Frustrating discussion with a protestant friend of mine


#1

So today I was at school (I'm in first year at University) and I had a discussion which touched on some important issues :

1 - My friend started to allege that although God is Trinity, there was a time pre-genesis that God fused into 1 being as the father alone and that the "separation" of persons happened later... I pointed out to him that God has always been trinity as the scripture says God is the same yesterday, today and forever. He still kept pushing his ideology despite this

2- I touched on the bible and how protestants had vandalised the holy text by removing 7 books from the bible. He acknowledged that, that was wrong but then immediately contradicted this by saying he will only believe in the 66 book bible because he doesn't know the 7 other books :banghead:

3- He claims he doesn't trust the Church and believes in the bible alone. I told him that the Church gave him the bible so he should trust the Church that gave him the bible. He refused and started throwing cheap shots and straw man statements like saying the Pope is a child molester, Catholics worship statues etc. :mad:

Please give me any advice on how to approach any of these issues? One thing I do know is that I need to be patient... Also please say prayers for the both of us and for ,more importantly, the reunification of the Church


Church swap with Mormons
#2

[quote="Wandile, post:1, topic:298874"]

2- I touched on the bible and how protestants had vandalised the holy text by removing 7 books from the bible. He acknowledged that, that was wrong but then immediately contradicted this by saying he will only believe in the 66 book bible because he doesn't know the 7 other books :banghead:

3- He claims he doesn't trust the Church and believes in the bible alone. I told him that the Church gave him the bible so he should trust the Church that gave him the bible.

[/quote]

I'm sorry, but that's an inaccurate statement.
The Hebrew Bible (Tanakh)- what we call the Old Testament, was around before Jesus walked the earth.

According to the Talmud,much of the contents of the Tanakh were compiled by the "Men of the Great Assembly" by 450 BCE, and have since remained unchanged. Modern scholars believe that the process of canonization of the Tanakh became finalized between 200 BCE and 200 CE.

Protestant bibles don't contain the apocrypha because the Hebrew Bible - the Old Testament does not contain them and the Hebrew Bible has remained unchanged all these years.


#3

[quote="Micah11, post:2, topic:298874"]
I'm sorry, but that's an inaccurate statement.
The Hebrew Bible (Tanakh)- what we call the Old Testament, was around before Jesus walked the earth.

[/quote]

When I say the bible, I don't just mean the OT, I mean the compilation of the 73 books of the Old and New Testaments into one bound library of books (Bible)
.The Church gave the world this Holy library of books.

Also the earliest bibles were based on the Septuagint version of the Old Testament (The version used coomonly by Christ and the apostles). The more ancient of version of the Old Testament. The more modern Masoretic Text (The Hebrew bible as you call it) is a version delivered by the masoretes in the period between the 7th - 9th century AD. The Septuagint dates back to around 200BC and contained the Deuterocanon!
The dead sea scrolls atest to this.

Thirdly the only reason why the Jews , after the fall of Jerusalem, rejected the deuterocanonicals is because they could not be found in hebrew. This flawed reasoning has been proven wrong as the Dead Sea Scrolls contained the Book of Sirach in biblical Hebrew! I can go on..

[quote="Micah11, post:2, topic:298874"]
Protestant bibles don't contain the apocrypha because the Hebrew Bible - the Old Testament does not contain them and the Hebrew Bible has remained unchanged all these years.

[/quote]

Actually the first protestant bibles contained the Deuterocanon. They got ejected later after it was deemed to costly to print these books which are just an appendix. They were secondly relegated because they did not conform with the Reformers doctrines and instead supported doctrines such as purgatory, praying to the saints and praying for the dead.


#4

Don’t forgot the changes Martin Luther added to some new testament texts to make them read that you are saved by faith alone and not works.


#5

=Wandile;9784276]So today I was at school (I’m in first year at University) and I had a discussion which touched on some important issues :

1 - My friend started to allege that although God is Trinity, there was a time pre-genesis that God fused into 1 being as the father alone and that the “separation” of persons happened later… I pointed out to him that God has always been trinity as the scripture says God is the same yesterday, today and forever. He still kept pushing his ideology despite this

Check out these sites:
answering-islam.org/authors/rogers/ot_trinity.html

custance.org/old/incarnation/5ch7.html

For one who professes the bible only; these OUGHT [but likely wil not] cause reflection:(

2- I touched on the bible and how protestants had vandalised the holy text by removing 7 books from the bible. He acknowledged that, that was wrong but then immediately contradicted this by saying he will only believe in the 66 book bible because he doesn’t know the 7 other books :banghead:

A rather STRANGE and unsupportable position as “the bible” was completely written by the end of the 1st. Century, and the 73 books CODIFIED and approved by God in the FOURTH Century and the “66 book edited edition” was a LATE Protestant innovation of the 16th. Century…:rolleyes:

Deut.4: 2 “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it; that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."

3- He claims he doesn’t trust the Church and believes in the bible alone. I told him that the Church gave him the bible so he should trust the Church that gave him the bible. He refused and started throwing cheap shots and straw man statements like saying the Pope is a child molester, Catholics worship statues etc.

THIS IS THE STRANGEST OF ALL OF HIS CHOSEN BELIEFS. “BIBLE ALONE” CANNOT BE FOUND IN THE BIBLE. BUT FOLLOWING TRADITIONS CAN:)

2 Thessalonians 2:14 “Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.”

Luke 9:26 “For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of man be ashamed when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.”

ALWAYS AND EVERYWHERE IN BOTH THE OLD AND THE NEW TESTAMENTS GOD CONSISTANLY TAUGHT:

Belief in Only One God [Triune] Mt.28-16-20

Only one set of Faith beliefs ALSO Mt. 16:28-20

and Only One Church

2nd. Peter 1: 16-21 “You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”

One Church
John.10: 16 “And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd”

Ps.127:1 “Unless the LORD builds the house, those who build it labor in vain.
Unless the LORD watches over the city, the watchman stays awake in vain”

Eph. 4: 1-7 “I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all. But grace was given to each of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift.

Eph. 2:19-20 “So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.”

AND IT IS BIBLICALLY INDISPUITABLE THAT GOD HIMSELF IN PERSON

GAVE THE “KEYS TO HEAVENS ACCESS” TO ONLY PETER AND THE CC [MT.16-15-19] AND READ JOHN 20;19-23… THESE TO ARE CATHOLIC EXCLUSIVES:D

Please give me any advice on how to approach any of these issues? One thing I do know is that I need to be patient… Also please say prayers for the both of us and for ,more importantly, the reunification of the Church

There is soo much more I could share,

DON"T get mad. Pray for yourself and this person.

God Bless,
pat /PJM here on the FORUM


#6

[quote="Wandile, post:1, topic:298874"]

Please give me any advice on how to approach any of these issues?

[/quote]

Walk away. If they wouldn't listen, why waste your time talking?


#7

Uh, no. What catholics call the deuterocannonicals have been revered Hebrew Scriptures since before the time of Christ (Jesus even quoted one text, though which one escapes my feeble memory at the moment). Judaism today doesn’t consider the deuterocannonicals as Holy Scripture today largely because of a decision made by the descendents of the Pharisees to purge any source materials for which they could not located early documents in Hebrew. The earliest deuteros were written in Greek, but this decision by te Jewish rabbis came long after the establishment of the church. There is no evidence of a consensus rejecting these books by Judaism before the time of Christ.

Your post contains the error Luther made when he assumed that the Scriptures the rabbis of his day recongnized were unchanged throughout time. Bad assumption.

The OP might want to read Karl Keating’s “Catholicism and Fundamentalism” for succinct responses to about 90% of the attacks on catholicism you will ever hear coming from protestants at the populat level (i.e. not phd level arguments).


#8

[quote="ConstantineTG, post:6, topic:298874"]
Walk away. If they wouldn't listen, why waste your time talking?

[/quote]

While I agree with this to a degree, we should never give up on them. Even if they won't listen voluntarily, God may work his will through out continued discourse on a subject and eventually open them to the truth.


#9

[quote="ProdglArchitect, post:8, topic:298874"]
While I agree with this to a degree, we should never give up on them. Even if they won't listen voluntarily, God may work his will through out continued discourse on a subject and eventually open them to the truth.

[/quote]

I doubt it. Even Jesus commanded His Apostles to turn back and shake off the dust from their sandles when towns wouldn't receive them.

To carry on a conversation with someone who wouldn't listen will only grow the animosity. Best to avoid discussion and if the person is really a friend, just be a living example of the faith through your actions.


#10

[quote="ProdglArchitect, post:8, topic:298874"]
While I agree with this to a degree, we should never give up on them. Even if they won't listen voluntarily, God may work his will through out continued discourse on a subject and eventually open them to the truth.

[/quote]

I agree. People are not always ready to listen, are they? So, as you say patience is key.

Potential converts are like cats. We can't make them do what they don't what to do and we can't turn them into dogs. We have to accept them as they are and where they're at, while giving them incentives to see things differently.

A lot of people have been brought up thinking and believing a particular way. They've built who they are and all they know around it--they have a personal stake in keeping themselves as they are, which is why they can lash out if challenged. It can be very hard to get anyone to see things differently. We have to carefully and prayerfully ween them away from their misconceptions with love, love, and more love.


#11

[quote="Micah11, post:2, topic:298874"]
I'm sorry, but that's an inaccurate statement.
The Hebrew Bible (Tanakh)- what we call the Old Testament, was around before Jesus walked the earth.

[/quote]

The Table of Contents of the Hebrew bible was developed after Jesus walked the earth


#12

[quote="ConstantineTG, post:9, topic:298874"]
I doubt it. Even Jesus commanded His Apostles to turn back and shake off the dust from their sandles when towns wouldn't receive them.

To carry on a conversation with someone who wouldn't listen will only grow the animosity. Best to avoid discussion and if the person is really a friend, just be a living example of the faith through your actions.

[/quote]

I believe that this was geared more towards people who have rejected Christ. These people have not rejected him, but rather have a flawed understanding. As fellow Christians, it is our job to help as many people as possible see the Truth.


#13

May the fruitful discussion continue. I would like to add that I would still like to know how I could have approached the three issues better please? :)


#14

I think you did a good job on the first one, pretty straightforward and he didn’t seem to have a response (based on what you said).

For the second one, I would approach it like this: *You recognize that protestants removed those books, therefore, you know that protestants violated Deut. 4:2.

Deut.4: 2 “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it; that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."

Since you know that they were removed after the Bible was finalized, why would you reject them simply because you haven’t read them yet? That’s like not going to see a movie because you said it was bad before you saw it… It’s almost circular logic. Why wouldn’t you embrace the additional knowledge that God set forth for His people?*

As to the third… well… to be honest, he’s just being stupid. As you said, he’s relying on Straw man arguments. Did you point that out to him? I think you also handled that one well because he was forced to reject rationality and rely on emotional arguments. People tend to only do that when they know they’ve lost. I would keep doing what you did for this one, it’s valid, straightforward, and eventually he’ll either have to listen, or he’ll stop bringing it up because he knows he can’t beat you.

You might also ask him to point out where in the Bible it put forward Sola Scriptura. When he can’t, he’ll have to rethink it.


#15

Ask him for any evidence of this in the scripures or the early Church Fathers. This is a ridiculous satement and the burden of proof is on your friend.

Ask your friend, if a person had only seen the New Testament would it be reasonable for them to reject the entire Old Testament just because they didn’t know it?

Considering that last comment I wouldn’t waste my time on this person. Your friend is obviously not interested in having an intellectually honest conversation.


#16

[quote="ProdglArchitect, post:12, topic:298874"]
I believe that this was geared more towards people who have rejected Christ. These people have not rejected him, but rather have a flawed understanding. As fellow Christians, it is our job to help as many people as possible see the Truth.

[/quote]

A flawed understanding is a rejection, as per the Episltes of St. Peter and St. Paul regarding false teachers and "believing a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached".


#17

[quote="ConstantineTG, post:16, topic:298874"]
A flawed understanding is a rejection, as per the Episltes of St. Peter and St. Paul regarding false teachers and "believing a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached".

[/quote]

One last counter point. This person, theoretically, did not make the choice to have a flawed interpretation. Therefore, it is not their fault, but rather the fault of the ones who taught him. Why should we condemn him for something that is ultimately not his fault?

I agree with you to a degree, as stated. At some point you just have to walk away, I just don't think this is to that point yet.


#18

I also encounter this a lot. I think for these people it is a defense mechanism because they really don’t know the truth/facts so they start spouting off the usual anti Catholic remarks. At this point what I usually do is ask them if we could not approach this in a different way. Instead of accusations ask her/him if they have any serious questions about the Catholic Church and you will do your best to answer one at a time. If you can answer at that point fine…but if you can’t then tell her/him that you will get back to them.


#19

[quote="ProdglArchitect, post:17, topic:298874"]
One last counter point. This person, theoretically, did not make the choice to have a flawed interpretation. Therefore, it is not their fault, but rather the fault of the ones who taught him. Why should we condemn him for something that is ultimately not his fault?

I agree with you to a degree, as stated. At some point you just have to walk away, I just don't think this is to that point yet.

[/quote]

I just think that if someone doesn't want to listen, best to leave them alone. It is best to spend our time with those who are willing to listen. Also, innundating those who are resistant of the message with the Gospel will only make them averse to the Gospel, rather than draw them near to it.


#20

I swear its like a bad rerun....these type of protestants need to get some new material. We can tell them and prove to them that we are not Mary worshiping whores of Babylon, they don't care. They will keep listening to their hate mongrel preachers.

:blush:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.