in union. G. K. Chesterton wrote that going to Church and professing your faith makes you as much a christian as standing in your garage makes you a car. And to say that it is solely grace is idiotic, because even if you're a scrooge like figure, still practicing your evil deeds and profess your love of Jesus... well, you get my logic.
kubrox91 2 months ago
Comment removed
kubrox91 2 months ago
As an Orthodox, I think Craig is right about justification. We affirm that our works are necessary for our salvation, since they constitute an aspect of our faith ("Faith without works is dead" James 2:26.), but they certainly don't merit our salvation! Our salvation comes as a gift from Almighty God who desires the salvation of all. We have our part to do, however. As Augustine put it, the God who created you without your consent will not save you without your consent.
TheOrthodoxSteven 2 months ago
@TheOrthodoxSteven what do you have to say about mary aspect of the video?
MrRichardwinkel 2 months ago
@MrRichardwinkel I would first want to draw some distinctions between the Catholic and Orthodox approaches to Mary. While we Orthodox do indeed venerate and honor Mary as Theotokos, or Mother of God, and seek her intercessions, we reject any attempt to make her a co-redeemer with Christ, as some Catholic zealots have done, and we also reject the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Our Lady was a human being, born under the fall like any other person. (Cont...)
TheOrthodoxSteven 2 months ago
@MrRichardwinkel As for Dr. Craig's remarks, I think he is right in some things, but I also think he misunderstands the tradition of Marian devotion within the historical church. The veneration of the Mother of God, as with all the saints, is not something apart from our worship of Christ our Lord. Coming to Mary (or any saint) and seeking her intercessions only brings us closer to the Lord. She does not stand between us, but rather seeks to bring us closer to Him.
TheOrthodoxSteven 2 months ago
@TheOrthodoxSteven Thats wrong i think.Because i myself was baptised in orthodox church and stuff but,Faith Alone does all the job, not works.Just believe simple gospel that Jesus died for your sin and was buried and rose again for you.Believe in Jesus Christ for the free gift of eternal life.All there is to it.
MrUrosSrb 2 months ago
@MrUrosSrb No, sorry. The Protestant doctrine of "sola fide" (or faith alone) is not only heretical but is contradicted by Scripture itself. In fact, the only place in the Scriptures where the phrase "faith alone" appears is in the Epistle of James, where it says, "Ye see then how that man is justified by works and NOT FAITH ALONE. For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead." -James 2:24, 26.
Faith and works are an integral unity, like body and spirit.
TheOrthodoxSteven 2 months ago 2
@TheOrthodoxSteven The word save occurs five times in James (1.21; 2:14; 4:12; 5:15, 20). In none of the four uses outside of our passage is eternal salvation in view. In his epistle James uses the word save to refer to deliverance from the death-dealing consequences of sin (cf. 1:15,21). A believer whose faith is not accompanied by works will not be saved from the consequences of his sinful behavior. He or she will experience difficulties which God sends.
MrUrosSrb 2 months ago
We need to find a least common multiple and get back to one great community. Not against atheism, not against someone, but for our very faith. A roman catholic.
DenkaSaeba3 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
beware youtube user megazordman2 who been posts deragatory comments about christianity on videos. Please go to his channel youtube dot com slash megazordman2 and report him 100 times a day if necassary until youtube bans him. Stop letting these people get away with it.
RethinkingAmerica 2 months ago
Whatever your denomination, put it aside and thank the Lord that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ, for we need to stand together to confront a more disturbing problem for Christians in western society, the New Atheist movement.
patricktuorto 2 months ago 4
@patricktuorto
Amen to that
FeignofCordor 2 months ago
@patricktuorto Agreed Brother.
pmfrankcabrera 2 weeks ago
Dr. Craig's Catholic friends have actually understood the Council of Trent statement well. Better even than Dr. Craig himself. We are not justified by good works by any means, but by the Grace of God. Good works are necessary for salvation (as Jesus puts so eloquently himself), but there is no talk of earning salvation.
Lakester91 2 months ago
@Lakester91 would be interested to know how you reconcile the two claims "Good works are necessary for salvation" and "there is no talk of earning salvation". Is it not as Paul said? "For by grace (unmerited favour) are ye saved by faith (pistis) and that not of yourselves. It is a gift of God, not of works lest any man should boast."?
CJNecros 2 months ago
Thanks for some interesting thoughts. I tend to be one of those Protestants who think that RCs are hopelessly deceived and not part of the Body of Christ. They perfectly conform to all the criteria for being a cult. But I also have some Catholic friends who I consider to be Christians. I just don't understand why they don't leave:-)
The justification point is very fitting - also exactly fits SDA teaching on jusification.
athb4hu 2 months ago
@athb4hu hopelessly deceived??? How? Cult??? Why would u consider Catholicism a cult and not Protestantism?
spireman50 2 months ago
I like Dr. Craig, but the last bit of this discussion (about Mary) is very disappointing. True devotion to Mary, properly understood, can never distract from Jesus. Everything about Mary points to her son. In all things, Mary says that God's will should be done. There is no competition between Mary and Jesus, but devotion to Mary is just another dimension of a complete relationship with her Son.
Dauphin35 2 months ago
@Dauphin35 I agree entirely. I feel the role of Mary within Catholicism has been misrepresented by Dr Craig. I too, like Dr. Craig, but felt somewhat disappointed that he chose to opinionate on what we as Catholics believe, rather than to stick to his original stance of accepting the variances between the different denominations of Christianity.
spireman50 2 months ago
Whoever denies them denies Christ and the one sent Christ. They act as person Christi. Where's the anti Christ ~ Joseph Smith's, Martin Luther SEVERS the Christendom and continues to create fallible protestant denominations. OK, all you did was create doctrines in the 16th century and broke away from union with the bishops and start your own religions.
Godnogods1 2 months ago
I have great respect for Dr. Craig. He is brilliant. I am Catholic. There are many problems I have found with Catholicism. One for example, prohibiting divorced people from accepting communion. In my opinion, the Catholic Church needs God's help. In conclusion, Dr. Craig is right. Let's focus on uniting us as Christians!
vtorrieri 3 months ago
To any Protestants watching this video the only advice I can give as a Catholic is that they go and read about the early Church & and in particular the various writings & epistles from the first centuries that exist (Clement, Ignatious of Antioch etc.) and see if the early Church believed in Protestant doctrines such as Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, the Eucharist as just a symbol, the Church as a merely spiritual entity etc. NewAdvent - org - fathers
Millingtorres 3 months ago
Our justification is not forensic, but truly ontological. For there to be a real relationship and partaking of God's nature, our acts must be truly our own while still acknowledge that they are grounded entirely in the grace of God. This is absolutely essential, as the idea of imputed grace and forensic justification is anathema to the Biblical doctrine of salvation and theosis.
Breearg 3 months ago
As such, in view of the person regenerated in God's grace, we view our good works as being merited both condignly and congruently. Both as our own acts and the act of the Holy Spirit in us, non-competitively. This is necessarily in view of the doctrine of theosis, which is to say, in the words of St. Peter, that we become "partakers of the divine nature."
Breearg 3 months ago
God is not a being and therefore he is non-competitive with secondary causes. As such, as a result of our regeneration and infusion with grace, our response to God's grace--which is itself only possible through grace--is both truly our own and comes about through the Holy Spirit operative through us. (This is something like the concept of double agency elaborated by the Anglican theologian of the last century, Austin Farrer.)
Breearg 3 months ago
This issue of sola fide and the merit of works according to the Council of Trent relies on a distinction between condign and congruent merit. Essentially, the Catholic view is that, as a result of the fact that we believe in the infusion of grace (as opposed to the IMPUTATION of grace) we believe that the human person has truly been regenerated ontologically by the operation of the Holy Spirit...
Breearg 3 months ago
~ symbolic Eucharist: all of those things only later done by those mart luterans. You follow "cheap grace", sola fide etc. very non biblical
Godnogods1 3 months ago
Never mind, found it - it's a Catholic chant of "Agnus Dei". YouTube search "Agnus Dei Catholic", it's the first song - in case you're interested!
EdificationNetwork 3 months ago
What song is that in the background in the beginning?
ByWayofBeautyDotCom 3 months ago
1 Corinthians 1:10-12
10I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. 11My brothers, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephasa”; still another, “I follow Christ.”
FeignofCordor 3 months ago
I think Dr Lane Craig (Protestant philosopher) would have an awesome over-lunch-debate with Dr. Peter Kreeft (Catholic Philosopher).
TheHardout2005 3 months ago
I think the Catholic Church cannot be wrong: Jesus said to Peter that, paraphrasing, 'You are my rock, and on this rock I build my Church, ... and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Peter then, was the first pope of the Catholic (at this stage just Christian) Church. Thus if the Council of Trent was wrong, then the gates of hell have prevailed against the Church, and Jesus was a liar.
Of course, no one would call Him a liar, but Protestants in this way seem to do it indirectly...
TheHardout2005 3 months ago
~ Christ, we can guarantee THAT is unfailing. Infallible means to not fail. Doesn't everything is perfect.
Godnogods1 3 months ago
@iwanttocrashmybike "VATICAN is a building,and organization with a long history of abuse" ~ I'd like to see a valuable site or sources for this judgment preferably non anti catholic. Also did we say that the Church is perfect? Look at martlut's vid on protestant pedophile cover ups. BTW infallibility is never to be confused with the pope being perfect on EVERYTHING. This is why pope john paul II goes to confession 1 a week. But when the pope raises the authority given to him from the succession~
Godnogods1 3 months ago
C.S.Lewis covered this topic in Mere Christianity, Dr. W.L. Craig does a good job re-presenting this basic core=-)
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
@311veritas I don't think the Scriptures teach apostolic succession. Judas was replaced because he defected. There is no mention of James Zebedee being replaced when Herod killed him. The Twelve(plus Paul) played a unique role in laying the foundations of the Church. That role has ceased to exist. Nobody is writing Scripture today.
Jesrael1986M 3 months ago
@311veritas So,the Vatican calling for a "One World Money System" isnt a omen?
Nor the Pope to pedo activity as it relates to Alester Crowelys teachings not even the concord between the Vatican and the Nazi Brownshirts or the Masonic symbology ...None of that to screams out to you? btw le goddess thing come from Ancient Pagan traditions,which ironically are interconnected as to Judaisms(Christianity)past as well also btw I suggest checking out my second boxed channel(Catholic Physicist)
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
@iwanttocrashmybike The Vatican isn't calling for a one world money system. A department of the Vatican merely published a policy paper suggesting it.
Ohyewildthong 3 months ago
@Ohyewildthong Hitler didnt kill anyone he just said some words
Phifft
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
@iwanttocrashmybike Poor analogy, come up with a better one please.
Ohyewildthong 3 months ago
@Ohyewildthong Your right,he didnt say anything,only the department of his vocal cords did,silly me XD
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
@iwanttocrashmybike Except the Pope didn't exercise his vocal cords. This was a random Vatican department publishing a policy paper that was under no orders from the Pope. Learn how the Vatican works please.
Ohyewildthong 3 months ago
@Ohyewildthong Right and President Obama is in now way responsible for Troops still being in Irag,sure;-)
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
@iwanttocrashmybike I have a question for you. What do you understand about this Vatican policy paper and how the Vatican works?
Ohyewildthong 3 months ago
@Ohyewildthong /watch?v=PzIGDW6zIHM
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
@iwanttocrashmybike Wrong. It's like a member of the Republican party (but not its leadership) creating a potential policy document. It means NOTHING.
Ohyewildthong 3 months ago
@Ohyewildthong So this OWO being a prophecy from the bible itself(from which all functions come from) means NOTHING either,alright so then lets abolish all variations of Christianity and be done with it;-)
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
@iwanttocrashmybike No, it doesn't. The true form of Christianity, as History, theology and everything else conclude to is clearly Catholicism.
Ohyewildthong 3 months ago
@Ohyewildthong XD,now I know your full of it,no one in their right mind would make such a claim when talking about the VATICAN the VATICAN is a building,and organization with a long history of abuse,documented left and right,it NOT only doesn't represent CATHOLICISM ,its basically Lucifers seat of power on Earth,bu by all means supply with your proofs of claim;-)
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
One question to any Biblical scholars out their (or anyone who's read the bible enough to answer my question): Call me crazy but I don't really see any Bible based need for a pope (with all due respect of course). Is their anything in the Bible that suggests that there is such a need? If so where in the bible can I find it?
lockdown260 3 months ago
Even if the Eastern/Oriental/Assyrian Orthodox and the Protestant denominations came to an agreement with Rome on all other points of doctrine (the sacraments, justification, Mariology, etc.), the one dogma which would kill any hope of reunion is papal infallibility. No church would budge on it.
That being said, I believe the justification issue is a matter of semantics, whether one goes with the Pauline or the Jacobean definition of faith. The Marian dogmas are much more problematic for me.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago 8
@ElasticGiraffe "The Marian dogmas are much more problematic for me." - As says: Coredemtrix ~ I agree. So we have 2 different terms: 1 Coredeemer, 2 Coredemtrix. We call Mary coredemtrix as she participated the MOST role than any creature to Gods redemption process. 2nd is The concept of Immaculate Conception. Mary needs a savior as she was saved BEFORE sin = sinless.
On justification, Catholic's easy formula:
Justification by grace alone THROUGH faith plus work.
Godnogods1 3 months ago
@Godnogods1 I can accept co-redemptrix (which has not "yet" been dogmatized) in the sense that Mary facilitated the Redemption in the same way Eve facilitated the Fall. I do not accept the co-mediatrix title because Jesus is the singular mediator between God and Man; he is not so unapproachable that we need the special mediation of his mother, however gentle she was. Neither Eastern Orthodox nor Protestant Christians affirm the unbiblical, unpatristic doctrine of Mary's Immaculate Conception.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@Godnogods1 I accept the necessity of works of love for living faith, but I do not accept the fundamental Roman Catholic premise (unknown to the Eastern churches, which see the nature of sin differently) that works are necessity as penance to make satisfaction for our post-baptism sins, or else we'll end up in Purgatory to pay for them later. I don't accept that we need Masses as propitiatory re-sacrifices of Jesus' body and blood to infuse us with grace to cover our guilt for post-baptism sins.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@Godnogods1 We are baptized with water and indwelled by the Spirit to enter the new covenant and become part of his body. No more feelings of guilt or need for satisfaction. We answer our universal human calling--as the images of God--by abiding in him, and we gradually conform to the divine likeness through the work of the Spirit within us. The church is a mystical union. Works of evil draw us away from him and shipwreck our faith, but works of love draw us closer to him and perfect our faith.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago 8
@ElasticGiraffe "No more feelings of guilt or need for satisfaction" so where in the Bible. Read (2 Samuel 12:13-14), (2 Maccabees 12:39-46). "The church is a mystical union." what are these people who has the most credential whose taught by the apostles themselves:
Ignatius of Antioch, Pauly Carpus, Clement of rome, they all say in their letters:
Here is the heirachy and here is the mass.
As Paul disagree with you:
"The church is the pillar and ground of truth."
Godnogods1 3 months ago
@Godnogods1 I'm not even going to look up those references. You cite a book of the Old Testament and an intertestamental, non-canonical book to debunk my understanding of the new Messianic covenant.
Pauly Carpus? You mean Polycarp? I'm not claiming institutional churches do not or should not exist, but the invisible church--the communion of saints in Christ's spiritual body and bride--is more fundamental than its visible shells, and Paul did not refer to a ecclesiastical hierarchy.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe spiritual communion is not to be interpreted as INVISIBLE. In fact it is joined through the current VISIBLE communion which happens in the mass every single hour. It actually proves this idea of the saints being saved in the old testament and the question against protestantism (non canonical non authoritative seculars) gous;
Go are they saved if you claim non biblically that the suffering is only present in one time.
Not to mention symbolic baptism, eternal security, cont
Godnogods1 3 months ago
@Godnogods1 SPIRITUAL communion is INVISIBLE, but it is edified through and manifests in the worship and practices of the institutional churches. I have no idea how your idea of the mystical church as conceptually indistinguishable from the institutional church is supposed to validate the salvation of faithful Jews under the Old Covenant.
I don't believe baptism and the Eucharist are merely symbolic, nor do I affirm eternal security--the Calvinist doctrine of the "perseverance of the saints."
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe "No more feelings of guilt or need for satisfaction." again, read between lines:
2 Samuel 12:13-14 - David, though forgiven, is still punished for sin
Matthew 5:48 - be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect (perfection is to be strived for on earth)
1 Corinthians 3:10-16 - "if someone's work is burned ... the person will be saved, but only as through fire"
1 Peter 3:18-20 to 4:6 - Jesus preached to the spirits in prison.
purgatory all over the Bible. Where's cheap grace
Godnogods1 3 months ago
@Godnogods1 All over the Bible? >_> Most Catholics wouldn't even dare to make that claim. It is an unfortunate outgrowth of Augustinianism, a doctrine denied by Protestants and Jews AND the Eastern, Oriental, and Assyrian Orthodox Churches alike. Purgatory is exclusive to Roman theology. If "cheap grace" is the label you've come up with to deride all interpretations of grace that exclude Purgatory, then you need to read thinkers in other Christian traditions to broaden your theological horizons.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe why not? If protestants and all the other severing joseph smiths you say are the most valid, you also continue to sever the body of Christ and it's done already all because Martin luther removed those books that contained the purgatory in the Bible. He attempted to interpolate the word "alone" in romans to fit his pseudo maniacal doctrine of sola fide. Protestant doctrines are no theology at all. those contains no grounds for early christian history.
Godnogods1 3 months ago
@Godnogods Funny how the Eastern Orthodox accept more books than Roman Catholics, yet they too reject the doctrine of Purgatory. You might want to consider whose channel and video you're commenting on before you start lambasting your Protestant Christian brethren.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe see no uploads on who you are but you're right. You are a protestant. Nothing more. Eastern Orthodox is not infallible? Where do we Roman Catholics received such authority? Any little pebble like your pastors, should not be given the keys of the kingdom of heaven. This is why Peter was in Rome and also passed down and esteemed among all the apostles . That is the fact the church is visible communion of saints through the mass. Who's sins they forgave they are forgiven cont
Godnogods1 2 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe The Co-redemptive Doctrine (almost dogma) is only stating something obvious. Mary had free will. She was asked a yes or no question. Therefore, she was part in a linear fashion in part of saving mankind (but only through God). It does NOT mean that she had a equal part. It means only 'co' which really means 'with', not 'equal'. This is often a misunderstanding. Catholic theologians go on to state that had Mary said no, God would NOT have given mankind another chance.
6630mcdo 3 months ago
@6630mcdo Like I said, I am perfectly okay with the "co-redemptrix" title as long as it isn't taken too far by those obsessively devoted to the mother of Jesus. The excuse for the dogmatization of Mary's immaculate conception was completely unbiblical, unapostolic, unpatristic, and based on obscenely bad--albeit popular and allegedly pious--reasoning. Orthodox think so; Protestants think so.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe I see honoring Mary as a good thing. God would surely desire His mother to be honored, as you wish yours be. All truth is not in the bible. St. John writes not everything Jesus spoke was written down and could not be contain in all the books ever written. Some things were remember and used as tradition (not human tradition) but holy tradition.
6630mcdo 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe If one believes God knew Mary would say yes and sees the responsibility given to her, one can only give reverence to her. God gave her something that He gave no one else in history, namely no original sin. If we could make our mothers perfect, we would. He could and He did. Papal infallibility is on faith and morals only. Do you think protestants would ever agree the pope to lead the Christian Church? If so, only if he was not given infallibility?
6630mcdo 3 months ago
@6630mcdo Just one more thing about co-redemtrix--I do not believe God would not have given up on the whole of humanity just because a teenage girl wouldn't cooperate, but he also knew Mary would not refuse. As was the case with Esther, God would have raised up another woman to fill the role.
I think most Protestants prefer decentralized leadership, so they'd be more comfortable with the less authoritarian Eastern Orthodox model. Beyond infallibility the "Vicar of Christ" title would have to go.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe Remember, God gave the choice to Eve and Adam! It seems unfair, but it was done. So, I believe it could be with Mary. Right, it is a grave sin to worship Mary, only God is worthy of worship.
6630mcdo 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe St. Thomas Aquinas stated all truth comes from God. Some tend to think there are certain truth in science, math, religion, etc. Truth must never conflict regardless of the source. Of course, truth based on God cannot change; therefore, the dogmas of the Church cannot change if all truth comes from God. I hope all Christians unite one day. Anglicans are slowing uniting. Jews are suppose to realize Jesus was their Messiah during the last days - that's from Revelation.
6630mcdo 3 months ago
@6630mcdo I believe Christians ought to honor Mary as well. Too many Protestants have "Mariophobia" on account of the Mariological excesses of Roman Catholicism, and they need to stop being so reactionary. One of the stumblingblocks which I image carries over from Scholasticism is that while Catholics strongly maintain a technical distinction between latria and hyperdulia, in practice the distinction is difficult to see. Not everything Jesus said was written in the NT, but neither are we in a...
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@6630mcdo position to decree dogmas a thousand or two thousand years later which clearly was not apostolic teaching.
Apparitions are not uncommon (especially in Catholicism), and I don't doubt that people saw something--although some instances are highly dubious--but I don't believe it was the actual mother of Jesus.
I agree that there has been a lot of Christians departing from the most basic doctrines of the faith, but I find Vatican II's ecumenical spirit encouraging. Anglicans have always
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe Ever study Fatima? It appears to be true. The Catholic Church was very damaged from Second Vatican Council. So many are weak Catholic and lack knowledge, virtue, etc. It really has affected all Christians. There is a mass apostasy among many Christians such as denying reality of sin, hell, relative truth, all religions come from God, etc.
6630mcdo 3 months ago
@6630mcdo been all over the board, from non-papal Catholics to Arminian centrists to anti-Catholic Calvinists. The EOC and OOC seem close to a merge, but I hope and pray it does not further alienate the Assyrian Church of the East, which is not exactly on good terms with the Cyril-loving Copts. I'd love to see the Methodists and Anglicans unite, but the sorry state of the Episcopal Church might make that problematic. John Wesley never broke off from Anglicanism and in fact said, "Schism is sin."
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe There are some things I do not understand on the Protestant view. One is the how to view the creation of the bible. The bible was approved in the Council of Hippo in 380 AD. The Church chose between 300+ possible gospels and books to place into the bible. How can the bible be infallible unless the Church is also infallible? The effect cannot be greater than the cause. Sure the gospels were infallible from God, but how were they gathered into one book? Please explain this to me.
6630mcdo 3 months ago
@6630mcdo Evangelical Protestants believe the Bible is infallible because the authors were writing under the inspiration of the Spirit of God, not because it was "officially" approved by an infallible church hierarchy. I'm sure you know church councils have at times been overturned and old official doctrine condemned. The truth was maintained by the apostolic church, preserved by the post-apostolic church (cf. the canon lists of theologians like Origen), and then later officially recognized.
ElasticGiraffe 3 months ago
@ElasticGiraffe I agree the books were written through inspiration. But before the Bible was chosen from 300+ gospels and books in 380 AD, how would one know which books and gospels were infallible and which were not? There were no labels on the current gospels saying 'I'm infallible'. The Council of Hippo chose them.
6630mcdo 3 months ago
The Catholic church teaches another gospel, not the gospel of Christ, and must be warned about by all bible believing Christians as commanded in scripture[Gal.1:8]
kovenant7 3 months ago
The works are a necessary consequence of living in grace. If you accept Jesus but don't follow your conversion with an apostolic duty emanating from the grace infused by the Holy Spirit, then you're not factually living in grace, you're living a fake grace. The signs of a true life in grace is your urge to perform apostolic works. So, it might sound shocking due to semantics, but salvation due to works is a valid doctrine ONLY if it comes as a sincere urge from the acceptance of Christ as savior
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx I agree that works will follow from true faith, but I think that to take that and say salvation is "due to works" is wrong. Romans 4:3-5 "What does Scripture say? 'Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.' Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness."
acts541 3 months ago
Comment removed
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@acts541 I guess we are saying the same thing, is a semantics game. I wouldn't change the doctrine for just one simple reason: it may give the false impression that anyone can be saved just by saying: I believe in Jesus. That would only be the case if this person hadn't had the chance to live a normal life in grace. Is the grace received through the Lord what saves. Jesus was a message, the incarnated verb and a message is to be acted upon, to be lived. You can't live Jesus and not have works.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
Faith without works is dead.
MrItchyElbow 3 months ago
As a Catholic, I appreciate this.
11Angst11 3 months ago
Only the work of Christ merits salvation ...the good works (holiness) that follow a believer is necessary but comes from regeneration or another words "the quickening of the Spirit" Ep 2:1 ( made alive)..Scripture ," the final authority, warns of doctrines that teach from the same principle that the jew was relying on Gal.5, (not kind of like, but exactly) the same thing as the Catholic church teaches concerning sacraments.
kovenant7 3 months ago
"faith without good works is dead" Epistle of St. James.
Ohyewildthong 3 months ago
Uh, what about Orthodoxy?
tetrahydroscope 3 months ago
@nymphrenic Furthermore, the fathers are in complete disagreement with you that Christ gave the keys to Peter *alone*. You can't find one father who says that.
TheFunkyTheist 3 months ago
@TheFunkyTheist agreed, check out william websters book called "The church of rome at the bar of history" for quotes of the Fathers against romes doctrine
Onetruthrgv 3 months ago
@TheFunkyTheist
Which fathers, the Anglican/CoE fathers? Whom you've made your authority, of which they had no right to usurp for themselves?
Anyway, Peter's primacy was recognized by the *Catholic* Church fathers, and it takes all but a quick search to see that your assertion is false. But even if it weren't false, what do you suggest? We go off into the Anglican communion? Who made them an authority on anything? You did, and good luck finding a Church father that supports you on that.
nymphrenic 3 months ago
@nymphrenic It's interesting to see how Paul recognizes Peter's primacy in Galatians 2:11.
Jesrael1986M 3 months ago
@Jesrael1986M It is Peter who stuck up for Paul when people doubted Paul & twisted his letters, & he did this even though he was called out for hypocrisy by Paul. Peter isn't the lord/king or anything, he's the chief pastor whom Christ decided to build his church on, & charged him to feed his lambs even after Peter denied him 3 times. People can take issue w/his behavior, & participate, argue for their case, etc, but the authority of his office should be respected if they truly do trust Christ.
nymphrenic 3 months ago
@nymphrenic Unlike you, I don't make fallible men my authority.
TheFunkyTheist 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nymphrenic Christ gave the keys to Peter indeed. However those keys were transmitted through Peter to the other apostles. Since Peter was no greater an apostle as the others, such as Paul, all the apostles had equal authority and power. The apostles at times disagreed with one another, yet they were able to still profess the same faith, gospel, and truth-- be cleansed with the same baptism-- and worship at the same alter on the Lord's day. I pray for ecumenical love. Christ will establish it!!
TheFunkyTheist 3 months ago
Comment removed
TheFunkyTheist 3 months ago
Comment removed
TheFunkyTheist 3 months ago
I find fault with Priests thinking they can absolve you of sin,when its pretty clear only Jesus can.Also the whole Mary as a Goddess,which is Paganism.
Also,not to bother people,but I have heard that the Vatican is the Beast the Anti-Christ will ride in on,note I said Vatican,not Catholicism itself,nor Catholics,unless some of you think your a building/organization....
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
@iwanttocrashmybike "Whatever u bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever u loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." There is nothing more profoundly satisfying & uplifting for a person burdened by grief, guilt or pain to confide or share that burden with someone they value. We call that Reconciliation. Whatever transgressions we perceive the church has committed over the millennia, it still survives in spite of them as Christ has promised.
Prodigalfather1 3 months ago
@Prodigalfather1 Yeah,but you dont need some Ritual or Rites to share your feelings.Plus its like with the Lawyers:Civic Social Engineering,Jesus came to free us from all previous Religions.
So in effect they are(Vatican) denying Gods words.
iwanttocrashmybike 3 months ago
Let's be clear the real enemy of Christ is militant atheism which gained new vigor and acceptance after 911. All religion has been universally tarred with the same brush reaked by militant Islamics. Lets also be clear that anyone can claim "God told me to do it" but that doesnt mean it's true. Hatred abounds on YT blogs but it can never come from God. Religion will NEVER be enforced on anyone. What is true, is the male ego & its need to dominate, control & manipulate the gullible.
Prodigalfather1 3 months ago
While we may be Catholics or Protestants, let's not forget that we are Christians, and that we are all part of the body of Christ. As Paul warned time and time again, let's not let minor difference in doctrine divide this body, and let's not forget that our true master is Christ, not Peter, Luther, or anyone else.
THEEVANTHETOON 3 months ago
What I don't like about Catholicism is that they removed the 2nd Commandment and there too much focus on the virgin Mary than on Jesus and even going as far as to say she is our mediator.
jonathanfater 3 months ago
James 2:
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? 24 Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?
As always, I love you Dr. Craig, but I was just wondering how on earth Protestants (who call themselves biblical) can possibly hope to maintain Sola Fide with these few verses.
D3uscaritas3st 3 months ago
James chapter two kinda makes "faith alone" unbiblical. This is coming from a Protestant. I take intercessory prayer and Mary veneration to be far more important.
TeaPartier22 3 months ago
Im glad craig spoke on this subject you could tell he wanted to say more but he didn't want to give the catholics and ass wooping
Taurion4467 3 months ago
God had 12(13?) tribes, all children of Abraham. Christ recognized 7 churches each with faults that needed to be over come. A tree has many branches but all branches are apart of the same trunk and same roots. The path is narrow, but could it be wide enough to see people on your left and right, if you happen to be in the center? I believe Christians can believe alot of different things, but as long as Christ is their foundation, He will do His work in them.
kvash3154 3 months ago
Dr. Criag is very respected apologist because he is reasonable ,and he knows the history of Christianity , he uses a lot of Saints works through the ages to defend Christianity in his debates . in fact I don't have problems with protestants like him at all , he can disagree with many of the church teachings , but agree on the basic things , the problem is with others who want to disagree , and don't want even to agree , those people are no different than the Taliban
newtochrist 3 months ago
A bit of a misrepresentation of the doctrine of justification but otherwise pretty good.
RobertPotter9 3 months ago
Excellent
TyGreenTLB 3 months ago
I am a former Catholic, and I still love going to high mass. However, the confusion of some of the doctrines eventually drove me away...I felt uncompleted as a Christian in the Church. I remember telling my dear grandmother that I could talk to God without the help of the saints, and she recoiled.
As a Catholic, there was no regeneration for me. As a Protestant, Jesus renewed my spirit and made me a new creation, in His grace...not because I did anything but because He did everything!
stronzo5785 3 months ago
Thx for the respectful segment. I disagree w/Craig on what divides us, he may think justification is it, but in my estimation it's authority when it comes to doctrine, and who has it and who doesn't.
Craig disagrees doctrinally with other sects in protestantism, true, but Craig's authority on what is doctrine and what isn't is just as authoritative as the protestant sects he disagrees with. I.E. Not authoritative.
Jesus gave the power of the keys to Peter, not Luther or Craig or anyone else.
nymphrenic 3 months ago 18
@nymphrenic
I think neither Luther nor Craig justifies their own authority on their own abilities and/or knowledge, but by the Scriptures. I don't think the Man who proclaims the "Kingdom of God is not of this world" would give the key to this realm to yet another man, another worldly institution; that doesn't make sense, considering His views on moralistic religion and establishment. Thank's for your comment though, I understand the concern behind it.
DanieruShidebuteru 3 months ago
@DanieruShidebuteru
Doesn't everyone w/an opinion. From Calvinists to atheists.
Christ built his Church on Peter & changed his name. God changing people's names has significance in the Bible.
Peter didn't use his own ability to determine gentiles can come into the church & to abrogate kosher laws, he received rev from God. Just like in Matt 16:16, Peter's God-given revelation on the truth of Jesus was right, whereas everyone else had only a worthless opinion.
nymphrenic 3 months ago
@DanieruShidebuteru "I understand the concern behind it."
I appreciate that, I really do.
nymphrenic 3 months ago
I'm Catholic and a big fan of Dr Craig. Good to see Christians focusing on what unites us rather than what divides us.
AtheismKills 3 months ago
John 10:27 "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me."
The only reliable access to Christ's voice is through the Scripture. Against them, all things should be tested (2 Tim 3:16-17). The Holy Spirit speaks through them more than any other means because the words therein have the power of Salvation (Rom 1:16).
As soon as we say, "It's the Bible and...", we open the door to anything (Magisterium, Tradition, Book of Mormon, Watch Tower, Spiritual experiences etc.)
RPM11111 3 months ago
@codegoddard
So there is no need for any of the sacraments. Why have them?
RetSquid 3 months ago
Sorry but I must bring it bluntly.......Catholicism is extremely unbiblical.
scionofzion(.)com/rc(.)htm
Marcell2aG 3 months ago
Damn it, what is the name of the opening music?
Marduniya 3 months ago
Finally, no Catholic bashing! Yes. I can understand Dr. Craig's position on popular level understanding not being adequate but the evangelizing of the Church is being done as we speak! Check out Fr. Robert Barron at wordonfirevideo here on YouTube.
GideonsKnight 3 months ago 7
Comment removed
kevinvalsonjacob 3 months ago
Well, I'm surprised to see WLC's research on the RC faith isn't as thorough as his apologetics for God's existence. It would be interesting to know what he thinks about Marian apparitions, particularly Fatima and the miracle of the sun.
beesh2180 3 months ago
Is the first time that Dr Craig disappoints me with their point of view, I think on the issue of Catholicism Dr. Craig is a neophyte. It is a great philosopher and I'm very surprised that Dr Craig does not know the Catholic doctrine, as we Christians, in the Catholic Church there is no possibility of salvation. I do not know if one view is philosophical, because theological. It is not. Although the Catholic Church calling itself Christian, has no true faith.
Globalchristians 3 months ago
I think the catholic church and its corrupt past is what makes people turn away from it, also because its thought that the vatican is new babylon from the book of revelations, and that in theory all the popes are the antichrist waiting for their chance to destroy the world.
Falcondick69 3 months ago
Catholicism is the one true Church.
LeftHandCookie 3 months ago
@LeftHandCookie
Yes, that is what they claim.
RetSquid 3 months ago
@RetSquid No, it truly is. Although we should still learn to love our Christian/Protestant neighbours. God bless
LeftHandCookie 3 months ago
@LeftHandCookie
"The Church" is all the believers in Christ, not one group of them.
RetSquid 3 months ago
Wow, lots of discussion on this topic. I hope we can all agree to respectfully disagree and not use our denominational differences to further divide us. As Craig said, we are all Christians, and while I'm not a Catholic myself, I stand side by side with them united in our commitment to theism and against atheism. Plus, Catholics make great Biblical scholars :) (sorry I just had to add that as I'm a huge fan of the rigorous scholarship so many Catholics have produced).
Christianjr4 3 months ago 18
@Christianjr4 Are you aware that Roman Catholicism claims to be the one true Church and that the Council of Trent curses Evangelicals 100’s of times?
IDH77 3 months ago
I would like to hear his thoughts on Methodists, Lutherans, and Baptists.
jryan1971 3 months ago