Trent Horn debate with James White: watch here!

livestream.com/g3conference

Wow thanks OP!

Thanks. Great debate.

Before the Protestant can consider the Catholic argument I believe it is necessary to affirm that the Catholic Church rejects the
False characterizations of Catholicism by James White

(Please help to complete this list below)

(According to the Catholic position, The grace of Jesus Christ is not enough to save us so we need to ) Add to the work of Christ

Christ could fail

Could Trent Horn list the quotes he gave on the projector from his laptop computer for those who only have access to the audio of this debate ?

Irenaeus of Lyons
- Adversus haereses, Against Heresies 4.41.3

Augustine quotes : ?

Congratulations to Trent Horn. He did a marvelous job. I have watched several of Dr. White’s debates, lectures, podcasts, etc. I have never seen him challenged at this level. Being a former Baptist, I was sensitive to the context of where this debate was happening. I don’t think the people that put this debate on were expecting quite this outcome. Very well represented. Our Catholic faith, I mean.

I should add one exception to my above comment. Years ago, Dr. White did several debates with Fr. Mitch Pacwa. He was certainly challenged in those.

White is the best I’ve heard on the protestant side.

So my take on last night was that he was doing what all if protestantism does - apply their own standards to the scriptures. This prescriptive vs descriptive theory he came up with…is that even a thing?

As a protestant i tried very hard to believe in OSAS. But i could not. Because reading the New testament as a totality wont allow it. There are too many passages that contradict that view. The strongest part of Horns argument was being severed from Christ and the branches being cut off. You have to first be joined to be severed. The weakest scriptural case was the rocky soil argument. I feel like that actually appears to support the reformef view.

I missed the final part of the debate Q&A - hoping it’s uploaded to youtube.

Thanks OP for the link. Enjoyed it

1 Like

I was stuck at work and missed it. Can’t wait for it to be uploaded to u-tube. If anyone comes across a link to watch the debate please post it on this thread.

Thanks

No, not a thing as far as I know.

And there is no guidance from the Bible as to how we are to discern whether a passage is prescriptive or descriptive.

So that makes it a man-made tradition, no? :slight_smile:

I’m not familiar with this. What is his assertion or proof? I’m guessing he says descriptive is the only way to go since prescriptive means “accepted by long usage or the passage of time”. Which we all know would be the writings of the Church Fathers.:shrug: Personally I have a hard time listening to White, he comes across as nothing more than a cyber bully to me. That’s one of the reasons I kept working last night. I can usually only handle White about 20 minutes at a time.

1 Like

Also, the Bible doesn’t state that we should read it with the eye of description vs prescription, so that’s a thing we are under no obligation to endorse.

Do I need to register to view? Where is it on the site?

Since the debate is over it can’t be watched on that website. It was only a live stream.

It may be up on youtube in a few days though.

I’m gonna actively look for a upload because I would like to hear it again. Maybe I just missed his rational as to why he applies this method.

Basically, those passages like John 15 where Jesus describes pruning, he is saying that is describing what happens to the unregenerate, not saved people. And these are just warning type passages for people to understand what happens to the fake Christians.

But Horn rightfully maintained that in order to be cut off or severed you must first be adjoined.

To me he is just practicing typical Sola Scriptura. Which means I place certain scriptures above others based on my own theological presuppositions.

Exactly what I was thinking when listening to him carry on.

So basically the definition of descriptive is “how James White chooses to describe it”?:wink:

Exactly.

He also danced around the not so friendly passages in Hebrews by saying if you aren’t scholarly on the book of Leviticus then you wont really get the true meaning of Hebrews.

Love to hear more on his rational on this as well.

But yeah, he can be tough to listen to in his bully pulpit of condescension. He made a snide remark to protestants who aren’t OSAS believers…said you are basically already
Catholic. Horn fired right back at him on that. Really unfair generalizations made. Surprising since much of Protestantism is about allowing diversity.

Indeed.

And it was a great debate point when Trent offered some other Protestant theologians, whom White acknowledged were indeed familiar with Leviticus, who disagreed with White’s personal interpretation of Hebrews.

But yeah, he can be tough to listen to in his bully pulpit of condescension. He made a snide remark to protestants who aren’t OSAS believers…said you are basically already
Catholic. Horn fired right back at him on that. Really unfair generalizations made. Surprising since much of Protestantism is about allowing diversity.

Now, this, I didn’t see. I didn’t see him being snide.

And this surprised me, because I’ve seen his online persona–and he is indeed the master of snark.

But I was pleasantly surprised to see him being very respectful in person during the debate.

I hope I am not going to far off topic, this might actually be a good thread to start some day.

But my question goes with your remark above “if you aren’t scholarly on the book of Leviticus.”

I thought one of the big premises of Sola Scriptura was anyone could pick up the Bible, read it for themselves and teach themselves God’s revelation?

If that weren’t true wouldn’t your only course of action be to either go to a Church which was 2000 years old or read the writings of the Church fathers to aid you in your interpretation?

Right.

“The Catholic Church can’t tell me that I can’t interpret the Bible in this particular manner!”–James White (rhetorical)

Also,

“Your interpretation of Scripture is incorrect”–James White (rhetorical)

That is the biggest hang up I have when I dialogue with someone of another faith. I can fully accept someone saying they don’t agree with the Catholic Church’s interpretation. Hey God gave us all an unlimited supply of free will. But it just sends needles up my spine when someone says she is wrong. That just makes absolutely no sense.
“I am right and the Church is wrong”.
How do you know?
“Well the Holy Spirit is within me”.
Yep that’s what what I hear all the time from people that don’t agree with either one of us. :banghead:

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.