Latest / The Immutable Word / EP045 When Scripture Is Twisted: Debunking Catholic Proof-Texting

Transcript

EP045 When Scripture Is Twisted: Debunking Catholic Proof-Texting · The Immutable Word

• 0:00
  What they're basically doing is saying that only the Catholic Church has the authority.
• 0:04
  Only the Catholic Church has the, one, the authority to create tradition that's
• 0:09
  equal to Scripture, if not superior to Scripture.
• 0:11
  Whatever their claim is, whatever their argument is, it's going to be one of
• 0:15
  these passages they're going to use to proof text it.
• 0:18
  Meaning that I'm going to prove our tradition with a single passage of Scripture.
• 0:23
  Instead of the preponderance of Scripture, instead of the broad application
• 0:26
  of Scripture interpreting Scripture. They believe that they have the right to
• 0:30
  privately interpret it.
• 0:31
  No privacy of the scriptures of any private interpretation. Private in the scriptures
• 0:36
  is always separating it from the whole.
• 0:39
  So when you take a verse of scripture, isolate it from the rest of scripture,
• 0:43
  and then you pour your own definitions and meaning and interpretation into that
• 0:48
  particular verse, that's called private interpretation.
• 0:51
  It's not just you coming up with your own personal explanation of a verse of
• 0:55
  scripture, but you're on purpose ripping it from the rest of Scripture.
• 0:58
  Welcome back to The Immutable Word.
• 1:00
  Today we have been bruising, I think, Facebook.
• 1:04
  Found another meme that we can talk about. This particular meme was put out
• 1:09
  by a Roman Catholic and was designed to, I suppose, trap.
• 1:15
  Looks like the target is probably Protestants or even Baptists in general,
• 1:19
  but it's designed to trap Protestants, Baptists, into reading these specific
• 1:25
  verses, and he provides 10 of them,
• 1:27
  that supposedly proves.
• 1:32
  Catholicism, or they can't accept it without actually becoming Catholic.
• 1:37
  So, we thought this would be a pretty interesting meme to cover today.
• 1:40
  We're going to run it through the,
• 1:43
  The questions that we have, what is that again?
• 1:46
  The two, two wise for every what? Yeah. The what? The bull hockey test.
• 1:52
  Yeah, that's exactly. That's the nice way of saying it.
• 1:55
  Yeah, that's, that's, that's exactly it. The doctrinal expression model.
• 2:00
  So we've learned about that in the last couple of episodes that we had run through.
• 2:05
  So you said you did find this on Facebook, right? Or something. Yeah, I think it is.
• 2:10
  The group was something like Reaching Catholics and others.
• 2:14
  And of course, Catholics, they don't separate Baptists from Protestants.
• 2:18
  They think Baptists are Protestants.
• 2:20
  Yeah, so you're all in the same bucket. They just basically put you all in the same category.
• 2:24
  So whether you're Methodist, Lutheran, Baptist, whatever, you're a Protestant.
• 2:29
  Yeah, so all it says, it just says Protestants consider these verses,
• 2:33
  and then there's a snapshot of 10 different verses here.
• 2:37
  And it says 10 biblical verses that— Well, it's 10 passages.
• 2:39
  It's a lot more than 10 verses, but it's 10 passages of Scripture.
• 2:43
  Oh, there is. Okay, yeah, there's a lot more in there.
• 2:46
  But yeah, it says 10 verses or passages that Protestants cannot accept without becoming Catholic.
• 2:53
  And then it just names it 1 through 10. And it looks like they categorize it.
• 2:58
  So, they'll say like, read Matthew 16, verses 18 through 19 in Isaiah 22,
• 3:04
  22, and it says in parentheses, authority.
• 3:06
  And then it goes through other ones that says authority, tradition,
• 3:09
  baptism, confession, Eucharist, anointing.
• 3:13
  Suffering and works and so forth so
• 3:16
  we'll run this we'll run this through and i know this is what we call text proofing
• 3:23
  which is a tactic that's used by roman catholic apologists which is essentially
• 3:27
  cherry picking a verse where they take that verse and take it out of context
• 3:33
  and as you know you can do you can make you know.
• 3:36
  You can do anything with that verse in that sense. So, that's basically what they're doing here.
• 3:41
  They'll strip it of its dispensational setting, and then they'll inject their
• 3:44
  own theological dictionary into the words.
• 3:46
  So, as believers, we obviously don't need to become Catholics to accept these
• 3:52
  verses. You just simply read them in context.
• 3:54
  You rightly divide them, and then go from there.
• 3:58
  Oh, also, a shout-out to Shiloh, Shiloh Stenses.
• 4:03
  You were asking about some of these things. This episode's going to be dedicated to you.
• 4:09
  And it's also validation that we actually have a listener. I mean, that's great.
• 4:13
  So he came up to me asking, well, first was talking about some of the other
• 4:18
  episodes about the angelology that we've been doing and found this pretty interesting.
• 4:22
  So we appreciate you listening, Shiloh, and of course, everyone else.
• 4:25
  So we'll dedicate this episode to you since you're asking specifically about,
• 4:29
  you know, when we're going to do an episode about Catholics. So, well, here you are.
• 4:32
  We're doing one about Catholic proof texting. So hopefully this will answer your question.
• 4:37
  I think it will because what you're asking, I forget specifically.
• 4:41
  Let me see if I can bring it up.
• 4:43
  Well, these typical verses that we're going to look at, these passages,
• 4:46
  and the claims made by Catholics are basically a broad brush.
• 4:50
  This is what they use almost exclusively to attack Protestants.
• 4:55
  They'll always fall back on these same passages whenever they attack Protestants. Across the board.
• 5:01
  So, whatever the claim was, you know. It'll lead to, you know.
• 5:04
  Yes, it'll be covered in one of these.
• 5:06
  That's why we say, you know, like,
• 5:07
  for example, authority or tradition or Eucharist or something like that.
• 5:12
  What they're basically doing is saying that only the Catholic Church has the authority.
• 5:16
  Only the Catholic Church has the, one, the authority to create tradition that's
• 5:22
  equal to Scripture, if not superior to Scripture, and so forth and so on.
• 5:26
  So, whatever their claim is, whatever their argument is, it's going to be one
• 5:30
  of these passages they're going to use to proof text it,
• 5:33
  meaning that I'm going to prove our tradition with a single passage of Scripture
• 5:37
  instead of the preponderance of Scripture, instead of the broad application
• 5:43
  of Scripture interpreting Scripture.
• 5:46
  They believe that they have the right to privately interpret it.
• 5:49
  So we'll talk a little bit about that when we go to it. But yeah,
• 5:51
  these, I'm sure that, you know, as we go through this, it's going to cover one
• 5:55
  of the concerns that Shado probably brought up. Yeah, perfect.
• 6:00
  All right, so we start to break this down. We use tactical questioning, right?
• 6:05
  So that's where you get that classic question, what do you mean or what do you
• 6:10
  mean by to then understand what they're defining or whatever specific term.
• 6:15
  I think really the simplest way is we're going to use some apologetics.
• 6:19
  We're going to use apologetics with the Bible as our foundation,
• 6:23
  our final authority to respond to these.
• 6:26
  So whether this is Catholics today, right? But we can do the same thing with
• 6:30
  Muslims. You can do the same thing with JWs, Mormons, one is Pentecostals.
• 6:35
  I mean, you name it. There's a lot of groups out there that we can,
• 6:39
  you know, all we're doing is saying, look,
• 6:41
  We want the foundation and the basis of our belief to be grounded in Scripture.
• 6:46
  That's all we're saying.
• 6:48
  So when a Catholic tells us that they can prove that they have the authority,
• 6:53
  demand obedience to their traditions, and they give you a verse of Scripture
• 6:57
  to prove it, then we're going to say, okay, well, let's take a look at that.
• 6:59
  And I think that's what any Christian should do.
• 7:02
  All right. So where do we start here? It says definitions are important, right?
• 7:06
  And you gave an example of, you know, they provide a verse. where would you start?
• 7:12
  Well, I mean, yeah, when we're looking at it, so this is what I would say to
• 7:16
  the Bible believer, you don't need to become a Catholic to accept these verses
• 7:20
  that we're going to look at. You just simply need to read them in context.
• 7:23
  We've talked about, and just as a brief, you know, kind of summary of what we
• 7:27
  meant by no privacy of the scriptures of any private interpretation.
• 7:32
  When we discussed that before, we meant that private in the scriptures is always
• 7:37
  separating it from the whole.
• 7:39
  So, when you take a verse of Scripture, isolate it from the rest of Scripture,
• 7:44
  and then you pour your own definitions and meaning and interpretation into that
• 7:48
  particular verse, that's called private interpretation.
• 7:51
  It's not just you coming up with your own personal explanation of a verse of
• 7:55
  Scripture, but you're on purpose ripping it from the rest of Scripture.
• 7:59
  Because you remember when we did the epistemology, right? Yeah.
• 8:05
  When we look at 1 Corinthians 2, we said that Scripture, we have to compare
• 8:10
  Scripture with Scripture.
• 8:12
  And somebody once wisely said that the best interpretive scripture is scripture.
• 8:17
  The best commentary on scripture is scripture.
• 8:20
  If you want to know what God's intention and his definition of a passage is,
• 8:27
  you go back to what the Bible explains.
• 8:29
  So these verses are perfect examples of where,
• 8:34
  yes, if I read them with a bias in mind, if I read them with the presupposition
• 8:39
  that the Catholic Church is the first true church, that the Catholic Church
• 8:43
  is exactly what Jesus Christ was talking about.
• 8:46
  Anytime he talked about the church or anytime he referenced,
• 8:49
  you know, the special, you know, the ordination of Peter and the apostles,
• 8:54
  if I automatically read into those passages, oh, Catholic Church,
• 8:58
  Catholic Church, absolutely.
• 9:00
  If you read it with that bias, that's exactly how you're going to walk away with it.
• 9:03
  That's what you see. But you have to take it out of context to do that.
• 9:07
  You have to rip it from the whole of Scripture.
• 9:09
  If you don't let the Bible define the terms that are being used,
• 9:13
  that's why, you know, the first tactic in apologetics, usually whenever you
• 9:18
  ask somebody, let's just say that somebody says anything, it doesn't matter.
• 9:21
  It's like, hell, you know what?
• 9:22
  You need to be baptized to be saved. What do you mean by that exactly?
• 9:26
  When you say baptism, what do you mean by baptism?
• 9:28
  Let them explain it. Let them define it. Now, because most people,
• 9:33
  they're trained in our generation to throw out a claim with no evidence.
• 9:40
  That's not a legitimate argument. An argument must contain a conclusion and a premise, right?
• 9:48
  And the premise has to be your evidence or your proof. If all you're doing is
• 9:51
  making a claim, but you're not backing it up with evidence, you're just making
• 9:54
  a claim You haven't you haven't provided a legitimate argument.
• 9:58
  So right that's another good question. You can ask So what exactly is your argument here?
• 10:03
  Make them clarify the argument If you can help if you can try to listen and
• 10:08
  learn how to dissect an argument then you yourself can say, okay So if I understand you correctly,
• 10:14
  this is what you're arguing And then you can steel man their position Because
• 10:18
  usually the best way to respond to an argument is take the opponent's strongest argument against you.
• 10:25
  That's usually the best way to dissect whatever argument they're bringing to
• 10:29
  the table. If they have one.
• 10:31
  Right. But a lot of times, some of that dissection, though, they may not even
• 10:36
  know what their own argument is. You can formulate the argument from the claim.
• 10:40
  But what you're going to do is you're going to expose some hidden assumptions.
• 10:44
  That's why you have to ask questions.
• 10:45
  Is this what you mean? When you say baptism, is this what you're talking about?
• 10:50
  Sprinkling as a baby. Is that what you're talking about?
• 10:52
  Right? And when you say that baptism saves you, are you basing that off of a specific scripture?
• 10:57
  What scripture exactly are you basing that off of? And when you read that scripture,
• 11:03
  when you say baptism saves, are you ignoring this part of the verse that says
• 11:09
  something a little bit different or maybe changes the context?
• 11:13
  Or if you know your scriptures, you can take them to scriptures that are more
• 11:18
  explicit about baptism and have them agree to it.
• 11:21
  It's like, that's what it says, and we can both agree that this is where it
• 11:24
  refers to you, but it's not consistent with what you previously said,
• 11:27
  so there's a contradiction or inconsistency. Yeah, there was a recent debate
• 11:31
  I saw with, what is his name?
• 11:34
  He's the dinosaur guy in Pensacola.
• 11:39
  Now I can't remember since she mentioned it.
• 11:42
  I know who you're talking about, though. I just saw, anyway,
• 11:44
  I just watched a debate with him and another guy about whether the church is
• 11:48
  going to go through the tribulation.
• 11:50
  And one of the things the guy did, the guy that was talking to Kenneth, Ken?
• 11:56
  Yes, Kent Hoven, right? Kent Hoven, Kent Hoven, there you go.
• 11:59
  So, when he was talking to Kent Hovind, the first thing he asked Kent,
• 12:03
  he's like, first of all, while we're discussing this, can you agree with me
• 12:09
  that a Christian today can't lose their salvation? Absolutely,
• 12:12
  they can't lose their salvation.
• 12:14
  Then he put them, then he put that church or that Christian in the middle of the tribulation.
• 12:19
  And if they took the mark of the beast, because he just, he got Kent to admit
• 12:23
  that a Christian can't lose their salvation.
• 12:25
  So if a church member goes through the tribulation and takes the mark of the
• 12:29
  beast, did they lose their salvation?
• 12:32
  According to Revelation 20. And Kent, believe it or not, he said he couldn't
• 12:35
  explain it, but then he backpedaled and said, oh, taking the mark and worshiping
• 12:40
  the beast are two different things. But anyway, that's a different discussion for later.
• 12:44
  But the point is, is he got Kent to admit that he and this guy both agreed that
• 12:51
  a Christian can't lose their salvation.
• 12:52
  So that's why with a Catholic, it's going to be a little bit different because
• 12:56
  doctrinally they do not believe the things we believe.
• 12:59
  So this is where knowing what the Bible says is very, very important.
• 13:05
  So this is where you would say to the Catholic, if you have,
• 13:08
  and this is why I would say, you know, have a King James Bible open.
• 13:11
  When you're talking to them and say, look, does the verse say this?
• 13:15
  Yes or no? Yes, it does say that. Okay.
• 13:18
  Well, then you're saying the verse means this, but that actually goes against what it's saying.
• 13:24
  How do you get that interpretation based off of this wording?
• 13:29
  You see what I mean? That's what I mean by like challenging them,
• 13:32
  asking them questions against what the scripture is actually saying.
• 13:35
  We may not agree on what it means, but we got to agree on what it says.
• 13:38
  So that first text, as far as whenever they start bringing their text proofing
• 13:43
  tactic, and you want to just ask them questions is...
• 13:47
  Define some words. Let's define some terms here, right?
• 13:50
  We've talked about this before, you know, like one of the things you want to
• 13:54
  do is you always want to make sure that you guys are on the same page.
• 13:58
  Whoever you're talking to, I've had my students, you know, recently talk to
• 14:03
  Mormons, right? There's a lot of them talk to Mormons.
• 14:05
  And of course, Mormons have their own terminology.
• 14:08
  It sounds very similar to Christian terminology, right?
• 14:12
  They have, I call it Christian ease, Christian language, you know.
• 14:16
  Because, you know, if we say baptism and they say baptisms, two different types
• 14:20
  of things we're talking about.
• 14:21
  If I say the gospel, what I mean and what the Mormon means, two different things.
• 14:26
  So that's why you can say, hey, wait a minute, when you say gospel,
• 14:29
  what exactly do you mean by that? It's always to find your terms.
• 14:32
  Right. So that's where that's, you know, that's where you ask those questions.
• 14:35
  So like, for example, you know, using this, what do you mean method,
• 14:38
  when you see the word, you know, talking to a Catholic, you want to try to expose
• 14:41
  a little bit of their definitions, their assumptions, you say,
• 14:45
  when you see the word tradition in the Bible,
• 14:47
  does it mean teachings written down by apostles or rituals invented a thousand years later?
• 14:54
  Because again, when they say traditions, they're immediately assuming Catholic dogma.
• 15:01
  They're thinking Catholic catechisms. They're thinking, you know, ex cathedra.
• 15:06
  They're thinking, you know, the magisteriums, you know, of what they've published
• 15:10
  and so forth and so on. So that's your hidden premise, that's their hidden premise
• 15:13
  or your hidden assumption by asking that question. They're getting the word tradition.
• 15:17
  When Jesus speaks of eating flesh, does he mean physically chewing,
• 15:23
  you know, and consuming his flesh and drinking his blood or spiritually trusting?
• 15:29
  And does he clarify that in the same chapter that you guys are presenting?
• 15:35
  So that's where you ask, what do you mean? I need you to define a little bit
• 15:40
  further, and then I want you to substantiate that definition with the context
• 15:46
  or the broader range of scripture.
• 15:49
  So, by asking these type of questions, obviously the Christian has some knowledge scripturally.
• 15:55
  It helps you to know. Yeah, it helps to already know. And what you're doing is...
• 16:00
  You already know a couple, you're already a couple steps ahead because you're
• 16:04
  going to try to expose the underlying assumption.
• 16:08
  Well, here's the thing. I would also say, I would say, yes, that's true.
• 16:13
  And it's also true that you may have no clue what the verse says.
• 16:18
  But by getting them to define it and looking at the verse, you're now educating
• 16:23
  yourself. You're not making an assumption.
• 16:26
  Okay? That's the whole point of asking questions. The what do you mean tactic.
• 16:30
  Simply, it has two things. It operates two ways.
• 16:34
  Number one, it exposes their assumption, and it helps you be clear on what they're talking about.
• 16:40
  That's really what the what do you mean tactic is.
• 16:44
  The second questioning is, how did you come to that conclusion?
• 16:49
  That's where you start to challenge how they've proven that assumption to be
• 16:53
  true. What was our logical reasoning to get there? Right.
• 16:56
  The third type of questioning and apologetics is where you are pushing back
• 17:02
  and doing the worldview critique.
• 17:04
  Like, so how do you reconcile that with this passage?
• 17:07
  That's the three types of questions. What do you mean?
• 17:10
  How did you come to that conclusion? How do you reconcile that with?
• 17:14
  So if you can learn how to do that in debate, you may never get to the third question.
• 17:19
  Okay. You may spend all your time just on the what do you mean part.
• 17:23
  Because you'll find out that most people that have claims have no clue what
• 17:27
  they're talking about. Oh, they don't have an argument.
• 17:29
  No, they're parodying. They have a claim. They're parodying what they've seen
• 17:32
  on social media, YouTube, whatever. That's it.
• 17:35
  Yeah, for the most part, you'll find that mostly people respond that way and
• 17:40
  that they don't really have an argument to defend their claims.
• 17:43
  And another good thing to do if they give you a quote like, hey,
• 17:46
  you just need to watch this video. You need to listen to this guy.
• 17:50
  You know, Mark Trent is a Catholic apologist and he knows how to defend the Catholic faith.
• 17:54
  Well, I know why Mark Trent believes it, but I'm not talking to Mark Trent. I'm talking to you.
• 18:00
  So I want to know why you believe it. Do you have your own belief about it? Exactly.
• 18:04
  What have you studied it out? And so by asking that kind of questioning or putting
• 18:08
  them in a corner, you're forcing them to substantiate why they believe it's true.
• 18:15
  They have to, well, they're responsible for establishing their own position
• 18:18
  if they make any claim at all.
• 18:20
  Right. Not somebody else's. I mean, that's a faulty appeal, right? Yep.
• 18:23
  So, anyway, when we look at the verses, like the verses, we'll read, I'll read the list.
• 18:33
  Okay. So, this is what it says. Ten biblical verses that Protestants cannot
• 18:36
  accept without becoming Catholic.
• 18:38
  So the assumption is that if you read these verses honestly.
• 18:43
  Right, and clearly you would walk away, you know, reading all these 10 passages,
• 18:49
  you would walk away converting to Catholicism.
• 18:52
  You would reject being a Baptist, you would reject being a Protestant,
• 18:56
  and you would immediately become Orthodox or Catholic.
• 18:59
  So the first passage or set of passages is Matthew 16, 18 through 19,
• 19:04
  and Isaiah 22, 22, which is talking about the key of David.
• 19:08
  So the, and this is about authority.
• 19:11
  That's where Jesus Christ assuming, you know, presumptuously is asking,
• 19:19
  is telling Peter that he's going to build his church on Peter.
• 19:22
  Okay. That's the, that's the claim. And then 1 Timothy 3.15,
• 19:26
  it's talking about authority, and it talks about traditions that have been laid.
• 19:31
  Same thing as 2 Thessalonians 2.15, or 1 Timothy, I'm sorry,
• 19:35
  3.15, is that the church is the ground and pillar of the truth.
• 19:39
  So, that's the assumption is, well, if the church is the ground and pillar of
• 19:43
  the truth, it determines truth.
• 19:45
  The church does, not God.
• 19:48
  Okay. That's the assumption is that the church determines truth.
• 19:54
  It doesn't submit itself to truth. So you got to be clear on what the claim is here.
• 19:59
  Okay. Then 2 Thessalonians is talking about the traditions that Paul set up.
• 20:04
  Therefore, if Paul had the right to establish traditions and the apostolic succession
• 20:09
  is true, then all the popes, the preceding popes also have the right to set
• 20:15
  up traditions that have to be followed by the church.
• 20:19
  Okay? 1 Peter 3.21 is baptism. Baptism saves. That's the claim that they make.
• 20:25
  John 20.23 talks about confession.
• 20:27
  John 6.53 through 58 and 66 through 67 is where Jesus is talking about eating
• 20:33
  his flesh, drinking his blood. So that's the Eucharist.
• 20:35
  1 Corinthians 11.27, that's retelling the story of the Lord's Supper.
• 20:40
  And so it's making the Lord's Supper the Eucharist. That's where they establish the doctrine.
• 20:45
  James 5.14-15 is talking about that the fervent effectual prayer of a man availeth
• 20:51
  much, and then you're supposed to ask him for healing, basically.
• 20:55
  So, that's where they get last rites from.
• 20:58
  Colossians 1.24 talks about suffering, that, you know, this is where monks and
• 21:03
  priests and stuff like that,
• 21:04
  aestheticism, where they reject, you know, worldly wealth and all this other
• 21:08
  stuff, and they're supposed to beat themselves, you know, and whip themselves,
• 21:11
  and genuflect and do all this other stuff, right?
• 21:14
  Then James 2, 17 through 26, you have works. So these verses,
• 21:18
  if you read them according to them without any explanation, however,
• 21:24
  here's the catcher though.
• 21:26
  In order to become a Catholic by reading these verses, you actually have to
• 21:30
  have a predisposed bias when you read them.
• 21:34
  You have to automatically assume that the Catholic Church is right.
• 21:37
  Instead of saying, well, do these scriptures actually prove what the Catholic Church is saying?
• 21:43
  Which is Acts 17.11. Remember what the Bible says, that the Bereans,
• 21:48
  or the Thessalonians, were more noble, or I'm sorry, the Bereans were more noble
• 21:53
  than those in Thessalonica, in which they searched the scriptures daily to see
• 21:57
  whether those things were so, right?
• 21:59
  1 Thessalonians 5.21, the verse
• 22:01
  we always quote, is that a Christian is supposed to prove all things.
• 22:06
  So it's not immediately accept based off of your singular verse you take out
• 22:11
  of context and just assume that you're right.
• 22:13
  I can't read into that verse with the mindset that the Catholic church is right.
• 22:17
  I've got to read it and say, wait a minute, is this actually,
• 22:19
  is this actually evidence that the Catholic church is correct and they're true?
• 22:24
  That's what I have to ask.
• 22:26
  So, in order to do that, I've got to stop and say, okay, well,
• 22:28
  let's look at the verse. Let's look at the context. Let's look at what other scripture says.
• 22:32
  So, anyway, so that's basically when we look at these categories,
• 22:37
  we kind of broke them down into three, big three categories,
• 22:41
  which is authority, sacraments, and salvation.
• 22:43
  Okay? So, multiple, these passages all deal with one or three,
• 22:48
  one of these three categories.
• 22:50
  So, it's either dealing with authority. Who has the authority?
• 22:54
  Does the Catholic Church have the authority?
• 22:56
  Or does the scriptures have the final authority? Who is the final authority?
• 23:01
  And then the second one, sacraments, do the sacraments, for example,
• 23:06
  the Eucharist and baptism, do they have the power to absolve you of sins and
• 23:13
  to save you? That's the question.
• 23:15
  And then, of course, the error of work salvation is that we have to atone for
• 23:21
  our sins, either in this life by taking the sacraments, living a good life,
• 23:26
  so forth and so on, working our way through faith in some kind of partnership.
• 23:32
  Or we go through purgatory so that we're cleansed of the rest of our sins.
• 23:38
  Okay, that's salvation by works. And then what we'll do is kind of look at,
• 23:42
  well, what does the Bible tell
• 23:43
  us as far as, you know, the doctrinal expression and so forth and so on.
• 23:47
  So if we look at, for example, the first one, the claim is Matthew 16.
• 23:51
  Do you want to read that Matthew 16,
• 23:54
  And then just, I guess, read verse 16 through 18.
• 23:57
  Yeah, read that. What page? Yeah, Matthew 16, verses 16 through 18.
• 24:04
  Matthew 16, verse 16. I think it's page 887. That's what I was looking for.
• 24:10
  All right, 16, 18. Start verse 16, read through 18. All right.
• 24:15
  The Bible says, starting in verse 16, And Simon Peter answered and said,
• 24:20
  Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, Verse 17,
• 24:25
  Verse 17, Verse 17.
• 24:44
  Okay, so here's the Roman Catholic claim. Their claim is that Matthew 16,
• 24:50
  and let's look at the 2 Thessalonians, read 2 Thessalonians 2 and verse 15.
• 24:56
  2 Thessalonians 2 and verse 15.
• 25:00
  That way we can kind of read the verses first that they're referring to and
• 25:04
  then what their claim is. Okay.
• 25:06
  All right. 2 Thessalonians 2.15 says, Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold
• 25:11
  the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle.
• 25:17
  Okay. So, the claim is that both Matthew 16 and 2 Thessalonians 2 prove that
• 25:25
  the Pope, the Roman Catholic hierarchy,
• 25:28
  the religious hierarchy, right, the administrative, that the Pope and the oral
• 25:34
  traditions and the written traditions are equal to Scripture.
• 25:39
  This is the claim they make. They use these two verses to back that up.
• 25:43
  So if you talk to a Roman Catholic and you say, well, the Bible says,
• 25:47
  for example, that, you know, that we're supposed to believe in the Lord Jesus
• 25:50
  Christ and thou shalt be saved, that it's not by works, lest any man should boast.
• 25:55
  Titus 3 verse 5 says, it's not by works which we have done, but by his mercy
• 26:00
  he saved us and so forth, right?
• 26:02
  So if you say, well, look, salvation is by grace through faith alone.
• 26:06
  It has nothing to do with works. And they go, well, no.
• 26:09
  And they give you whatever verse. And you say, well, I'm going to believe the Bible over the Pope.
• 26:14
  I said, yeah, but the Bible gives the Pope and the traditions the Pope has published
• 26:20
  through the Catholic hierarchy, it gives them equal standing with Scripture.
• 26:27
  So, if you quote Ephesians 2.8.9, we'll just bring you to Matthew 16 and we'll
• 26:32
  bring you to 2 Thessalonians 2.15.
• 26:34
  And that undermines everything else. And say, whatever the church wrote is equal
• 26:37
  to what you read in Scripture.
• 26:39
  That's their claim. Just from those two passages. That's called proof texting.
• 26:44
  That's called ripping them out of context, ignoring the rest of scripture,
• 26:50
  and pouring into those verses all the doctrinal teaching that they want to espouse.
• 26:56
  So, what's the problem? The problem is, when we read Matthew 16,
• 27:00
  for example, if we go back to verse 16, Simon Peter answered,
• 27:03
  well, let's just go verse 15.
• 27:05
  Well, actually, let's go- Matthew 16. Actually, I'm going to go to Matthew 16, look at verse 13.
• 27:11
  Here's the context. When Jesus came into the coast of Caesarea Philippi,
• 27:15
  he asked his disciples, saying, here's the question, whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?
• 27:23
  He didn't start off the question, Peter, who do men say that you are?
• 27:28
  Hey, Peter, we're going to have a discussion about you. Hey,
• 27:31
  Peter, we're going to have a conversation.
• 27:33
  The rest of us, you and the rest of the disciples, we're going to sit down and
• 27:36
  talk about you. Because right now, you are the primary subject of this conversation.
• 27:40
  That is not what he said. He said, his first question is, whom do men say that I, the son of man, am?
• 27:47
  Okay, well, what does he say? He goes, and they said, some say that thou art
• 27:51
  John the Baptist, some Elias or Elijah, or others, Jeremiah,
• 27:55
  or Jeremiah, or one of the prophets, and he saith unto them, but whom say ye that I am?
• 28:01
  Notice the first three verses already, 13, 14, and 15, is all about who?
• 28:08
  Jesus Christ. It's not about Peter.
• 28:12
  And then Simon Peter, verse 16, answered and said, Thou art the Christ,
• 28:18
  the Son of the living God.
• 28:21
  Jesus answered verse 17 said unto him blessed art thou Simon Barjona for flesh
• 28:25
  and blood hath not revealed it unto thee but my father which is in heaven then
• 28:29
  he says in verse 7 18 and I say also unto thee thou art Peter but then there's a comma,
• 28:36
  and upon this rock and upon,
• 28:39
  He didn't say Peter is the rock. He said, upon this rock that we've been talking
• 28:44
  about, he is the son of God, right?
• 28:48
  What Peter just admitted. He says, thou art the Christ, the son of the living God.
• 28:53
  He says, thou art, he goes, thou art Peter, upon this rock will I build my church.
• 28:58
  And notice what he says after the semicolon.
• 29:02
  And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
• 29:07
  It's not the church, it's the rock.
• 29:10
  The gates of hell shall not prevent. Now, if you read in your Bible.
• 29:16
  Gates usually will either keep things out or keep things in.
• 29:22
  And if hell is like a prison, the gates are not because people are breaking their way into hell.
• 29:29
  It's so that people in hell cannot break their way out, right?
• 29:33
  So if a gate cannot prevail against the rock, that means the rock is going to
• 29:39
  be able to bust through those gates.
• 29:41
  That means somebody's going to have the keys of hell and death,
• 29:45
  and he's going to be able to break through the gates.
• 29:48
  That's not Peter, and that's not the church.
• 29:51
  That's Jesus Christ. Acts chapter 2 confirms it.
• 29:54
  Peter even preaches that David said that his body would not be left in hell.
• 30:02
  Speaking of Jesus Christ, he's preaching about the resurrection.
• 30:05
  Jesus Christ went down into hell, preached to the prison, the people in prison,
• 30:10
  according to Ephesians.
• 30:11
  He had the keys of death and hell, and he was able to bust. Hell could not keep them contained.
• 30:17
  So anyway, he says, I say unto thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock.
• 30:22
  Jesus Christ, me. He's pointing to himself.
• 30:25
  I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
• 30:28
  And I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven and whosoever thou shalt bind,
• 30:31
  thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.
• 30:35
  And whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
• 30:37
  And this is where they took Isaiah 20, 22, and it talks about having the keys of David.
• 30:43
  Now that key of David, which they don't go through and study,
• 30:48
  but the key of David is also mentioned in the book of Revelation,
• 30:50
  but that has to do with opening the scriptures.
• 30:53
  But here he says, whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever.
• 30:59
  And you see an example of that in the book of Acts, where Peter starts preaching
• 31:06
  about the gospel, like in De Corugnilus in Acts chapter 10.
• 31:10
  He's bound, anybody they're preaching to, it's like if I were to say,
• 31:13
  look, if you don't accept Jesus Christ, you're going to go to hell.
• 31:16
  Whatever I just bound here on earth is going to be bound in heaven.
• 31:20
  If I tell you, you need to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
• 31:24
  I have the ability to tell somebody if they believe on Christ, they can be saved.
• 31:27
  Or if they reject Jesus Christ, they're going to go to hell.
• 31:30
  I have the power to do that.
• 31:32
  Every single believer has the power to do that. That's the keys he's referring
• 31:35
  to here. But here's the thing.
• 31:37
  Then later on, just a couple of verses in verse 21, from that time forth,
• 31:41
  Jesus began to show unto his disciples how that he must go into Jerusalem,
• 31:44
  suffer many things of the elders, chiefs and priests, the chief priests and
• 31:47
  scribes and be killed, be raised again the third day.
• 31:50
  Peter took him, verse 22, and began to rebuke him. He's rebuking Jesus Christ.
• 31:54
  Here's the first pope rebuking Christ.
• 31:57
  Be it far from thee, Lord, this shall not be unto thee.
• 31:59
  But Peter, but he turned, Jesus Christ did, and said unto Peter,
• 32:03
  get thee behind me, Satan.
• 32:05
  Thou art an offense unto me. Thou savest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
• 32:10
  So there's the first pope being called Satan. If this is the foundation of your
• 32:13
  church and the foundation of your church is being called Satan,
• 32:16
  I don't think I'd want to have anything to do with that church.
• 32:18
  Yeah, we're speaking Christ and being called Satan. So the problem is the exegesis,
• 32:24
  the way that they're studying this verse.
• 32:25
  The entire passage from verse 13 to 18, the preceding verses tell you what the precedence is.
• 32:36
  And the context of the passage is the identification of Jesus Christ,
• 32:41
  not the identification of Peter. It has nothing to do with that.
• 32:44
  So, grammatically speaking, the subject is,
• 32:49
  is Jesus Christ, not Peter. That's grammatically speaking.
• 32:53
  Context, contextually, this passage is talking about the identification of Jesus
• 32:59
  Christ, not the identification of Peter.
• 33:01
  So grammatically and contextually, it's about Jesus Christ. Well, what about Scripture?
• 33:06
  If you compare Scripture with Scripture, what does the rest of Scripture say?
• 33:11
  Well, the Bible tells us that Peter admits later on that Jesus Christ is the rock.
• 33:17
  Matter of fact, he says it later on in, let's see, in...
• 33:23
  Got the verse here, 1 Peter 2.8, he speaks of Jesus Christ being a stone of
• 33:29
  stumbling and a rock of offense, even to them that stumble at the word,
• 33:34
  being disobedient, where unto also they were appointed.
• 33:37
  So 1 Peter 2.8 is a confirmation by Peter that Jesus Christ is the rock.
• 33:41
  He's the rock of offense. And then he says he's the stone of stumbling.
• 33:45
  And Jesus Christ also speaks to that, that the rock, that rock,
• 33:50
  that stone of stumbling is going to be the rock that's laid in Zion.
• 33:54
  Paul also confirms that in Romans 9.33, as it is written, behold,
• 33:58
  I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and a rock of offense, and whosoever believeth
• 34:03
  on him shall not be ashamed.
• 34:05
  So, and then of course, Luke talks about, remember we talk about the,
• 34:09
  he's talking about the word of God being like in Luke chapter six,
• 34:12
  he goes about receiving the truth.
• 34:14
  He says, he's like a man which built an house, dig deep and laid the foundation on a rock.
• 34:19
  And when the flood rose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house and could
• 34:23
  not shake it, for he was founded upon a rock.
• 34:25
  And then he's talking about the rock being the rock of offense.
• 34:29
  Jesus Christ even said, you know, that it's going to grind you to powder.
• 34:33
  And you see that in Daniel chapter 2, about the stone that's made,
• 34:36
  that's cut without hands, that comes out of a great mountain and destroys the
• 34:40
  image that Daniel prophesied about of Nebuchadnezzar's gem in Daniel chapter 2.
• 34:45
  And then later on in 1 Corinthians 10.4, Paul says this, and he's speaking about
• 34:50
  the Israelites in the desert when they left Egypt,
• 34:55
  and did all drink the same spiritual drink, for they drank of that spiritual
• 34:59
  rock that followed them, and that rock was Christ.
• 35:03
  The Bible also tells us in the book of Deuteronomy.
• 35:07
  It says this in Deuteronomy 32, verse 4, He is the rock, speaking of God,
• 35:13
  in the previous verse, His work is perfect for all His ways or judgment,
• 35:17
  a God of truth and without iniquity.
• 35:20
  So the rest of Scripture tells us that the rock is God, who is Jesus Christ, respectively.
• 35:27
  So grammatically, Matthew 16 is about the identification of Christ.
• 35:33
  Contextually, it's about the identification of Christ. And then scripturally
• 35:38
  defined across the broader application of Scripture, Jesus Christ is the rock.
• 35:43
  Why would we take the rest of Scripture, toss that out to accept the Roman Catholic
• 35:49
  Church proof texting this verse?
• 35:52
  Cherry picking this verse, ripping it out of its context and the broader scope
• 35:56
  of the rest of Scripture, just so that we can try to prove that the Pope is a predecessor to Peter.
• 36:03
  Peter was the first Pope. Yeah, you have to do that to support their theology.
• 36:07
  I would literally have to throw out the rest of my Bible, much less just read
• 36:11
  this verse and turn to a Catholic.
• 36:13
  I'm not going to turn into a Catholic because if I, listen, if you turn into
• 36:17
  a Catholic by reading this verse, you've got a bigger problem.
• 36:20
  Than just turning into a Catholic. If you can sit there and convert into a Catholic
• 36:24
  by reading a couple passages of scripture out of context, then you've got a serious problem.
• 36:29
  And here's the thing that most people don't understand.
• 36:32
  Anytime that you study Satan and scripture, one thing that you will learn about
• 36:36
  Satan is Satan was born to rip scripture out of context.
• 36:42
  He did it at the temptation of Jesus Christ. He used scripture.
• 36:47
  He ripped it out of context because he was trying to get Jesus Christ to violate
• 36:51
  his first advent, which was to come to don a cross.
• 36:55
  The second advent is Jesus Christ ruling and reigning as king on earth.
• 36:59
  And he was trying to get him to fulfill or appeal to scriptures that had to
• 37:05
  do with the second advent.
• 37:06
  He was just ripping out of context.
• 37:09
  So anyway, so the Matthew 16 problem is, is that the rock is not Peter.
• 37:15
  And not only that, 2 Thessalonians 2.15, where Paul is speaking,
• 37:19
  he's basically telling you, if you look at the verse, let me pull it up again, 2 Thessalonians.
• 37:25
  Yeah, stand fast and hold the traditions which ye have been taught,
• 37:29
  whether by word or our epistle.
• 37:31
  Right, so notice what he says. He says, which ye have been taught by word or our epistle.
• 37:39
  So, the origin of this tradition is Paul and other apostles, presumably.
• 37:44
  Here it's defined by the context, by word or our epistle. That's what he's saying by tradition.
• 37:49
  It refers to the apostolic doctrine being delivered then by Paul in the first
• 37:56
  century, which we now have as the completed New Testament.
• 37:59
  It doesn't refer to extra biblical myths like the assumption of Mary or the
• 38:04
  perpetual virginity of Mary. That's not what it's saying.
• 38:07
  It's not like an open license to basically say, just because I belong to this
• 38:14
  church that Christ started in the first century, I can now make up whatever doctrine I want.
• 38:19
  Especially because here's the problem, and this is what some people have to
• 38:23
  understand about Scripture.
• 38:24
  Scripture is extremely consistent. There are no contradictions in Scripture.
• 38:28
  The Scripture will never violate
• 38:30
  itself, and it will never violate the testimony of the character of God.
• 38:36
  Okay? Even Paul said that. He says, look, our God is true.
• 38:40
  That's why we don't come to you and say yay, nay. We don't say something is
• 38:44
  yes and no at the same time. That's a contradiction.
• 38:48
  Something cannot be yes and no at the same time and in the same sense.
• 38:51
  That's literally the logical definition of a contradiction.
• 38:55
  That's the law of contradiction. So the law of non-contradiction says that I
• 38:59
  cannot be a human being and a bird at the same time. So what Paul is saying
• 39:04
  in Corinthians is, hey, our God is true.
• 39:08
  Therefore, whatever we tell you is not going to be yay and nay.
• 39:13
  It's going to be yay and yay or nay and nay.
• 39:16
  It will always be consistent because it's consistent with the testimony and
• 39:21
  the character and the integrity of God.
• 39:24
  And if a Catholic bishop or a pope says something about Mary being a virgin
• 39:29
  perpetually, but then you read about her having children, and they were brothers
• 39:34
  and sisters to Jesus Christ,
• 39:36
  and Jesus Christ even confirmed that they were his brothers and sisters,
• 39:39
  then either the Catholic Church is lying through their teeth,
• 39:43
  or your Bible is full of contradictions.
• 39:45
  That's it. That's what it boils down to. So, this tradition that Paul is talking
• 39:50
  about is the traditions that they laid that were part of their epistles and their writings.
• 39:57
  As far as apostolic authority, it's because those apostles like Peter and Paul,
• 40:03
  they understood they were writing by the commandment of God.
• 40:08
  You want an example of that?
• 40:09
  Look at 1 Corinthians chapter 7. Let me show you something.
• 40:15
  So 1 Corinthians chapter 7, this is where Paul's talking about marriage.
• 40:19
  And he starts talking about, you know, concerning things wherever you wrote
• 40:22
  unto me, it's good for a man not to touch a woman.
• 40:24
  Nevertheless, to avoid a fornication, let every man have his own wife.
• 40:27
  Right? And he goes through and he says, defraud not one another.
• 40:30
  He starts giving some advice.
• 40:32
  But then he says, let me see where it says it.
• 40:37
  So notice in verse 12, but to the rest speak I.
• 40:41
  Notice what he says, not the Lord. Yeah. Why did he say that? It's not a commandment.
• 40:46
  But what do you think that right there tells you about what Paul understood about his writings?
• 40:51
  That what he was writing was a commandment from the Lord. That means he knew
• 40:56
  he was writing scripture.
• 40:58
  That means God, in some way or another, he knew that the writings,
• 41:02
  when he told the Thessalonians, we're giving you traditions through our word
• 41:07
  and through our epistles, which are considered scripture.
• 41:13
  So that, it's an interesting statement that he makes.
• 41:16
  He even says, where does he say, look at, he's the same chapter.
• 41:20
  He says that again, doesn't he? Yeah.
• 41:22
  I speak not by commandment, specifically.
• 41:25
  2 Corinthians 8.8.
• 41:28
  I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of the forwardness of others.
• 41:32
  Yeah, he says he speaks not by commandment. But if you look at 2 Peter 3 now.
• 41:37
  2 Peter 3, and down about verse 15, he says this. He says.
• 42:06
  See that? Yeah. Under their own instruction. So even Peter admits that what
• 42:11
  Paul's writing is scriptures. Thank you.
• 42:13
  So, and, you know, the point is this, when Paul says tradition,
• 42:18
  what he means is when we are writing to you right now in these epistles in this first century,
• 42:23
  this is going to be established as the tradition to follow, and it will never contradict scripture.
• 42:30
  Now, we have traditions today. You know, we have a piano player.
• 42:33
  You know, we have pews in our church. We have air conditioner.
• 42:36
  We have, you know, the entry into the building, right?
• 42:41
  You know, anyway, we have all these things. We have bathrooms in there.
• 42:43
  So, we could argue and say, well, those traditions are unscriptural.
• 42:48
  No, but those traditions don't contradict Scripture.
• 42:51
  So, if the Catholic Church comes up with a contradiction, a tradition that contradicts
• 42:55
  Scripture, you have to draw the line in the sand.
• 42:58
  Okay? This is the problem with the Catholic Church. They first, they fix the rules.
• 43:03
  They poison the well. They go, oh, wait a minute.
• 43:06
  You know, Scripture is not the final authority because Christ gave the church
• 43:10
  the final authority, Which means the church can then make up its own authority
• 43:15
  and their own traditions and their own teachings, even if it contradicts scripture.
• 43:19
  And the way they prove that is through scripture.
• 43:23
  It's self-defeating. It's as if they treat scripture as a companion guide to the Catholic church.
• 43:28
  That's it. That's it. So, then, of course, first that's Timothy 3.15,
• 43:33
  where the church is a pillar and ground of the truth.
• 43:35
  It's not the foundation. A pillar holds something up so that others can see
• 43:39
  it. it does not create truth.
• 43:41
  So again, this is where you've got to be careful on the meaning of what they mean.
• 43:48
  When they said the church is the ground and pillar of the truth.
• 43:52
  Okay, are you telling me that that verse is giving authority to the church to create truth?
• 43:58
  Here's the problem I have with that. If you take 2 Timothy 3,
• 44:03
  verse 16, what does it say? All scripture is given by inspiration of the church.
• 44:11
  Not exactly. So, 2 Timothy 3.16 tells us that all scripture is originated from God, not the church.
• 44:19
  The church does not determine truth. The church upholds the truth.
• 44:25
  The church defends the truth.
• 44:28
  The church preaches the truth. It does not invent the truth.
• 44:33
  Categorical error. See that? So, what they're doing is taking 1 Timothy 3.15
• 44:38
  and committing a category error.
• 44:40
  A pillar does not create the truth. It's not the foundation of truth.
• 44:44
  So anyway, this is again where if you read the scripture in its context,
• 44:49
  if you compare scripture with scripture, it's going to basically refute what
• 44:53
  the Catholic Church is claiming.
• 44:55
  No, the proof, the Pope and oral tradition are not equivalent to scripture.
• 45:00
  Then you have the error of the sacrament. So the first one, the water baptism saves, right?
• 45:05
  So 1 Peter, let's look at that. 1 Peter chapter 3. Okay.
• 45:09
  And verse 21. The Bible says this. 1 Peter 3.21.
• 45:14
  It says, The like figure, whereunto even baptism doth also now save us,
• 45:20
  not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience
• 45:23
  by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. So, right there.
• 45:28
  Pentecostals, Oneness Pentecostals, Church of Christ, Lutherans,
• 45:32
  Methodists, they'll all run to this, verse Catholics especially.
• 45:34
  The like figure whereunto, and this is the phrase. Even baptism doth also now
• 45:40
  save us. So that's where they're going to teach.
• 45:44
  Baptism saves. It is a sacrament. If you do not get baptized,
• 45:48
  you are going to go to hell. So they have to baptize every baby.
• 45:52
  We believe in credo baptism or credo baptism, which means that we have to confess belief in Christ.
• 45:59
  A baby doesn't confess belief in Christ. Not only that, baptism is by immersion only in the scriptures.
• 46:07
  But the problem is, is this verse doesn't say baptism saves us.
• 46:11
  This is where you got to be careful and read it. So first he's talking about, you look at verse 20,
• 46:16
  by which also he preached unto the spirits in prison, verse 20,
• 46:19
  which sometime were disobedience when once the long suffering of God waited
• 46:23
  in the days of Noah while the ark was a preparing, wherein few,
• 46:27
  that is, eight souls were saved by water.
• 46:30
  They're physically saved by water, right?
• 46:33
  Right. Then look at verse 21. the like figure.
• 46:38
  The like figure. Similar to. That means that Noah's baptism or that water baptism
• 46:45
  is a figure or a picture of something.
• 46:49
  The like figure, not the actual baptism of water. Then he clarifies it.
• 46:55
  He goes, the like figure.
• 46:57
  So the like figure, what is the like figure he's talking about?
• 47:00
  Noah and the flood. It's a picture of something.
• 47:03
  The like figure where unto even baptism doth also now save us.
• 47:07
  Then there's this little grammatical thing called the parentheses.
• 47:13
  Read the parentheses.
• 47:15
  Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God.
• 47:22
  The answer of a good conscience, that's not a physical thing.
• 47:26
  That's a spiritual thing. Your conscience, the seat of your conscience is your
• 47:29
  spirit. So he says, not the putting away the filth of the flesh.
• 47:33
  That's not me getting in a shower and washing off the filth of my flesh.
• 47:36
  That's not me getting into a baptismal tub and washing away the filth of my flesh.
• 47:42
  He clarifies in the parentheses, this has nothing to do with water.
• 47:45
  This is not water baptism.
• 47:47
  The water baptism is a type, is a type, is a type, is a picture.
• 47:52
  It's a like figure. So, he's very explicit when he's saying,
• 47:57
  look, it's like unto this thing, which is Noah's flood. And also...
• 48:04
  I'm also saying that this isn't about taking a bath. Right.
• 48:08
  That's where he says this is not the putting away of the filth of flesh is what he's saying.
• 48:12
  That's right. And then he clarifies the answer of a good conscience toward God,
• 48:17
  which is spiritual. It's nothing physical.
• 48:18
  But we have a problem. This is what the Bible tells us in Ephesians 4 verse 5.
• 48:23
  Again, comparing scripture to scripture, we got to figure this baptism thing out.
• 48:27
  The Bible says Ephesians 4 verse 5, and this is Paul talking to the church at Ephesus.
• 48:32
  These are saved, you know, blood-washed Christians. He says this,
• 48:38
  there's one Lord, one faith, one baptism.
• 48:43
  One Lord, one faith, one baptism.
• 48:47
  Now, Peter says there's a figure of baptism that deals with water,
• 48:53
  but it's a type of the baptism that actually saves us.
• 48:56
  So there is a baptism that saves us because there's a singular baptism that Paul is talking about.
• 49:03
  He says there's one Lord, one faith. We're not preaching any other faith.
• 49:07
  We're preaching a singular faith, but there's also one baptism.
• 49:11
  Well, that baptism that saves, Paul talks about it in Colossians chapter 2.
• 49:16
  And if you go to Colossians chapter 2, look at verse 11.
• 49:20
  The Bible says this, and whom also you're circumcised
• 49:24
  with a circumcision made without hands in the putting off of the body of the
• 49:29
  sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ buried with him in baptism wherein
• 49:36
  also you're risen with him through the faith of the operation of God who hath
• 49:40
  raised him from the dead.
• 49:42
  So he says there's a spiritual circumcision. There's a circumcision made without hands.
• 49:49
  That cuts away our soul and our spirit away from our flesh.
• 49:53
  So our flesh has no more jurisdiction over our spirit.
• 49:58
  That's what happens. That's the reason why you can't lose your salvation anymore,
• 50:00
  because what your flesh does doesn't affect your spirit or your soul.
• 50:03
  Your soul is, the Bible says, in Leviticus that the blood atoned for the soul,
• 50:08
  while the shed blood of Jesus Christ atoned for our soul.
• 50:11
  So in this particular case, this baptism that Paul is talking about,
• 50:15
  the one Lord, one faith, one baptism, is spiritual baptism.
• 50:18
  He talks about it in 1 Corinthians 12, whereby that we're all baptized by one spirit into one body.
• 50:23
  And then Romans chapter 6, he says we're baptized into Christ.
• 50:28
  Now, when we baptize, when, you know, we have a service and then somebody gets
• 50:32
  saved and they're going to come forth to do believer's baptism,
• 50:35
  right? As a public testimony.
• 50:37
  What they're doing is that they get up there and they're showing what happened to them spiritually.
• 50:41
  They're buried into the water and then they come up, risen to walk in the newness
• 50:44
  of life. Now, we quote Romans 6.
• 50:48
  That's usually what our pastors and stuff quote when they're baptizing somebody.
• 50:53
  But technically, it's not water baptism. Water baptism is not being buried with
• 50:57
  him at that moment and risen to walk.
• 50:59
  No, they're basically showing us physically through the physical baptism what
• 51:04
  happened to us spiritually.
• 51:05
  So this one baptism that does save us, there's only one baptism that saves.
• 51:10
  It's spiritual baptism.
• 51:12
  Well, how do you know there's more than one baptism? If you go to Hebrews chapter
• 51:15
  6 and verse 1, the Bible tells you there's more than one baptism. Verse 1 and 2.
• 51:20
  God who at sundry times—I'm sorry, I'm reading verse 1 or chapter 1.
• 51:24
  But chapter six, therefore, leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ,
• 51:29
  let us go on unto perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance
• 51:34
  from dead works and from faith that were God.
• 51:36
  Verse two of the doctrine of baptisms, plural.
• 51:41
  So, in Hebrews 6, 2, there's more than one baptism.
• 51:45
  But in Ephesians chapter 4, Paul says there's only one Lord, one faith, one baptism.
• 51:51
  So, there is one baptism that saves us.
• 51:55
  All other baptisms are what Peter's referring to, a like figure,
• 52:02
  whereunto baptism doth also save us.
• 52:05
  See that? So when you start to put those verses together and you read them in
• 52:09
  context, you find out, yeah, there is a baptism that's saved that has nothing to do with water.
• 52:12
  Yeah, there's no water. And it certainly doesn't have anything to do with sprinkling a baby.
• 52:16
  So this sacrament that the Catholic Church, and they're trying to run to 1 Peter
• 52:20
  3.21 to establish that? No, I'm sorry.
• 52:23
  That's all you're doing is proving you don't know how to study your scriptures.
• 52:26
  Or read what he's actually saying. Yeah, they're not paying attention to what
• 52:30
  he's actually saying and what the rest of scripture corroborates.
• 52:36
  Yeah. Okay. So the other one is John 663. This is my favorite one.
• 52:41
  This is the Eucharist, right? So, the Eucharist is a doctrine.
• 52:45
  You probably hear that, did you? Didn't hear nothing.
• 52:48
  The doctrine of transubstantiation. This is where they believe that the priest,
• 52:53
  whenever he's holding up the wafer and the wine, that he does some magical incantation.
• 52:59
  And he has now literally turned the wafer into the physical,
• 53:02
  literal flesh of Jesus Christ.
• 53:05
  And the wine into the literal, physical blood of Jesus Christ.
• 53:10
  Cannibalism. And when you eat Christ, when you consume him, you are now receiving Jesus Christ.
• 53:18
  So when you talk to a Catholic, you say, hey, have you received Jesus Christ?
• 53:21
  He goes, oh yeah, I receive him every Saturday.
• 53:25
  Definitions, defining terms. Does he mean like chewing on him every Saturday
• 53:30
  or actually spiritually?
• 53:31
  But what do you say? You say, look, you need to receive Jesus Christ as your
• 53:34
  savior. Oh, I do. Every Saturday I receive him.
• 53:37
  Definitions. What do you mean by receiving? Exactly. You need to get him.
• 53:40
  That you got it that's why it's so important ask that question when
• 53:43
  you say receive him what exactly do you mean and
• 53:46
  it's important for the christian to say when i say receive him what i
• 53:49
  mean is believe on him now look at john chapter 6 this is an this is a pretty
• 53:53
  important chapter and they argue this man today are blue in the face but this
• 54:00
  is what they'll do so in john chapter 6 And he said 63 Yeah, 63,
• 54:07
  but He doesn't start there Here's
• 54:10
  where they have problems Here's where it says Jesus says in verse 51,
• 54:14
  I'll start in verse 50. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven,
• 54:17
  that a man may eat thereof and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven.
• 54:22
  If any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever.
• 54:25
  And the bread that I will give him is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
• 54:30
  The Jews therefore strove amongst them, saying, how can this man give us his flesh to eat?
• 54:34
  Then Jesus said unto them, verily, verily, I say unto you, except you eat the
• 54:39
  flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
• 54:44
  Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life,
• 54:49
  and I will raise him up at the last day, for my flesh is meat indeed,
• 54:53
  and my blood is drink indeed.
• 54:56
  He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me,
• 55:00
  and I in him. There you go.
• 55:03
  Verse 58, this is the bread that came down from heaven, not as your fathers
• 55:07
  did eat manna and are dead. He that eateth of this bread shall vow, live forever.
• 55:13
  Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church teaches the Eucharist as a sacrament.
• 55:17
  It is a saving work. You must take the Eucharist.
• 55:22
  You must take the Last Supper as part of saving grace.
• 55:27
  That's what they teach. Because if you don't eat the flesh of Jesus Christ and
• 55:30
  drink his blood, you will not live forever.
• 55:33
  The problem is, is they don't read the rest of the passage. So if you do go
• 55:37
  to verse 63, look what he says.
• 55:39
  Well, actually, look at verse 61.
• 55:42
  Because even his murmur, and even his disciples started to murmur.
• 55:45
  Yeah, I mean, even as Jesus was saying earlier, like, what do you mean eat of your flesh?
• 55:50
  And it's almost like Jesus Christ is saying, hey, you got to eat my flesh and
• 55:53
  drink my blood. And that's exactly what he's saying.
• 55:57
  But he explains what he means. Verse 61, when Jesus knew in himself that his
• 56:01
  disciples murmured at it, he said, did this offend you? Yeah.
• 56:05
  I love that. At some point, Jesus Christ is going to defend you,
• 56:08
  right? Verse 62, what? Watch this question. Pay attention to what he's saying.
• 56:13
  What an if? It's a rhetorical question, right?
• 56:16
  What an if you shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before?
• 56:20
  What if he goes, what if I'm standing here and all of a sudden the Son of Man
• 56:23
  rises up into the air and disappears into the clouds?
• 56:28
  It is the spirit that quickeneth. It is the flesh profiteth nothing.
• 56:34
  The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life.
• 56:37
  What if I, Jesus Christ, disappeared into the heavens?
• 56:40
  What good will my flesh do you then if I'm not here? No flesh to eat.
• 56:45
  Right? So the words that I'm talking to you have nothing to do with my physical flesh. They are spirit.
• 56:53
  He says, the words that I'm speaking to you are, is a spiritual application.
• 56:59
  The eating of my flesh and the drinking of my blood is a spiritual doctrine,
• 57:04
  not a physical doctrine.
• 57:06
  It has nothing to do with eating my flesh physically. But here's the kicker.
• 57:11
  If you go back earlier in the chapter, Jesus Christ actually defines what the work is here.
• 57:17
  Look what he says. So he said later on, remember he said, if you eat my flesh
• 57:21
  and drink my blood, you'll have eternal life, right?
• 57:24
  Look what he says in verse 45. It is written in the prophets,
• 57:27
  and they shall all be taught of God.
• 57:29
  Every man therefore that hath heard and hath learned of the Father cometh unto
• 57:32
  me, not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God. He hath seen the Father.
• 57:37
  Verily I say unto you, he that believeth on me hath everlasting life. See that?
• 57:44
  He that believeth on me.
• 57:46
  Now, look a little bit earlier. Where is it?
• 57:51
  Look at verse 40.
• 57:53
  And this is the will of him that sent me, that everyone which seeth the Son
• 57:58
  and believeth on him may have everlasting life, and I'll raise him up at that last day.
• 58:05
  Eternal life has to do with believing Jesus Christ, not eating his flesh or drinking his blood.
• 58:12
  When he used the analogy of eating his flesh and drinking his blood,
• 58:15
  it was a spiritual analogy.
• 58:18
  That's why he says the words that I speak unto you are spirit.
• 58:23
  Because if I ascended up into heaven, my flesh and my blood would do you no
• 58:28
  good. It profiteth nothing.
• 58:31
  So when you read the verse in its context, in its entirety, and you don't just
• 58:36
  cherry pick a few passages, the whole doctrine of the Eucharist falls apart. Yeah, there it is.
• 58:43
  And then James 5.14 talks about, you know, having a man pray for you.
• 58:47
  Has nothing to do with last rites, a man dying.
• 58:50
  It has something to do with a man who's sick and raising them up.
• 58:55
  Last rites are to prepare them for death. This has nothing to do with Jesus Christ.
• 58:59
  Now, here's the problem, again, is that they're taking a verse out of context
• 59:04
  and not reading the passage.
• 59:06
  The last point, so that was the error of sacrament. So, we dealt with the error of authority.
• 59:11
  So, the scripture is the authority, not the pope, not the traditions that they
• 59:14
  come up with, but the traditions of the apostolic authority,
• 59:18
  which Peter, Paul, and Acts, you know them, Luke, and so forth and so on.
• 59:23
  And then, of course, the error of the sacraments is that they're basically ripping
• 59:28
  it out of context, and they're coming up with some false doctrine that has nothing
• 59:32
  to do with the passages or what the rest of Scripture teaches.
• 59:35
  Then the error of work salvation, they use Colossians, talking about—like,
• 59:41
  if I go to Colossians 1, let me read that real quick.
• 59:43
  Colossians 1.24, the Bible says.
• 59:47
  It says, who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is
• 59:51
  behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church.
• 59:56
  And he talks about, and this is what they use. They say that we must suffer
• 1:00:00
  for our sins through purgatory or penance or whatever.
• 1:00:05
  And those works are required for salvation. So they'll use this and say,
• 1:00:09
  well, there you go. Paul had to suffer for Christ.
• 1:00:12
  We have to follow in his steps. We have to suffer for Christ if we're going to be saved.
• 1:00:17
  They'll also use, obviously, James 2, you know, talking about justification,
• 1:00:22
  a man's justified by works, and so forth and so on.
• 1:00:25
  And so what they'll do is they'll use this passage to try to prove that Jesus
• 1:00:30
  Christ, his sacrifice on the cross, his substitutionary atonement was not enough.
• 1:00:37
  That we have to cooperate and work with God in conjunction with our works.
• 1:00:43
  What he did on the cross, plus my taking the penance and the purgatory.
• 1:00:48
  And here's the problem. The Bible says, and look at Hebrews chapter one,
• 1:00:51
  if you look at Hebrews chapter one, because, you know, they talk about purgatory.
• 1:00:55
  Purgatory is where, you know, you pay for the rest of your sins,
• 1:00:58
  whatever you didn't pay for here on earth.
• 1:01:00
  But in Hebrews chapter one, the Bible says this in verse three, speaking of verse two,
• 1:01:05
  his son, verse three, who being the brightness of his glory and the express
• 1:01:09
  image of his person and upholding all things by the word of his power when he
• 1:01:12
  had by himself purged our sins.
• 1:01:16
  Sat down in the right hand of the majesty on high Jesus Christ purged all of
• 1:01:21
  our sins yeah he's our purgatory yeah,
• 1:01:24
  I don't have to go to purgatory. I don't have to pay for the rest of my sins.
• 1:01:27
  All my sins were completely and totally and utterly taken care of at the cross.
• 1:01:34
  Bible says he, whenever he paid for our sins, he forever sat down once forever.
• 1:01:40
  He doesn't have to be, you know, crucified over and over again.
• 1:01:43
  So every time a Catholic says, well, I've got to take the sacraments.
• 1:01:47
  I've got to suffer for my sins.
• 1:01:48
  I've got, but basically what you're arguing is that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ
• 1:01:52
  was holy in, is wholly inadequate, that God was not satisfied with the absolute
• 1:01:59
  sinless righteousness of a sinless sacrifice.
• 1:02:02
  He needs some dirty, rotten sinner also to pay for his sins.
• 1:02:06
  No, that is a complete blasphemy of the doctrine of grace through faith.
• 1:02:12
  Jesus Christ paid for our sins. And on John chapter 19, he says, it is finished.
• 1:02:17
  There's nothing else to add to the works of Christ. According to the Catholics,
• 1:02:21
  it should say it is almost finished. Right.
• 1:02:25
  So, if we were to look at this and we were to just say, look,
• 1:02:28
  if you're going to talk to a Catholic, what you need to do is establish the proper argument.
• 1:02:33
  Okay? You know, we went over the doctrinal expression model,
• 1:02:36
  which is the two whys for every what.
• 1:02:39
  Okay? And this is what you do. What is our conclusion? And our conclusion is
• 1:02:43
  scripture is the final sufficient authority.
• 1:02:45
  Tradition does not supersede the Bible. So when we say that,
• 1:02:50
  when we say sola scriptura, that's probably what some people may be familiar with that phrase.
• 1:02:54
  That is not, it's just me and my Bible under a tree and I can basically determine
• 1:02:59
  what truth is by my own private interpretation.
• 1:03:02
  No, that's not what we, that's not what we mean when we say sola scriptura.
• 1:03:05
  What we mean by sola scriptura is that when it comes to the final determination
• 1:03:11
  of what's true or false, we must go to the Bible.
• 1:03:15
  And if our own personal opinion or the opinion of our pastor or the opinion
• 1:03:20
  of a bishop or the opinion of a church or the opinion of an institution contradicts
• 1:03:25
  Scripture, we throw that testimony out and we accept what Scripture says.
• 1:03:30
  That doesn't mean that I'm going to go to the Bible to find out what I'm going
• 1:03:33
  to have lunch tomorrow, you know, what I'm going to have for lunch tomorrow.
• 1:03:36
  That's not, that's misinterpreting.
• 1:03:38
  That's mis, that's a straw man argument of Sola Scriptura.
• 1:03:41
  What we're saying is scripture is the final arbiter when it comes to faith and
• 1:03:47
  practice for a Christian. That's what it comes down to.
• 1:03:50
  So when it comes to these traditions, whatever we believe about Mary is going
• 1:03:55
  to be based off of what scripture says.
• 1:03:56
  What the Bible says about the, you know, the blood of Christ or the body of
• 1:03:59
  Christ, the Bible is our final authority, always.
• 1:04:03
  So, here's the major premises, and this is the explicit proof.
• 1:04:08
  Jesus said in Mark 7, 13, he said that the Pharisees made the word of God of
• 1:04:14
  none effect through their tradition, right?
• 1:04:18
  So, that means that the Pharisees had their own private tradition that superseded
• 1:04:24
  scripture, and Jesus Christ admitted right there, Mark 7, 13,
• 1:04:28
  your tradition makes the word of God of none effect.
• 1:04:33
  That means there's a conflict between their tradition and the word of God.
• 1:04:38
  Sola Scriptura is we have to, our final arbiter is scripture,
• 1:04:43
  period. So that's the major premise. The minor premise is this.
• 1:04:46
  2 Thessalonians 2.15 defines tradition as what Paul preached and wrote.
• 1:04:53
  Once the canon was closed, the faith was then once delivered.
• 1:04:58
  You don't add to it. You don't build upon it. You don't build or come up with
• 1:05:03
  new doctrines and tradition that contradicts scripture.
• 1:05:07
  Then the world, the consequence for rejecting this, the implication,
• 1:05:11
  the why number two, which is why does it matter?
• 1:05:13
  If oral tradition is equal to scripture, then there's no objective standard.
• 1:05:18
  You end up with a man-centered epistemology where the church stands over the
• 1:05:21
  Bible rather under it, and this leads to dogmas that contradict scripture like
• 1:05:25
  purgatory, Mary worship, the Eucharist, so forth and so on, right?
• 1:05:28
  Those are all traditions that violate what scripture says.
• 1:05:33
  So, the what is, Scripture is the final sufficient authority.
• 1:05:37
  Tradition does not supersede it. Why is it true? Because Jesus rebuked the Pharisees
• 1:05:42
  and confirmed that they used their tradition to undermine the Word of God,
• 1:05:48
  which is exactly what the Catholic Church.
• 1:05:50
  The minor premise is that when Paul said tradition,
• 1:05:53
  it was based off of their written epistles and scripture, and that it was not
• 1:06:00
  inferring that future dogmas and traditions would then supersede scripture.
• 1:06:07
  And of course, why does it matter? Because once you reject the literal,
• 1:06:12
  biblical literalism that the Bible says what it means and means what it says,
• 1:06:16
  and you reject the sole interpretation of Scripture and Scripture interpreting
• 1:06:20
  itself, once you do that, there's no end to what you can teach.
• 1:06:24
  You go down a slippery slope of doctrine. And basically, man can invent whatever he wants about God.
• 1:06:31
  The Catholic Church. Which is exactly what the Catholic Church is.
• 1:06:34
  So therefore, the conclusion is we hold to the Bible alone.
• 1:06:37
  Any tradition that contradicts a written word must be rejected, period.
• 1:06:41
  So, you know, when it comes down to simple questions, we can push back,
• 1:06:45
  you know, like the rock thing.
• 1:06:48
  So we can ask this to say, look, so your claim is that Peter's the rock.
• 1:06:52
  He's the foundation of the church, right? Yes. He's the first pope. Yes.
• 1:06:56
  Therefore, because he has the keys of the church, he can come up with any tradition
• 1:07:01
  or doctrine he wants. Correct. That's right.
• 1:07:03
  So here's the question I want to ask you.
• 1:07:06
  When Jesus Christ, the entire context of Matthew 16, 13 through 18,
• 1:07:11
  is about the identification of Jesus Christ.
• 1:07:15
  How does that shift all of a sudden to just Peter?
• 1:07:19
  When Jesus Christ was speaking to all of his disciples,
• 1:07:23
  when he gave them all the authority to preach and teach whatsoever things I've
• 1:07:28
  taught you, when he gave that to all of them, all of a sudden you single out
• 1:07:32
  Peter, that the whole context about Christ now shifts to Peter.
• 1:07:36
  Why would I accept that the grammatical, the contextual, and the broader scriptural
• 1:07:42
  argument is that Jesus Christ is a rock for your private interpretation that
• 1:07:46
  Peter is the rock he was referring to. Why would I accept that?
• 1:07:50
  Or you could push it and say, well, why did Peter and Paul and Jesus Christ
• 1:07:55
  all argue that he was the rock in other places?
• 1:07:58
  You never hear Peter. Can you show me a passage of scripture where Peter admitted he was the rock?
• 1:08:04
  Or isn't any. He had a perfect opportunity in Acts 2 and 3 and 4.
• 1:08:10
  How come he never did that?
• 1:08:12
  Matter of fact, when somebody in the book of Acts fell down his feet, he said, stand up.
• 1:08:17
  I'm a man just like you. You don't see popes doing that.
• 1:08:21
  He was a bad example. He had a wife. He was called Satan right after,
• 1:08:26
  and he was rebuking Jesus Christ.
• 1:08:29
  So anyway, so there's some problems. And you just push back on the questions,
• 1:08:32
  right? Whenever you say, for example, about the baptism.
• 1:08:35
  So when you tell me that baptism saves, why does the scripture say right there
• 1:08:41
  that it's not the putting away the filth of the flesh like water would do?
• 1:08:43
  Why does it admit that it has nothing to do with water baptism?
• 1:08:47
  Why should I automatically assume that it is water baptism that saves when other
• 1:08:53
  scriptures confirm that it has nothing to do with water at all?
• 1:08:57
  Why should I accept you taking some passage, redefining what it means,
• 1:09:04
  taking it out of its context, and it conflicts and it contradicts with other scripture?
• 1:09:10
  Why should I accept your private interpretation versus what the rest of scripture says?
• 1:09:15
  Why should I reject the whole counsel of God just for your particular obscure
• 1:09:19
  passage that you took? Why would I do that?
• 1:09:24
  So the point is When you look at these verses That they basically talk about,
• 1:09:29
  And this is again This whole appeal to authority fallacy Which is really what it boils down to.
• 1:09:36
  I understand, and this is probably something you can say, your counter could
• 1:09:39
  be, look, when they respond, but the church teaches, but the church teaches again, right?
• 1:09:44
  Look, I understand that the claim, you know, that's the claim of the church,
• 1:09:47
  but my question is about the source of that authority, right?
• 1:09:52
  If the church claims authority from the Bible, but the Bible contradicts the
• 1:09:59
  church in so many different passages.
• 1:10:02
  Which one is the higher authority? The master or the servant?
• 1:10:07
  The master Jesus Christ or the servant?
• 1:10:09
  Because they will argue and say, well, if we go to Matthew 16,
• 1:10:14
  it establishes the authority of the church.
• 1:10:16
  So wait a minute, are you stating that the church's authority is based on the scriptures?
• 1:10:24
  You're admitting that the scriptures are greater authority than the church.
• 1:10:30
  If the church was given its authority,
• 1:10:33
  was created, its authority was created and legalized and justified by the scripture,
• 1:10:40
  are you then admitting that the scripture is the greater authority than the church?
• 1:10:46
  Because it doesn't say the church gave the authority to the scripture.
• 1:10:50
  In order to give authority to the church.
• 1:10:52
  Sounds a little... Self-defeating, yeah.
• 1:10:55
  But you see, the problem is when you talk to a Catholic, and this is where you
• 1:11:00
  got to be real careful, you got to define your terms, and you stop and say,
• 1:11:04
  okay, well, let's look at the passage.
• 1:11:06
  And whatever the passage reveals, leverage that passage and challenge their assumption.
• 1:11:13
  So, wait a minute, you're saying that Jesus Christ said literally that we had
• 1:11:17
  to eat his flesh and drink his blood.
• 1:11:20
  Then why in verse 63 does he say the flesh and the flesh profits nothing?
• 1:11:25
  Why does he admit that even if you had a cup of my literal blood and you had
• 1:11:31
  a plate of my literal flesh, it would profit you nothing?
• 1:11:36
  It would do you no good. Why would Jesus say that?
• 1:11:40
  And then why would Jesus say that the first logical step in obtaining eternal
• 1:11:47
  life was believing on him?
• 1:11:50
  It had nothing to do with eating his flesh and drinking his blood.
• 1:11:53
  It's almost as if he was using the eating his flesh and drinking his blood as
• 1:11:58
  a mockery to those Jews, because he's trying to point something out.
• 1:12:02
  Just like God used the manna to feed them physically, the nation of Israel.
• 1:12:09
  Because again, the context here is Israel. It's not about the world.
• 1:12:12
  He says, hey, you ate manna and it preserved your physical life.
• 1:12:17
  But what you need is to eat me spiritually?
• 1:12:21
  What is the eating spiritually defined as? Believing on Christ. That's what he said.
• 1:12:26
  He said he is the bread of life. But he said in verse 40, this is the will of
• 1:12:32
  him that you believe on him whom he sent.
• 1:12:36
  That's the point. It has nothing to do with eating his flesh.
• 1:12:40
  So, the question you push back and say, when Jesus said that the work was believing
• 1:12:46
  on him and that having his literal flesh and his literal blood would profit you nothing,
• 1:12:53
  why should I automatically pivot and accept what the Catholic Church translates
• 1:12:58
  as the Eucharist, the doctrine of the Eucharist, which completely,
• 1:13:02
  totally undermines the passage and rips it out of its context?
• 1:13:05
  Why should I accept that?
• 1:13:07
  But the Church this, wait a minute, where does the Church get its authority from?
• 1:13:13
  And so, this is where, and you know what's funny about this?
• 1:13:16
  And this is where I've seen, I've seen Protestant apologists do this,
• 1:13:19
  which I think they shoot themselves in the foot, but they'll basically try to
• 1:13:22
  argue and say, well, you know, it's not literally the Bible says,
• 1:13:25
  and there was no Bible in the first century.
• 1:13:28
  So, scriptures aren't our final authority. It's the tradition of the apostles.
• 1:13:32
  The problem is, is they're actually giving the argument to the Catholics.
• 1:13:35
  Yeah. Because the Catholics will say the same thing. Well, what scriptures did they appeal to?
• 1:13:39
  Yeah. But they did appeal to scripture.
• 1:13:42
  Jesus did in Matthew 4 and Luke 4 when he opened up the book of Isaiah.
• 1:13:47
  Every time the Bible says in 1 Corinthians 15, our gospel that we believe,
• 1:13:51
  Paul said how that Christ died for us according to the scriptures.
• 1:13:58
  So the problem is, is that the scriptures are always appealed to as the final authority.
• 1:14:04
  Jesus said, for example, you know, to the Sadducees, he said,
• 1:14:07
  ye do err not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God. So he equates knowing
• 1:14:11
  the scriptures as the power of God.
• 1:14:14
  Jesus said in John 12, 48, he says, I'm not going to judge you,
• 1:14:18
  but there is one that's going to judge you in the last days.
• 1:14:20
  Even the words that I speak are going to judge you.
• 1:14:24
  And then he carries forth that authority when he says, hey, guess what?
• 1:14:28
  John 16, the Holy Spirit is going to give you remembrance of all things whatsoever
• 1:14:34
  you're going to say. Don't worry about what you're going to say.
• 1:14:37
  The Holy Spirit's going to guide you. and the Holy Spirit is the author of scripture.
• 1:14:41
  And then Peter and Paul and the other writers acknowledged that they were writing
• 1:14:46
  on the basis of what God told them to write.
• 1:14:51
  That's apostolic authority over scripture. That means the Bible,
• 1:14:55
  and this is what, here's the kicker.
• 1:14:57
  I keep saying the kicker. That's my word for today.
• 1:15:00
  2 Timothy 3.16 says, all scriptures give my inspiration to God, right?
• 1:15:06
  Profitable, profitable for doctrine, doctrine, doctrine.
• 1:15:09
  That means I don't need to go anywhere else for doctrine. I go to scripture
• 1:15:12
  for doctrine, for proof, correction, for instruction, righteousness.
• 1:15:16
  Verse 17, what does verse 17 say? that the man of God may be perfect,
• 1:15:21
  perfect, perfect, not and throughly, not thoroughly,
• 1:15:25
  throughly, through end to end, throughly furnished unto all good works.
• 1:15:33
  That means that that verse 17 tells us that scripture is holy and completely
• 1:15:39
  sufficient for the believer.
• 1:15:42
  Verse 16 tells us the origin is from God, it tells us that it's profitable,
• 1:15:47
  that scripture alone is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction.
• 1:15:52
  Reproof is showing somebody where they're wrong. Correction is showing them
• 1:15:56
  here's the correct verses, and then instruction in righteousness is discipline.
• 1:16:01
  So why? That the man of God may be perfect. Not so he can run to the Roman Catholic
• 1:16:06
  Church and then balance the two authorities, and whenever the church contradicts
• 1:16:11
  the scriptures, Well, you just toss the scriptures out and go with the church.
• 1:16:15
  There's nothing in the Bible that corroborates that. So the problem is with
• 1:16:20
  this Catholic proof texting,
• 1:16:22
  what they're essentially doing is ripping verses out of context and twisting
• 1:16:27
  it into their perverted doctrines that send people to hell.
• 1:16:32
  That's what they're doing. That's what the Roman Catholic Church is.
• 1:16:35
  No, when I read these verses, I don't need to be scared. I'm going to turn into
• 1:16:37
  a Roman Catholic. Right.
• 1:16:39
  When I read those verses and I'll read the context, what I should be afraid
• 1:16:43
  of is that I don't have like a lot of hatred for Catholics because of what they're teaching.
• 1:16:48
  Honestly, I don't hate Catholics, you know, individually. I hate the institution
• 1:16:53
  because that institution has sent more people to hell than probably next to
• 1:16:58
  the Muslims than anybody else.
• 1:17:01
  And they do it by, and the worst part, because the Muslims don't do this,
• 1:17:06
  but the Catholics do. The Catholics use scripture to do it.
• 1:17:10
  This is a perfect example. Now, here's what's, you know what the irony is?
• 1:17:15
  If you and I lived in the 1400s or 1300s, that the Catholic Church would never
• 1:17:21
  use scripture to back up anything they taught.
• 1:17:24
  They would just burn you at the stake. They would just burn you at the stake
• 1:17:27
  or drown you or chop your head off. Yeah. That's exactly, because they don't
• 1:17:31
  want you to know the scriptures.
• 1:17:32
  The fact that they're wised up now after the last 500 years,
• 1:17:38
  and they realize that the Bible has been published in the common language that
• 1:17:43
  man can read for themselves, they don't need a priest to read it.
• 1:17:46
  They have to change their tactics. They have to change their tactics. Yeah.
• 1:17:50
  And they're always going to undermine, and they're going to use the same exact
• 1:17:53
  tactic as the devil is, because it's the devil's religion. And so,
• 1:17:56
  the point is, is whenever these
• 1:17:57
  Catholics start to use these verses of Scripture to try to prove it, stop.
• 1:18:01
  Examine the Scriptures. See whether those things are so. Ask some good logical
• 1:18:06
  questions. Is that really what the text is actually saying?
• 1:18:09
  Here's the evil intent behind all of it, is you had a question there—.
• 1:18:17
  Their premise about approaching it this way, using scripture because they are
• 1:18:21
  banking on what? They're banking on your ignorance.
• 1:18:24
  That's right. Not knowing, and even as believers, not knowing the scriptures
• 1:18:28
  as thoroughly as they should.
• 1:18:31
  And, you know, we're always going back to this, studying your Bible,
• 1:18:35
  understanding what you believe, so that way you can defend your position.
• 1:18:40
  Yeah, when I got- And defend against stuff like this. When I got saved in the
• 1:18:42
  early 90s, it wasn't about this. It was more about, I just didn't know what
• 1:18:48
  the Bible actually said.
• 1:18:49
  So, you know, the Catholic church banked on that. They just knew people didn't
• 1:18:52
  know what the Bible said.
• 1:18:54
  Now people are getting smarter as to what the Bible says. Now they're leveraging
• 1:18:59
  it and they're just twisting it. Well, that's not really what it means.
• 1:19:02
  And they're doing exactly what the devil did in the garden, right?
• 1:19:05
  Well, God didn't really say you'd die. You're not surely going to die.
• 1:19:09
  You know, did God really say that? And so what they'll do is,
• 1:19:13
  again, they'll take verses and they'll rip it out of context.
• 1:19:16
  I would just suggest people go back to our context episode.
• 1:19:21
  Read that. What is private interpretation? That's when you remove it from the whole.
• 1:19:27
  You're taking it away and isolating it from the rest of the text.
• 1:19:30
  And that's exactly what they're doing. So then I can just make it mean whatever I want to mean.
• 1:19:34
  Yeah, that's what they do. Yep. So, yeah, all they're doing with these verses,
• 1:19:42
  you know, read these 10 passages, 10 biblical verses that Protestants cannot
• 1:19:46
  accept without becoming Catholic. Like, oh, I can accept them all day long.
• 1:19:49
  I'm just not going to accept them on the Catholic Church's terms.
• 1:19:53
  I'm not going to take your private interpretation and private definition.
• 1:19:56
  I'm going to actually read the rest of Scripture and find out what God meant by those passages.
• 1:20:00
  You know what? I mean, this is, they provide almost like helping you or us,
• 1:20:06
  like taking these 10 and running it through what we just ran through right now. Yeah.
• 1:20:10
  To strengthen your own position and be able to respond and maybe help others
• 1:20:14
  that might be confused. Because people will take this stuff at face value and they know it.
• 1:20:18
  Yeah. It's like, oh, wow, I didn't see that in that verse.
• 1:20:21
  Exactly. And, you know, they must be correct.
• 1:20:24
  What do you do with that? Yeah. Well, and again, you know, when you read something
• 1:20:28
  with predisposed bias, it's almost like you're going to— It's like confirmation
• 1:20:32
  bias. You're going to gloss over, and you're going to read exactly the Catholic
• 1:20:37
  Church doctrine in there. Yeah.
• 1:20:38
  But if I'm going to stop you and say, wait a minute, wait a minute,
• 1:20:41
  wait, you read over that verse a little too quickly. Let's look at what it actually says.
• 1:20:45
  And then when you stop, and this is again, this is why, you know,
• 1:20:48
  adherence to the King James Bible, a perfect singular English standard is such
• 1:20:54
  a tremendous beneficial tool for the believer because you can sit there and rely on what it says.
• 1:20:59
  Just because they think it means something else or reinterpret it,
• 1:21:03
  listen, that doesn't mean you have to wholly accept it blindly.
• 1:21:06
  We don't have a blind faith. We have a faith that's based off of examination
• 1:21:10
  of God's word. If God said something, whether I understand it or not,
• 1:21:16
  my first obligation is to believe it.
• 1:21:19
  So when I read John 6 in its entirety, when I consider the entire context,
• 1:21:25
  what's going on in John 6? He's feeding the multitude.
• 1:21:28
  And he's basically saying the problem you people have is you're just here to get a free meal.
• 1:21:35
  So he leverages that and says, well, you need to eat my flesh and drink my blood,
• 1:21:39
  but they completely ignore the context of his message.
• 1:21:43
  It's not about the literal eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood.
• 1:21:48
  It's about believing on him.
• 1:21:51
  He is given the preeminence. Jesus Christ is.
• 1:21:54
  So, he says, look, even if you had my physical body and my physical blood, it wouldn't profit you.
• 1:22:00
  When you read it in its context, it makes perfect sense.
• 1:22:04
  And guess what? There's no contradiction in scripture.
• 1:22:07
  But when you read it like the Catholic, you have to say, well,
• 1:22:11
  in order for me to completely understand this, I've got to go to the Catholic catechism.
• 1:22:16
  I've got to go to the doctrines of the Catholic church so that they can further
• 1:22:20
  explain to me what the doctrine of the Eucharist actually is.
• 1:22:24
  No, you don't. What you need to do is put down the Catholic catechism and toss
• 1:22:28
  it in the garbage can and just stick with your King James Bible. That's all you got to do.
• 1:22:33
  And you will be right because you're basing what you believe off of what God said.
• 1:22:38
  And that's really, that's where you err in safety.
• 1:22:42
  I'm going to err, you know, I'm going to take the more cautious approach and
• 1:22:46
  just believe that God said what he meant and meant what he said.
• 1:22:49
  That's all you have to do. Yeah. All right. So we covered the 10 passages.
• 1:22:55
  And thank you to Reaching Catholics and others for providing us material to go over.
• 1:23:00
  It's a good exercise. So the big three things here.
• 1:23:04
  One thing to think about is using, this is a good exercise to use the two whys for every what.
• 1:23:10
  Solid framework. Let me stress this with the two whys for every what.
• 1:23:15
  Just so, it's not a counter to their rebuttals. The counter is the questioning.
• 1:23:21
  What do you mean by that? How did you come to that conclusion? Yeah.
• 1:23:24
  How do you reconcile? The two whys for every what is you confirming and establishing
• 1:23:29
  what you actually believe.
• 1:23:31
  That's the two whys for every what. The doctrinal expression model is how do
• 1:23:34
  we express our doctrine.
• 1:23:37
  And the way we tell others what we actually believe is the two whys for every what.
• 1:23:43
  But the way that we counter is going to the context, asking for clear definitions,
• 1:23:50
  asking them to reconcile that with apparent contradictions of other passages
• 1:23:54
  and so forth and so on, right?
• 1:23:55
  They must explain their doctrine in light of scripture.
• 1:23:59
  And so the only way we could do that is clarify what they mean by those things.
• 1:24:03
  How do they come to those conclusions scripturally?
• 1:24:06
  We're not gonna accept, well, you know, the Catholic church has always taught
• 1:24:09
  that. I don't care what the Catholic church always taught. Show me from scripture.
• 1:24:13
  And then they would say, well, you know, you believe in that sola scriptura
• 1:24:15
  thing. Well, hold on, I'll clarify my doctrine.
• 1:24:18
  I'll clarify it by my two whys for every what. What we believe is that scripture
• 1:24:22
  supersedes any human tradition. That's what we believe.
• 1:24:26
  Well, where do you get that from? First premise, Jesus Christ told the Pharisees
• 1:24:31
  in Mark 7, 13, that they were leveraging their tradition to undermine scripture.
• 1:24:37
  That's the major premise. That's a biblical argument. What's the minor premise?
• 1:24:41
  Paul said, you establish traditions based off of what we wrote and what we taught
• 1:24:47
  you, not what some other biblical teacher or some other religious teacher teaches you.
• 1:24:53
  That's the minor premise. And then what's the implication?
• 1:24:56
  The implication is, If we reject that doctrine, right, that the Bible supersedes
• 1:25:01
  tradition, if we reject that, then that means any tradition can easily undermine
• 1:25:06
  scripture and there's no end to it. There is no perfect absolute standard.
• 1:25:10
  So, the two whys for every what is simply a way that we express our doctrine.
• 1:25:16
  That's really what it boils down to.
• 1:25:17
  So, just so I don't want our listeners to be confused about it,
• 1:25:21
  you don't use the two whys for every what to refute. you use the questioning
• 1:25:25
  the criteria the critiquing to refute you articulate your beliefs using that model that's it.
• 1:25:32
  But by doing that, and I would say this, by clarifying the two whys for every
• 1:25:37
  what, you actually help yourself, right?
• 1:25:41
  Like, what do I believe about John 6, 63, you know, and eating his flesh?
• 1:25:46
  And what do I believe about that?
• 1:25:48
  Develop a two whys for every what?
• 1:25:51
  What is the doctrine? What's the conclusion? The conclusion is,
• 1:25:54
  is that Jesus Christ was using a spiritual analogy, but the primacy of his argument is to believe on him.
• 1:26:03
  Well, what's the major premise? He says in verse 40 that you're supposed to
• 1:26:09
  believe on me. That is the work, is to believe on me.
• 1:26:12
  What's the minor premise? That if you had his flesh, it would profit you nothing.
• 1:26:16
  See that, how you argue it?
• 1:26:18
  And then what's the consequence? If you reject that, you're liable to believe
• 1:26:22
  that you're supposed to be cannibalistic.
• 1:26:24
  With the Catholics' belief. See? That's where you use the two whys for every
• 1:26:27
  what, is to help you articulate what you should believe. Yeah.
• 1:26:32
  And then the refuting is to ask them those questions to draw out what they mean.
• 1:26:36
  The Socratic method, yeah.
• 1:26:37
  Challenging them. How do they come to that conclusion? What was the reasoning
• 1:26:40
  process? And then that's when you start pushing back with the questions.
• 1:26:43
  Like, here are the inconsistencies.
• 1:26:45
  You're examining, you're doing an investigation. Well, that doesn't make sense
• 1:26:48
  because you said this over here and then you also agree with this over here.
• 1:26:51
  Put them on the hot seat. Yeah. That's what the questioning is.
• 1:26:54
  And the burden is on them. They're making these claims. They're saying these things.
• 1:26:59
  Yeah. So, there are three main categories. So, there's the ten passages.
• 1:27:03
  There's covering the three main categories, which are the… The authority. The error of authority.
• 1:27:10
  Yep. The error of sacraments. And then finally, works.
• 1:27:13
  Yeah, works salvation. Yeah, if you think of it that way, it just makes it a
• 1:27:17
  little bit easier for the believer, is that typically when you run into a Catholic,
• 1:27:21
  it's going to be one of those three categories. They're going to push back on you.
• 1:27:27
  Now, this is great, this going through—that's what I was saying.
• 1:27:31
  Thanks to these guys, whoever they are, for providing these passages for us to analyze.
• 1:27:36
  It only helps strengthen our position. I really do appreciate that Catholics
• 1:27:39
  do that because a lot of times they won't.
• 1:27:41
  They'll just push back on you that, you know, they're the true church.
• 1:27:45
  Yeah. And they'll throw a verse out. They'll basically throw a verse out to
• 1:27:48
  try—and they do this. They'll do this proof texting.
• 1:27:51
  You know what? This is, I think, another lesson here, Alan, is that we Christians shouldn't proof text.
• 1:27:57
  Don't grab a verse out of context and try to use that as a proof about your
• 1:28:01
  religion or your doctrine or whatever it is you believe, right? Yeah.
• 1:28:05
  You know, I've heard way too many people do it.
• 1:28:08
  Way too many examples and we'll probably get in trouble if we start going into
• 1:28:11
  it, but the point is, is that people will take a single verse of scripture and
• 1:28:15
  basically teach a broad brushed doctrine off of one verse of scripture.
• 1:28:21
  Yeah. You can't do that. We're guilty of it too. Yep.
• 1:28:25
  So, there'll be a podcast for that. Right. All right, so that's Catholic proof texting.
• 1:28:33
  I thought this was, you did some expository, you know, did some exposition of the scriptures here.
• 1:28:38
  And it's enlightening when you're reading the chapters and you're seeing what
• 1:28:43
  Jesus Christ was talking about, and it was spiritual application. He was using an analogy.
• 1:28:49
  It was just his method of teaching and how that could be taken out of context.
• 1:28:54
  And there's a, well, probably, I'm still kind of writing down my notes on it,
• 1:29:00
  but, you know, you and I talked a little bit about it, but deductive and inductive Bible study. Right.
• 1:29:06
  And the importance of both of those is that deductively, we come to a broad
• 1:29:12
  principled conclusion.
• 1:29:15
  Like, so, for example, the Bible's right. The Bible's perfect.
• 1:29:19
  There's no mistakes in the Bible, right?
• 1:29:21
  That's the broad principled conclusion. That's the deduction.
• 1:29:24
  And then the inductive study is as we look at those verses in particular,
• 1:29:28
  it's always guarded by the fact that the Bible is always right.
• 1:29:32
  So if I come across a passage that looks like it's a contradiction,
• 1:29:36
  I got to fall back on the deductive reasoning. No, the scripture is always right.
• 1:29:41
  So, that means there's something wrong with my inductive reasoning here. See that?
• 1:29:45
  The inductive reasoning is always protected by the deductive.
• 1:29:48
  So, we'll use some examples and we'll run through scriptures to show how that
• 1:29:54
  deductive Bible study and inductive Bible study complement each other.
• 1:29:57
  But it also helps us because think of inductive Bible study as exposition, expository.
• 1:30:04
  I'm looking through the passage and I'm getting clues.
• 1:30:07
  Like we look through John 6. oh he said
• 1:30:10
  believing on him was the work that was the purpose
• 1:30:13
  oh he said that if you had his flesh it would
• 1:30:16
  profit you nothing you see what i mean we were pulling clues
• 1:30:19
  out that's inductive and we came to an inductive inference
• 1:30:23
  that hey this he can't be talking about his physical blood yeah and and flesh
• 1:30:29
  it's like that detective approach you're just you're you're collecting evidence
• 1:30:33
  preponderance of evidence to paint a picture that supports you know the conclusion That's it.
• 1:30:40
  But yeah, that'll be an interesting one to cover too. Yeah. I think that'll
• 1:30:43
  really help. How to study your Bible.
• 1:30:44
  Because yeah, I would say that would really help a lot of our listeners that
• 1:30:49
  if you want to learn how to study better and you kind of create kind of a template
• 1:30:55
  of study and you do that every time you approach a scripture or a passage,
• 1:30:59
  it forces you to honor the Bible for what it says and not make false assumptions
• 1:31:06
  or build false assumptions.
• 1:31:08
  Because of some bias you have in your head, you know, so, yeah.
• 1:31:13
  Good stuff, man. Well, thanks for the comprehensive study. Yeah.
• 1:31:17
  Yeah. I mean, it could have been longer. It could have easily been longer,
• 1:31:20
  but we just wanted to give you a couple examples of what they teach,
• 1:31:24
  what they claim, but how far removed it is from Scripture. Yeah.
• 1:31:31
  It's deceptively simple. Yeah. You know, just read your Bible.
• 1:31:35
  You know, read the context. That's it.
• 1:31:38
  All right. We'll wrap it up there unless you have anything else to add.
• 1:31:42
  What is this? I know you have things to add.
• 1:31:44
  I can't remember. We'll be there. I think this is funny. I don't know if we'll
• 1:31:49
  have to maybe send a prize to a listener.
• 1:31:52
  See if you can see when Alan says it's an episode, but then you look at the
• 1:31:57
  episode and it's not the episode number that he says.
• 1:31:59
  If you can send us an email of which episode he did that, we might give you an Amazon gift card.
• 1:32:08
  We'll do a shout out. How about that? everybody knows i can't count i think
• 1:32:14
  it's funny i think that's kind of cool i was like i remember,
• 1:32:17
  and here's the thing you know i hope our listeners understand we
• 1:32:21
  pre-record these right ahead of time and sometimes
• 1:32:24
  we'll make a kind of an executive decision to stick
• 1:32:27
  in an episode maybe not in the order we originally
• 1:32:30
  intended because of you know i mean it's just maybe the
• 1:32:33
  lord's leading us to that or it might be the easiest because
• 1:32:36
  it was edited for whatever reason but anyway i just
• 1:32:39
  think it's funny that you know when you listen to it i just want
• 1:32:41
  to see if our listeners are paying attention yeah are you are you really i
• 1:32:44
  really want to see that's a litmus test email
• 1:32:47
  us tell us what episode it was and what was said yeah and
• 1:32:51
  what was the light one might send you a prize you never know something i mean
• 1:32:54
  hey a five dollar amazon gift cards a five dollar amazon gift card you know
• 1:32:58
  what i mean yep exactly all right well we'll wrap it up there before we get
• 1:33:04
  in trouble and appreciate everybody listening and any questions,
• 1:33:07
  you know, where to find us as usual.
• 1:33:09
  And we'll see you on the next one.