Protestants who spread blatantly false information

Below is a link to a video from a Baptist speaker sitting up in front of a lecture hall talking about the early Church Fathers. The pertinent information starts at the 36:00 mark in the video.

This guy is so inaccurate it almost makes me believe he is doing this intentionally. A simple Google search on my iPhone could prove this guy wrong. For one, he places Origen as a writer in the second century when we get a vast majority of his stuff in the third century. He then places St. Irenaeus as a strictly third century Christian writer even though we all know he wrote in the middle and latter parts of the second century. He then places St. John Chrysostom as an author writing right after Irenaeus in the third century (even though Chrysostom wasn’t born until the mid-fourth century).

All the while he is attributing these guys as making up dogma as they go along, completely ignoring the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, St. Polycarp of Smyrna and St. Justin Martyr - writers who are writing too early for comfort for this guy.

He then has the gall to suggest that St. Augustine invented Roman Catholicism in the fifth century.

How do we save people from things like this? Especially uninformed Catholics (who this guy admits to converting to the Baptist denomination later on in the video).

Consider his audience. He’s most likely speaking to people who already hold disdain for the church, and they don’t need any further convincing in their minds, so there’s no need for him to present accurate information, the crowd will simply go along with it and take it as truth because it reinforces their already formed notions of the church.

It’s like Fulton Sheen once said. "There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”

The best way to fight that is to counter ignorance and lies with knowledge and truth. In terms of how to protect Catholics in general, the same applies. A thorough grounding in Catholic beliefs and history, or at the very least the knowledge to assess claims made by others and judge their veracity.

I always ask them if they believe in the 8th Commandment! What do you gain by winning converts with lies. Certainly not God’s blessings! God Bless, Memaw

I don’t know about this man in particular, but with many of these folks, it’s not lies, it’s ignorance. This is what they’ve been taught for years, and they’ve never felt the need to research it for themselves. And when you call them out on it, they really can’t believe you. It’s kind of sad, really.

It’s really hard to understand how in today’s access to information, they can believe all that garbage. They close their minds to the TRUTH and continue to spread lies. If someone tells me the moon is made of green cheese, I’m gonna research until I find out if it’s really true before I book a flight there! ( I love cheese). God Bless, Memaw

I suspect he’ll disable his comments soon enough…he’s got many people correcting him.

That rapture stuff is a mystery indeed. My husband’s best friend (now deceased) sold everything he owned in the 90’s, gave it all to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and moved up to Maine in an old school bus to watch the end of the world come in on a small tract of land he owned… He came back about 4-5 years later completely broke and had to park his house-bus from place to place on friends’ properties.

That’s commitment! But I felt sorry for his wife.

Honestly, I think it would depends on the type of cheese. If the moon were made of sharp cheddar, I’d probably already be there.

To the OP, as others have said, it’s usually not willfully lying, it’s ignorance. As for why they don’t research it, how many people do you know who willing challenge their own beliefs?

Well said.

Well Tide, you certainly stated a good case in your comments there.

One of the things that struck me is his remarks about how about half his audience is “ex-Catholics”, which is not all that surprising since there are some who themselves are ignorant of their faith and history (as I was for about 35 years) and so when someone like this fellow comes along, with a Bible in hand and quoting scripture as he does, it gives the impression of accuracy and credibility in spite of his errors.

I noticed that he totally botched his teaching on what transubstantiation is since we know it takes place at the consecration and not upon reception. He goes on to state that Paul never taught that, which is completely wrong in the context of the following passages.
***1st Corinthians 10:16-17

“16 The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? 17 For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread.”

1st Corinthians 11:23-30

"23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep. "

***[FONT=Georgia]None of that would apply if St. Paul was speaking of a symbolic Eucharist. [/FONT]It defies all simple logic because you cannot become guilty of someone’s body and blood by abusing a symbol.

You’re right that he seems to have ignored Justin Martyr which I bring up in my blog article What Was Authentic Early Christian Worship Really Like?

Non-Catholics don’t have a monopoly on ignorance. I’ve heard some whoppers here on CAF.

Recently someone said that John the Baptists is only quoted in John’s Gospel and that Nicodemus had a conversation with John the Baptist in the Bible. It is a good bet that when someone says the word “Modernism” they don’t have a clue what they are talking about. Limbo, physical vs real presence in the Eucharist… the list goes on.

Sometimes I think it isn’t even ignorance but people just making stuff up. We need to take the log out of our own eye and knowing when not to speak is sometimes a great virtue.


Anybody who doesn’t even know how to pronounce the names of the ECFs doesn’t get my vote as someone who knows what he’s talking about. :nope:

(That being said, that doesn’t mean that he’s deliberately twisting the truth; maybe he’s just indoctrinated. :shrug:)


Oh. My. Goodness. Is this guy for real? I just got to the end of the video. “The mass of Christendom has turned away from Paul’s message, and they’ve gone back to the Four Gospels… on which Roman Catholicism is totally based… The Gospels are the Word of God, but that’s not where the Gospel for us is… the Gospel of grace, the Gospel of Paul.”

Wow. Just… wow.

I think, if I ever met this man, I’d gently point him to 1 Cor 1:12-13 – “I mean that each of you is saying, ‘I belong to Paul’ … Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?”

I’ll pray for this man; if he says ‘yes’ to Paul and ‘no’ to the Gospels… wow. :frowning:

Great comments on the Youtube page RollTide!!


Thanks RollTide for going onto YouTube and defending the Faith.

An act of charity to be sure.

Inspiring and perhaps even a little convicting (maybe I should be doing such too) to people like me.

God bless.


It seems your more upset that he got dates wrong, rather than his accusation on Augustine inventing Catholicism

The law of low-hanging fruit: if we want to demonstrate that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, it’s easier to point to the fact that he can’t even get the time frame right. The notion that “Augustine invented Catholicism” is just as laughable – but, people will believe what they want to believe, even if it’s demonstrably wrong. But, if someone wants to dispute our claims, it’s easier for them to say “you’re wrong about Augustine” than it is to say “you’re wrong about the ECFs’ birthdates”… :wink:

Which is also hogwash since we have Augustine making statements like…

"I would not believe in the Gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not influence me to do so."
Against the letter of Mani, 5,6, 397 A.D.

“All heretics wish to be styled Catholic, yet if anyone asks them where is the Catholic place of worship none would venture to point out his own. ***

There is no need to even address it. Once you prove he is wrong on just about everything else, a fair-minded reader will call into question his accusations on St. Augustine without needing evidence against it.

When he said those things about Augustine, I laughed out loud. The man is either tragically ignorant/misinformed or he is deliberately misleading people to further his anti-Catholic agenda.


‘borderline’? :rolleyes:

I thought this also. I think his translation may say on the front cover “The book of Paul”.:rolleyes:


It’s a nice media since no one can argue against them . . . . they think. Make a counterpoint video showing his errors and post it as a reply.

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