Posted on 03/19/2014 1:32:10 PM PDT by rwa265
If a Protestant looking into the claims of Catholicism were to ask me, “What one book should I read, where I can find a quick answer to any question I have?” I would tell him to read Devin Rose’s new book The Protestant’s Dilemma. I would also recommend this book to Protestant apologists, even those of many years, well-skilled in polemics. It will remind them of the heavy burden of proof they face, and the weakness of their position on point after point. The truth may set them free and bring them home too. (It has happened.)
All this may seem like overstatement — the obligatory praise from one Catholic blogger to another. But it is not.
Consider first the range of issues this book takes up. There are thirty-six chapters, each one on a different topic, from the papacy to sola scriptura, from the canon of the Bible to Purgatory, from confession to Eucharist to infant baptism. If something about the Catholic Church troubles you, this book has the answer. If you think you have found the point on which Catholicism fails, this book will show you why it is one more point upon which Protestantism fails.
Consider also the brevity. The book is just over 200 pages long, which means that Mr. Rose’s answers get to the root of the question without a knot of academic detail. It is harder to do than it might seem. This is the book of a man who has spent a long time studying the questions that divide Protestants and Catholics, and who knows how to present his case in a way that is easy for anyone to understand. At the same time, the book is useful for the professional apologist, for it recalls his mind to the basics.
(Excerpt) Read more at scottericalt.com ...
Hey man that just means this is an OFFICIAL Catholic thread, all that's missing is the Luther out of context quote about the Bible.
Please see here earlier today on this thread. The issue should not be whether helps are overall needed, and evang. Christian radion helped me much after i actually became born again while still a RC, and all of sudden was daily hungry to know how to please God according to Scripture. But the issue is the infallible nature claimed by Rome.
Would you concur that infallible authority is necessary to recognize and est. both writings and men of God as being so, and to correctly interpret it, so that dissent from them is rebellion against God?
And if not, then why not do as the noble Bereans did, with that manner of heart.
Does making the church the supreme authority solve the problem of a lack of unScriptural unity?
Thanks be to God for what is good. I posted the link to his blog, We'll see if he allows it.
as a priest, he had the authority to forgive sins...he did.
of course, you are free to reject Christ's gift of salvation anytime that you choose....Hitler did.
nope, He was busy elsewhere so He inspired mere mortals to actually put pen to paper and write the actual book....those were Catholics.
of course not, they wrote the new testament but they were thoughtful enough to include the old testament in their bible....say thanks, because if they hadn't, you'd probably woulhave never had the chance to read it.
Oh...
BINGO!
We have a loser!
But too stupid to include the Traditions. We'd not be having these 'discussions'.
as a condition for salvation?? so whatever the pope says goes??
I don’t think so.
The only condition for salvation is faith in Christ...not fighting in the Crusades.
I love your post 78...I haven’t seen your list of naughty popes in a while....it means nothing to anyone, but it is interesting.
would that be the Catholic version or the readers digest edited KJV??
the church is, after all, an organization of Christians and as such, certainly has a right to make institutional rules.....no skimpy garb in church, no bad language, moments of silence, holy days of obligation, no meat on FRIDAY....what's the big deal.
as is apparent, most through history have been, but all were human...were there a few miscreants....over 2,000 years I guess they are entitled to have made a few minor mistakes. That having been said, as bad as some of these characters were, they were still infallible in matters of faith and morals.....amazing, isn't it!!
a super computer can do that and it was never even human
hey eagle...
“...whatever the pope says goes”
you are utterly, totally and categorically wrong.
The ONLY thing ever infallible about a pope’s teaching is when he speaks “ex cathedra” meaning from the chair (of Peter) and then ONLY on matters of faith and morals (no picking infallible brackets like the pres).
“the actual occurrence of an ex cathedra statement is quite rare. It is generally understood to have only occurred twice: Pope Pius IX’s definition of the dogma of Mary’s Immaculate Conception in 1854 and Pope Pius XII’s definition of the dogma of Mary’s Assumption in 1950. In both of these cases, the Pope was not teaching something new. Rather, he was confirming and clarifying something that the Church had already believed as part of God’s revelation. “
http://catholicexchange.com/the-pope-and-infallibility
AMDG
So are you saying in the example below the Pope was not speaking "ex cathedra", which if this is the case was the Pope in error for this promise??
Care to explain Pope Urban II’s promise for the remission of sins to those who fought in the Crusades? as a priest, he had the authority to forgive sins...he did.
Christ told us to....whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven, whose sins you shall retain, they are retained......pretty clear to me.
what if you can’t make it to the priest in time before you die? sins forgiven?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.