You'd probably love the more recent debate they did on sola scriptura: Gavin Ortlund Vs.Trent Horn: Is Sola Scriptura True, on Pints with Aquinas channel. I found it the best Christian debate I've seen. These two have such respect for each other that it never got contentious.
A person must be baptized to be saved, but it has nothing to do with water. The proof is found below. Eating Kosher is not unbiblical, but it is not required under the New Covenant. Circumcision of male children is not unbiblical, but it is not required under the New Covenant. Trimming your beard according to the Law of Moses is not unbiblical, but it is not required under the New Covenant. Water baptisms were a part of the Old Covenant, but they are not required under the New Covenant. The proof is found below. John baptized with water. Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit. Which one is related to salvation, based on Romans 8:9? . Heb. 9:10 (YLT) only in victuals, and drinks, and different baptisms, and fleshly ordinances-till the time of reformation imposed upon them . (Old Covenant ------> New Covenant) . Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, (What is the one baptism of our faith here, based on Eph. 1:12-13, and 1 Cor. 12:13?) . Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, . 1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. 1Co 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. . Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. . Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. . Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Mar 1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. .
I’m Catholic, but I admire Gavin, with his lucid and charitable demeanor, even though he disagrees with my beliefs. I can feel his sincerity, and his intent is not to put down people but to be balanced in his approach. I watch his videos because I know they will strengthen my own faith in my humble efforts to address his arguments and answer his questions. God bless him and dialogues like this.
As a staunch protestant who discusses theology with Roman Catholics very often. Trent Horn is the most charitable roman catholic ive seen. Great work both of you.
@@palabraviva5840He believes in the Catholic faith and speaks with conviction. That’s how anyone who actually believes what they claim is going to talk. If you speak to someone who’s not a Christian about Christ, you can do so charitably while still standing against agnosticism or other religions.
As someone that was Baptist for many years and has recently converted to Catholicism I see both sides and still have many questions.Thank you both for this respectful informative talk.
Hey brother, same as me! I like to have those questions to. But i think we should first trust in the authority given by Jesus to His Church and try to understand why some decisions were made.
I agree with the last response. I think the magisterium is very much needed to decipher all of the scripture information. Since Martin Luther there are so many different Protestant religions that have so many different views which I believe is different from what Jesus wanted . Jesus in scripture speaks about the church. one Apostolic church that began with Peter when he received the keys from Jesus. He doesn't say there will be many churches with many different views. He tells people in scripture to go to the church that he founded
I love Trent Horn even though I’m a Protestant, I do admire Roman Catholics and I recently just started listening to you Mr. Gavin and I’m very impressed how knowledgeable you are with church history and your charitable demeanor with debates.
You might like Jordan Cooper on the channel Just and Sinner where he discusses Roman-Ausburg confession differences, and Alpha and Omega Ministries channel where James White discusses Roman-Reform differences. The channel Goy for Jesus also has content comparing Protestant and Roman differences.
@@truthisbeautiful7492 I love Dr. Jordan Cooper but not James White, he’s arrogant and a clanging cymbal unless you’re Muslim, he’s nicer to them than non Calvinists.
@@wordandwater9027 he thinks Arminians are saved and has even debated on the same team as Arminians. I'll assume the best and leave him to his Master to judge
As a confessional Lutheran these are so fun to watch. I tend to align with Trent on most of this but Gavin’s responses were definitely thought provoking and iron sharpening iron. Thanks Dr. Ortlund, Gods blessings during your break and to your family.
@@theodosios2615 I learned my confessional Lutheranism in the ELCA, and as much as it hurt having to leave the ELCA, I refuse to admit that there is any other legitimate Lutheranism than what is confessed in the Book of Concord, and that the Holy Spirit given in Baptism gives true faith, which is the faith confessed in the Book of Concord, even in the ELCA.
As a protestant on the fence, I am so thankful for these videos. I'm so glad you guys have such a respect for each other that I find rare in our divided communities. My parents are on the side of being Baptist that they believe catholics are not saved. I pray that no matter what happens, we can grow to understand each other and break down the walls be built up through our many dissesntions.
I'm Catholic, and I watch videos that strengthen my faith but I also watch videos from the point of view of those who criticize our system of belief to have a better perspective on every issue. Gavin's videos really help a lot.
Im so excited because my daughters friend who identifies as LGBTQ has been talking to my kiddo about faith in God. We are reading The Case for Christ in homeschool, and she decided to send the book to her friend who said shed read it. Daughter has been praying for her friends to come to Christ and she asjed the Pastor to pray with her for her friends' salvation, with another lgbtq kiddo burdening her heart. So wonderful to see Christ move in her heart
Happy to see this discussion. If we understand baptism to primarily be union with Christ per Romans 6:1-4, I have no problem saying Cornelius (and the theif on the cross) was baptized, though this baptism was apart from water. Ordinarily God uses water to bring about union with Christ but he is not limited by the sacraments and occasionally grants an extrasacramental baptism or union with Christ apart from water. The Council of Trent grants as much when it speaks of the necessity of the sacraments or the desire of them (which can be an implicit desire) for salvation. Hence we Catholics believe in baptism of desire and of blood and have noted this desire can be implicit. Concerning causes, the meritorious cause is Christ and the instrumental cause is baptism (which is ordinarily by water but can be granted apart from water as God is not bound by the sacraments). Concerning an awareness of the divinity of Christ for salvation, Catholicism recognizes a belief in the right doctrines of the church can be implicit rather than explicit, so if one is disposed to belief but has not yet become aware of ehat to believe, God reckons that as implicit faith which MAY suffice for salvation.
Interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing Michael. I am aware of the concepts of baptism by blood and baptism of desire; what would be the category for Cornelius? Are you saying Cornelius experienced a baptism of desire? Just trying to understand.
@@TruthUnites I would say figures like Cornelius could have received the gift of Holy Spirit prior to their water baptism in an extrasacramental way, at least that his how I read him being given the spirit in Acts 10:44 prior to water baptism (though someone could argue this was a gift of the spirit distinct from regeneration, so not the gift that is given in water baptism). The sign should still be given, if they have an opportunity and know that it should be received, however. This grace could be given prior to water baptism through desire, which may be implicit or explicit. Also, there are some additional grace that are given in water baptism that are not given in an extrasacramental baptism, though the forgiveness of sins and union with Christ are most certainly given. God expects his ministers to administer the sign and that is the ordinary means by which he has promised to give the Holy Spirit, but he is certainly not bound to use the sacraments to communicate his grace. So, someone like the thief on the cross, who was never baptized with water, was certainly united to Christ, at some point between the cross and the ascension. In other words, anyone who experiences God in the beatific vision must first be united to Christ. This union is ordinarily through water, though God is not restricted to use it. The desire for this union can be either explicit or implicit, as can the knowledge of the truths that are necessary for salvation. BTW, I've only had the chance to see the first 20 minutes so if there is some redundancy to my comments I apologize.
@@reasonandtheology yes, I am aware of the notion that God is not bound by the sacraments, I am just curious how specifically you would understand Cornelius. Aquinas puts this kind of episode into the category of baptism of desire, and it sounds like that is what you are saying, if I understand. I don't agree but I appreciate you sharing your thoughts. We do chase this a bit further after the 20:00 mark, but mainly on the general issue rather than Cornelius specifically. Thanks again.
@@TruthUnites I put Cornelius in the category of baptism of desire, but I don't think that is the only option to take as a Catholic. There are alternatives, but this is the one I prefer.
As always Trent never fails to deliver. One reason (among many) and many other Apologists that have helped me in my Christian journey and why I stay Catholic. God bless you Trent🙏🏼
Gavin, I know from the last video when you engaged Trent you said how busy you are. Both of you, I’m sure! Wanted to say we appreciate both of you for the time.
As one who respects both speakers, I thought this was a fantastic dialogue. For a full disclosure, I’m a former southern Baptist who is now an Anglican, so while I certainly understand where Gavin is coming from with his concerns, I would certainly lean much more closer to Trent’s view.
I actually read and considered both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox apologetic books and articles for a few years on my way to traditional Anglicanism, but thanks for the encouragement.
@Doubting Thomas interesting journey. I'm looking into lutheranism and Anglicanism. As I can't make that leap yet onto Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman catholicism. What's your opinion on lutheranism?
@@triplea6174 -I actually have a lot of appreciation for classical/confessional Lutheranism and consider classical Anglicanism and confessional Lutheranism close ‘cousins’ so to speak. I can say at this point in my life if there wasn’t a solid traditional Anglican parish in town, I’d have no qualms going to the local LCMS congregation.
I think Jesus smiles with a happy heart when His children get together to discuss what it means to be in His family like this. We remember His words and discuss what was meant, like a beloved parent that passed on... 🥰
I’m a grateful Catholic and I admire Gavin’s demeanor and the way he is. These two do a good job of being kind and good to each. They do a good job of disagreeing with ideas and not the person.
Great video. So respectful which helps all to understand. I grew up in a family where my Mom was Presbyteriani and my Dad was Catholic. Respect is the key. Over the years I have become firmly rooted in my Catholic Faith and had the good fortune of looking at both belief systems. I believe it was he respect of both of m parents who supported each other that allowed me to develop a strong faith and to see the need to be grounded in faith. As a young child I attended Sunday School and summer Bible school at my Mom’s church, I attended Catholic school for my education and my Mom is the one who taught me from the Catechism. She remained Protestant until shortly before she died and then converted to Catholicism. The issue that kept her from converting earlier was that she could not accept the doctrine of Transubstantiation and felt it would be hypocritical to convert. She was finally given the grace to believe shortly before her death. We are all on our individual faith journeys : love and respect will see us through. Thank you both for this beautiful thought provoking discussion. God bless.
Thank you guys for meeting in person. I watch both of you and love both works! I love your spirit Gavin. Your demeanor is something I truly find inspirational. I aspire to conduct myself how you do. Thanks for this awesome video! God bless!
As the Baptist raised daughter of a mother who converted as a young woman after being raised Catholic, this was really fascinating. My mom has a lot of resentment towards Catholicism due to feeling like she was only taught how to go through the motions and not given a living faith. As I've investigated as an adult, I've found there's more nuance on either side than I'd previously thought.
The real issue is whether we are righteous in God's sight only by the righteousness of Jesus Christ imputed to us, or whether we are righteousness in God's sight by our own internal Righteousness, as the council of Trent, the Romanist gathering said that Christins are 'innocent' and 'immaculate.'. They did this by denying that 'venial sin' is really formally sin and by claiming that concupscience isn't sin. Even though Romans chapter 7 says that concupscience is sin. So by adopting a lower view of sin, they could pretend that Christians are innocent and Immaculate internally and don't need to trust in Christ and His righteousness alone.
@@Psalm34rws that's not what Reformed Christians believe, so the wrong premise doesn't lead to that wrong conclusion. Sinners are always accepted only on the basis of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. We are only accepted in the sight of God on the basis of Jesus Christ, our righteousness (1 Corinthians chapter 1) who God made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him (2 Corinthians), or as Galatians puts it Christ became a curse for us, or Isaiah that the Lord has laid on Him the inquity if us all. Christ is perfectly holy and righteous, so our sins were imputed to him and He was punished for them, He is the propitiation for our sins according to 1 John, that God imputes rightouesness Apart from works, and God Declares Right the ungodly (Romans 3 and 4). The same Christ who makes the spiritually dead to alive, granting then repentence and the gift of trusting in Jesus, also gives the Holy Spirit to transform them by the renewing of their minds. So those whom God justifies (declares righteous by His blood, Romans 5) He also glorifies. When He appears, we will be like Him. Now, Christians have concupscience, which is sin, Romans 7, but when we are in the presence of Christ which is far better, even concupscience will be removed. So there will be no sin in the believers in Heaven when they see God. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified (declared righteous) by faith apart from the works of the law. If Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but NOT before God. Rome's idea of salvation doesn't remove boasting, and is impossible because concupscience is sin and is only removed in glory, not when a sinner is brought to spiritual life. So whoever told you that was either ignorant or lying, and we know who the father of lies is, the fallen angel Satan. So God is not involved in any deception for declaring righteous the ungodly (please read Romans chapter 3 and 4), because Christ died for the ungodly, and righteousness is imputed to them. Note the word used is imputed, not infused. Not that we sent that Christ transformed believers, but the internal Righteousness of believers is their own righteousness, and is not perfect and cannot stand in the judgment of our holy God, because concupscience is sin, as it is written, if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us, 1 John. And read Roman 7. What about you, are you still trusting that your own internal Righteousness is 'immaculate' and that you are 'innocent' as the council of Trent claims Christians are? Do you deny that your concupscience is sin, as Rome claims? Do you claim that what the Holy Spirit calls sin, is not really sin, but only leads to sin? Will you admit that so-called 'venial sin' is truly sin? How can a truly Holy God look at concupscience in believers here, and will you admit that the flesh lusts against the Spirit, as Galatians say? How can concuscpience be neither good nor bad, or even good, God forbid, when the Holy Spirit is against it?
Gavin, you bring me so much joy seeing how much passion, sincerity and kindness you have in your approach these dialogues. Thank you for being a shining example for a young man like myself who wants to enter these conversations, whether it be with fellow Christians or as an evangelist. Keep it up, sir! ❤
As a busy mother I find it so difficult trying to find the time to unpack all of these things. As a Catholic who is on an endeavour to learn more about my Faith, I'm very thankful for people such as Trent Horn who have obviously put in a lot of time and thinking to be as knowledgable as they are, and these types of videos are so helpful for me so thank you for the respectful dialogue and for Trent Horn who so beautifully and intelligently defends the faith in a way that I never could. God bless you both.
*Everyone can see Roman religion is a man made religion. Only RCs could not. 95% of RC doctrines and 95% of RC clergies did not come from God's Word. Why would a true religion have such statistics? Lucy has b - ded the eyes of RCs; so they could not C.* 1. Catholics say Mary was forever virgin. Yet Bible says Jesus had brothers and sisters. Mary was not perpetually virgin. Mk 6:3, Mat 13:55, Mat 27:56, Mar 6:3, Mar 15:40, Mar 15:47. 2. Catholics say clergies must be celibate. Yet BIBLE says Peter (supposed R Church first leader) had mother in law. Bible says celibacy is not a qualification for clergies. Mat 8:14-15, Mar 1:30-31, Luk 4:38-39. 3. Catholics say Mary was sinless. But Bible says Mary offered a sinner's offering. She was a sinner. Bible says Mary needed a Saviour. Lk 2:23-24, Lev 12:6-8, Rom 3:10. 4. Catholics say confess to R priests in a box. BIBLE says nothing about confessing to priests in a box. Bible says confess to God only. 1 John 1:9, Mat 6, Romans 10:9-10. 5. Catholics say drink of the physical blood of Jesus. Yet OT and NT both say do not drink blood. Acts 15, Lev 7:26. 6. Catholics say pray to passed on Mary and "saints". Yet Bible says do not contact the dead. NT Church did not record a single case of NT believers asking passed on saints to pray for them. Deut 18:11, Isaiah 8:19. 7. Catholics make and bow down to statues. Bible says do not bow down to graven images (statues). Deut 4, Exo 20:4-5. 8. Catholics sprinkles “holy water”. But NT Church of the Bible mentioned nothing about “holy water”. There was no record of any Apostles sprinkling “holy water” on believers. Catholics claimed “holy water” came from OT. Yet Num 5:17 says “holy water” was water used to test adulterous women in OT temple. Hardly the same. Those were for Old Covenant Jews. Not New Testament Christians. 9. Catholics say Peter was pope - bishop of all bishops. Yet Bible says Peter was just a leader of the Jerusalem Church. Bible says nothing of the office of bishop of bishops. Gal 2:9, Mat 16:18. 10. Catholics say there is a seat of Peter. Yet BIBLE says nothing about it. Jesus said “not to lord over others”. 11. Catholics has clergy priesthood. Bible says clergy priesthood was done away with in New Testament. There is no clergy priesthood in NT. Heb 7:27, 9:12, 10:10. 12. Catholics preaches Works Salvation (faith + good works + partake R sacraments + submit to R pontiff + be in R Church + devote to Mary = to be saved). Yet Bible says “believe in Jesus to be saved”. Bible says Works Salvation is cursed. Gal 1:8-9. Acts 16:30-31, John 3:16, Romans 10:9-10. 13. Catholics says they must do Penance to atone for their sins. Yet Bible says repent, confess and sins will be forgiven. Catholic Bible changes the word “repentance” in NT into “penance”. Original Greek NT does not use or mean the word penance. Penance = work to atone for sins. Repentance = change of heart. 1 John 1:9, Mat 6. 14. Catholics say Mary went straight to heaven without dying. Yet Bible says nothing about it. 15. Catholics say Islam and Christianity have the same God. Yet Islam doesn't believe in death and resurrection of Jesus and Trinity.
Amazing how much insight you can achieve when you don't treat each other as enemies. I hope you two do further discussions like this -- this was one of the most insightful discussions I've seen in a while.
I give Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and even New Ager’s who dialogue respectfully with faithful Catholics credit for being open to challenges to their ideas. Many Buddhists start meditating on the mysteries of the rosary, and find themselves called into the Church
I wish all followers of Jesus, like these two men, were as congenial and eager to seek the truth as Trent and Gavin. What a wonderful model of godly discourse and mutual respect even in matters where the positions are strongly opposed. Thank you, Lord, for Gavin and Trent!
I think the core theological difference here actually has to do with *how* God acts. Gavin's position seems totally sensible - if you *see* a change, there probably is a change. But I think the Catholic position here is much more true to who God is, especially in relation to creatures. The process of salvation is not something that can be quantified by any amount or quality of behavior, simply because we are not able to know and search hearts as God. Trent's wariness to ascribe a change in behavior to regeneration (instead of a million other psychological, social, etc. factors) is completely merited, even if that change in behavior is *radical*. That's because, again, only God searches and knows the heart, and his work (and presence) is often *invisible*. I don't think for a second this means we can't "judge" behavior - but again, that judgement is reserved for behavior, not for gauging the amount of grace God has given to a particular individual. If you think about it, the idea that we can quantify grace using our own standards is kind of absurd - which is *exactly* why sacraments are *given* to us-as revelation-as an objective measure of grace conferred for specific occasions. Baptism doesn't offer us some kind of amorphous "change in behavior", but instead it gives us, by faith, an assurance of salvation-regardless of our inner psychological state. One doesn't have to arise from the waters *feeling* any particular thing (our feelings are fickle and wounded by sin), we arise *knowing* we have died and been brought to life *because God says so*. I think this distinction really gets at the heart of Protestantism vs. Catholicism. Protestantism puts a lot of value and meaning on the interior psychological state of the *individual* - how he *feels* in relation to the world around him. And, to be clear, it's not as though those feelings and dispositions don't matter, but the Catholic would simply say that our salvation is not something that we can quantify by any measure of our own-even if it's something very close to us, like our own psychology. Instead, the Catholic affirms that salvation comes from the hand of God, *revealed to us* through *objective signs* so that our assurance can be tied to something outside of our own inward "sense".
That is a great distinction! I notice a trend from Protestants which seems like an excessive preoccupation with their salvation that you don’t see as much in Catholicism. Maybe it’s the Sacraments that give us that peace?
My personal experience is seeking Jesus diligently then getting baptized by water and hands and after that I was a new person! Never looked back! My entire life did a 360! So happy now, peace!!!
Great collaboration gentlemen. I'm RCC and lean on Trent alot (the apologist lol) but thought Gavin was suberb here and brought up real solid considerations.. Would like to see more here. Thanks guys.
I've made some comments on this video: "Reply to Baptist Gavin Ortlund on Baptism" [5-20-22 on my "Biblical Evidence for Catholicism" blog] This was one of the finest, most excellent, Protestant-Catholic exchanges I have ever seen in my 42 years of committed Christian discipleship. This is how it ought to be done. I thoroughly enjoyed it and learned a lot of things. Super kudos to both Gavin and Trent!
Appreciate this debate in tone and content, learned a lot, helped me clarify some things. I am with Gavin (except I am not a Calvinist so there were things that Trent said around faith that resonated with me :-) )
love your spirit of grace and gentless, Dr. Ortlund. I've been watching debates for a long time and have never seen anyone with a level of patience and humility as you. your work is a real blessing!
An outward showing of an inward doing. I was baptized when I was 8. And felt the need to do it again when I was 20. Because I had gone astray. And wow. I am amazed they brought up the guy on the cross. Great discussion!
Uplifting to see two Christians coming together to see what we can say amen on. I pray one day we can be One Church again! May God bless both of these charitable men.
Loved this graceful discussion. I kept thinking: God’s Grace is far beyond our attempts to understand Him and legalism doesn’t seem to be how He decides to show His love to the world. Thank you for this!
Can we liken baptism to a wedding? For a time the bride is wooed, then the brides heart is captured, then a proposal is accepted, then the actual wedding. Although it was a process leading up to the wedding, you are not married until the wedding day.
1:27:00 Fifth baby! Awesome Gavin! Congratulations! Hope your wife is doing OK with the pregnancy. Will pray for you! I think we are just about past our baby making years. Our youngest is four right now. I have her at home with croup and stridor. But it is so wonderful to have a lively family.
My heart broke when you said this will be your last video for a month... but praying this is a great period of rest for you! Looking forward to having you back soon!
5:20 - cause 5:54 - coronation analogy 37:50 - exceptions 39:14, 39:37 - the sticking point for Gavin 40:36 - Trent’s response 42:20 - fallback denominations 42:50, 44:10 - Gavin’s point about inconsistent reliance on tradition concerning the salvation of dead infants 44:31, 45:17, 45:50 - Trent’s response 46:08 - tradition and usury
This as important topic but what truly stands out to me is this mutually respectful dialogue. I wish more of us (including and especially myself) did this when we disagree with people.
I’m so glad you touched on Calvinism! Now I want to go find all of your vids on that topic, Gavin. Really interesting dialog. I so appreciate the calm demeanor expressed by you both. It’s like I’m eavesdropping on your talk over coffee. 😂
I enjoyed this video and appreciate the charitable dialogue. I hope for more and would appreciate hearing a discussion or debate between you two on sola scriptura as this is a point of particular conflict for me as a protestant as I have considered questions of canon. Thank you!
Very interesting back and forth! For us Lutherans, Baptism is a gift from God that distributes His saving grace to us, absolving us from the stain of original sin through water by His Word.
Two educated young men, theologically solid and grounded in both of their traditions , are candidly exchanging their own beliefs to find common ground and truth. The future is bright for Christendom if these men are anything to go by. (Irish Catholic here)
Please make this a regular segment or an add-on channel where you guys grab coffee once a week and unpack the major disputes between Calvinism/Protestant vs Catholic
I appreciate the clarity and quality of the debate.. The Pastor clears up on his denomination having a clear teaching and that it shouldn't be confused with none Denominational Evangelical Protestant Churches. He's clear on what the original teaching of Baptists is and how it's some what diverged. I am a former Protestant Anglican and go with the Sacrement of Infant Baptism. Accepting Jesus as our Lord and Saviour is something we Confirm in the Confirmation as Catholics. The Pastors point on can we stray from our Christian faith after Baptism and Confirmation yes of course we can but so can people who take an Adult Verbal Confirmation as Taking Jesus as Our Lord and Saviour or full immersion Baptism as a Baptist. We can diverge from faith.. I like all points made by the Pastor and Trent. It was a worthwhile and informative chat.
Im low church protestant. Non denominational. But I was in the Philippines, and I met this woman who was Catholic and her eyes brightened up when she spoke about the Lord. I had to grapple with what I had been told about Catholics and modified my thoughts because of her. I definitely believe that that woman will be with the Lord. I think He knows our hearts and knows what we believe. He is a saving God, so I am a lot less judgmental about who will be entering Heaven. Of course they need to believe the things that all Believers of all Christian traditions teach. But I dont think that one tradition will have everything correct.
The Bible is clear on salvation . It's by faith alone and repentence is needed. And good works will be testament of that faith alone through Christ. If that catholic lady believed in the true gospel and repented, then she's saved😊 follow what Bible says over any institution or traditions
On a humorous note, Trent reminds me a lot of Raymond from the show Everybody Loves Raymond. Maybe I'm the only one who sees it. Looking forward to the possibility of your debate in the fall and would enjoy being physically present if it were open to the public. This was time well spent. Thank you.
I appreciate what this channel aims to do in terms of calmly working through these issues. I think a great many of us are well acquainted with the sense of intense unease, even anger, that accompanies hearing views quite contrary to our own from intelligent folks like Dr. Ortlund. (For my part, I’m an Anglican with what I’d term broadly Lutheran views on Baptism and the Lord’s Supper and something akin to N.T. Wright’s views on justification.) Even now I’m struggling to restrain “fighty” instincts that recoil from Dr. Ortlund’s views. (Was raised Lutheran so I am definitely working hard to embody the irenicism characteristic of the best of Anglicanism.)
Loved this format, and think it's more fruitful/productive. Encourage this more between the two of you as I don't think others can pull this off. Debates sometimes feel like shoving beliefs against each other. Thia one has more search for the truth feels. Please do more of this, and maybe more fruitful discussions will occur with your example.
Hey Gavin, yes baptism is not the cause of salvation, but rather, the means of obtaining the gift of salvation by faith. Note the following two verses on baptism: "buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him _through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead._ And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses" Col. 2:12-13 NKJV
@@doubtingthomas9117 From those same verses notice also how one is co-buried and co-raised with Christ in baptism, and that baptism is also the point where one is forgiven of his sins and made alive. One must be baptized with this in mind in order for it to occur. Faith alone cannot save. Have a look at these scriptures and tell me all the things one must be willing to do to saved (Mk 16:15-16; Luke 13:5; Acts 17:30; Romans 10: 9-10; Acts 8:37; Acts 2:38; 22:16).
I imagine these kinds of dialogues take more prep than your solo videos but they are really helpful for someone considering both Catholicism and Protestantism in a very efficient manner. I think your potential topics would probably cover these off but in my process of thinking these issues through the two big points of disagreement that underpin others are ecclesial infallibility and the nature of the visible church (eg, structured under apostolic succession or not). It would be great if your future discussions could give these topics a substantive treatment. Thanks both!
@@timmaddock2672 Peace. From a historical perspective, that is where Protestantism starts to unravel. 500 years ago, there was no debate. Each member of The Church professed: "I believe in One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church." On the flipside we have: "I believe in many (×many×many), dirty (but grace covered), protesting, churches that men began and directed by their own personal interpretations of the Bible, which was given to them by the same Church, against which they protested." "To be deep in History, is to cease to be Protestant." -John Henry Cardinal Newman, convert to Catholicism from Anglicanism.
Gavin Ortlund said 40:04... "...faith and baptism are both spoken of as causative for salvation, so we've got two causes here with one effect, because of what baptism is, as a symbolical and representative event. And I'm not saying it's just a symbol, it just doesn't seem at all strange to me to say 'Yeah you're saved at faith, and that leads up to baptism where it is kind of formally expressed.' " It sounds like he has already decided that baptism is a symbolical and representative event, and after that, accommodates that scripture under this premise.
This might the best Protestant/Catholic dialogue I've seen. You both rock.
You'd probably love the more recent debate they did on sola scriptura: Gavin Ortlund Vs.Trent Horn: Is Sola Scriptura True, on Pints with Aquinas channel. I found it the best Christian debate I've seen. These two have such respect for each other that it never got contentious.
Not as good as the discussions I have with my friends.
A person must be baptized to be saved, but it has nothing to do with water. The proof is found below.
Eating Kosher is not unbiblical, but it is not required under the New Covenant. Circumcision of male children is not unbiblical, but it is not required under the New Covenant. Trimming your beard according to the Law of Moses is not unbiblical, but it is not required under the New Covenant. Water baptisms were a part of the Old Covenant, but they are not required under the New Covenant. The proof is found below. John baptized with water. Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit. Which one is related to salvation, based on Romans 8:9?
.
Heb. 9:10 (YLT) only in victuals, and drinks, and different baptisms, and fleshly ordinances-till the time of reformation imposed upon them . (Old Covenant ------> New Covenant)
.
Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
(What is the one baptism of our faith here, based on Eph. 1:12-13, and 1 Cor. 12:13?)
.
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
.
1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
1Co 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
.
Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
.
Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
Mar 1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
.
I’m Catholic, but I admire Gavin, with his lucid and charitable demeanor, even though he disagrees with my beliefs. I can feel his sincerity, and his intent is not to put down people but to be balanced in his approach. I watch his videos because I know they will strengthen my own faith in my humble efforts to address his arguments and answer his questions. God bless him and dialogues like this.
thank you! Glad to be connected!
I agree. Calvinism is the hezbollah wing of Protestantism. They're rabid catholic haters. This guy Gavin is sane and level headed. Props to him.
As a Catholic, I agree with you.
Your words were written with beautiful charity.
Thank you
As an Orthodox Christian, I completely agree.
Me too, de clare. Well said.
As a staunch protestant who discusses theology with Roman Catholics very often. Trent Horn is the most charitable roman catholic ive seen. Great work both of you.
It comes cross like that but he really is against Protestants and attacks with a calm voice
@@palabraviva5840 yes of course he is against protestants. But he is charitable in the debate.
@@palabraviva5840say it ain’t so
@@palabraviva5840He believes in the Catholic faith and speaks with conviction. That’s how anyone who actually believes what they claim is going to talk. If you speak to someone who’s not a Christian about Christ, you can do so charitably while still standing against agnosticism or other religions.
The Catholic is against protestants... no duh@@palabraviva5840
As someone that was Baptist for many years and has recently converted to Catholicism I see both sides and still have many questions.Thank you both for this respectful informative talk.
Hey brother, same as me! I like to have those questions to. But i think we should first trust in the authority given by Jesus to His Church and try to understand why some decisions were made.
I agree with the last response. I think the magisterium is very much needed to decipher all of the scripture information. Since Martin Luther there are so many different Protestant religions that have so many different views which I believe is different from what Jesus wanted . Jesus in scripture speaks about the church. one Apostolic church that began with Peter when he received the keys from Jesus. He doesn't say there will be many churches with many different views. He tells people in scripture to go to the church that he founded
@@samuelmachado7791
Peace.
Welcome, home! If you have specific questions, I am here to help, and to pray for you.
Blessings
@@davidC757
Peace, brother.
Welcome, home!
I teach the Faith and am here as a resource to help answer your questions and to pray for you.
Blessings.
this is the nicest Calvinist i’ve ever come across, my goodness
Gavin represents the best of Calvinism. Unfortunately, the loudest, angriest are the more popular ones 👎
@@ejravagoJames White needs to take some notes lol
Keith Foskey (YourCalvinist) is also really friendly.
I have such a love for Trent as a Protestant! He’s probably the most charitable Catholic apologist out there! God bless both Gavin and Trent.
You should watch Scott Hahn 😊
@@sosooze I have. Still very much Protestant 💀
@@sosooze I’ve watched most of the best Roman catholic apologists. None of their arguments are good. They are in majority circular and self defeating
I love Trent Horn even though I’m a Protestant, I do admire Roman Catholics and I recently just started listening to you Mr. Gavin and I’m very impressed how knowledgeable you are with church history and your charitable demeanor with debates.
Hi, you should take a look at Dr. Brant Pitres channel as well.
Thanks for the kind words, glad to be connected!
You might like Jordan Cooper on the channel Just and Sinner where he discusses Roman-Ausburg confession differences, and Alpha and Omega Ministries channel where James White discusses Roman-Reform differences.
The channel Goy for Jesus also has content comparing Protestant and Roman differences.
@@truthisbeautiful7492 I love Dr. Jordan Cooper but not James White, he’s arrogant and a clanging cymbal unless you’re Muslim, he’s nicer to them than non Calvinists.
@@wordandwater9027 he thinks Arminians are saved and has even debated on the same team as Arminians. I'll assume the best and leave him to his Master to judge
As a confessional Lutheran these are so fun to watch. I tend to align with Trent on most of this but Gavin’s responses were definitely thought provoking and iron sharpening iron. Thanks Dr. Ortlund, Gods blessings during your break and to your family.
Thanks Will!
Please clarify confessional Lutheran
@@patriciajohnson1894 "one who agrees with the Lutheran Confessions as contained in the Book of Concord"
@@j.g.4942The thing is "Confessional Lutheran" is a redundant statement.
@@theodosios2615 I learned my confessional Lutheranism in the ELCA, and as much as it hurt having to leave the ELCA, I refuse to admit that there is any other legitimate Lutheranism than what is confessed in the Book of Concord, and that the Holy Spirit given in Baptism gives true faith, which is the faith confessed in the Book of Concord, even in the ELCA.
As a protestant on the fence, I am so thankful for these videos. I'm so glad you guys have such a respect for each other that I find rare in our divided communities. My parents are on the side of being Baptist that they believe catholics are not saved. I pray that no matter what happens, we can grow to understand each other and break down the walls be built up through our many dissesntions.
I'm Catholic, and I watch videos that strengthen my faith but I also watch videos from the point of view of those who criticize our system of belief to have a better perspective on every issue. Gavin's videos really help a lot.
glad to be connected!
Im so excited because my daughters friend who identifies as LGBTQ has been talking to my kiddo about faith in God. We are reading The Case for Christ in homeschool, and she decided to send the book to her friend who said shed read it. Daughter has been praying for her friends to come to Christ and she asjed the Pastor to pray with her for her friends' salvation, with another lgbtq kiddo burdening her heart. So wonderful to see Christ move in her heart
1:19:00 I think it is also important to affirm that every Easter, Catholics reaffirm our baptism and our baptismal promises.
...As well as every time you make the sign of the cross with holy water (with the intent to renew your baptismal promises).
Reafir is just as bad cause I did it at 15 so
It's fun to make things up in the Bible.
@@jwatson181 2 Thessalonians 2:15 2 Timothy 3:16
You can have only 1 baptism in Roman Catholic...you cannot be baptized 2 times or more.
Happy to see this discussion.
If we understand baptism to primarily be union with Christ per Romans 6:1-4, I have no problem saying Cornelius (and the theif on the cross) was baptized, though this baptism was apart from water. Ordinarily God uses water to bring about union with Christ but he is not limited by the sacraments and occasionally grants an extrasacramental baptism or union with Christ apart from water. The Council of Trent grants as much when it speaks of the necessity of the sacraments or the desire of them (which can be an implicit desire) for salvation. Hence we Catholics believe in baptism of desire and of blood and have noted this desire can be implicit.
Concerning causes, the meritorious cause is Christ and the instrumental cause is baptism (which is ordinarily by water but can be granted apart from water as God is not bound by the sacraments).
Concerning an awareness of the divinity of Christ for salvation, Catholicism recognizes a belief in the right doctrines of the church can be implicit rather than explicit, so if one is disposed to belief but has not yet become aware of ehat to believe, God reckons that as implicit faith which MAY suffice for salvation.
Interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing Michael. I am aware of the concepts of baptism by blood and baptism of desire; what would be the category for Cornelius? Are you saying Cornelius experienced a baptism of desire? Just trying to understand.
@@TruthUnites I would say figures like Cornelius could have received the gift of Holy Spirit prior to their water baptism in an extrasacramental way, at least that his how I read him being given the spirit in Acts 10:44 prior to water baptism (though someone could argue this was a gift of the spirit distinct from regeneration, so not the gift that is given in water baptism). The sign should still be given, if they have an opportunity and know that it should be received, however. This grace could be given prior to water baptism through desire, which may be implicit or explicit. Also, there are some additional grace that are given in water baptism that are not given in an extrasacramental baptism, though the forgiveness of sins and union with Christ are most certainly given.
God expects his ministers to administer the sign and that is the ordinary means by which he has promised to give the Holy Spirit, but he is certainly not bound to use the sacraments to communicate his grace. So, someone like the thief on the cross, who was never baptized with water, was certainly united to Christ, at some point between the cross and the ascension. In other words, anyone who experiences God in the beatific vision must first be united to Christ. This union is ordinarily through water, though God is not restricted to use it. The desire for this union can be either explicit or implicit, as can the knowledge of the truths that are necessary for salvation.
BTW, I've only had the chance to see the first 20 minutes so if there is some redundancy to my comments I apologize.
@@reasonandtheology yes, I am aware of the notion that God is not bound by the sacraments, I am just curious how specifically you would understand Cornelius. Aquinas puts this kind of episode into the category of baptism of desire, and it sounds like that is what you are saying, if I understand. I don't agree but I appreciate you sharing your thoughts. We do chase this a bit further after the 20:00 mark, but mainly on the general issue rather than Cornelius specifically. Thanks again.
@@TruthUnites I put Cornelius in the category of baptism of desire, but I don't think that is the only option to take as a Catholic. There are alternatives, but this is the one I prefer.
@@reasonandtheology Got it! Thanks for explaining your take.
You two give hope to the world. Thank you for showing what unity and peace looks like.
Great discussion. I'm a Catholic and take Trent's position, though I also admire Gavin's eloquence and charitable approach. Gold stars for both.
As always Trent never fails to deliver. One reason (among many) and many other Apologists that have helped me in my Christian journey and why I stay Catholic. God bless you Trent🙏🏼
Horn was awfu in this discussion, his un biblical catholic views were laughable when put in view of Scripture. Did you watch another video?
@@EnHacore1 I watched a lot of his content as well as Jimmy Akin, Patrick Madrid and many others. Thank you for your opinion friend. God bless you 🙂
@@EnHacore1I’m not a Catholic either, but he’s a nice guy coming in good faith.
Boy.... a 10 episode series of 90-120 minute conversations with these two would be on my Amazon DVD wish list...
MEAT MEAT MEAT. Thank you Gavin!
Great to see catholics and protestants having fruitful discussions together. Glory to God
Gavin, I know from the last video when you engaged Trent you said how busy you are. Both of you, I’m sure! Wanted to say we appreciate both of you for the time.
Thank you so much! The discussion was a pleasure so I am glad we were able to make time for it.
@@TruthUnites of course. Enjoy the month of May off! From TH-cam, anyway.
@@TruthUnites Take care Dr. Ortlund. Your kindness is something that is inspiring.
@YAJUN YUAN What was I saying there?
As one who respects both speakers, I thought this was a fantastic dialogue. For a full disclosure, I’m a former southern Baptist who is now an Anglican, so while I certainly understand where Gavin is coming from with his concerns, I would certainly lean much more closer to Trent’s view.
DT, I followed the Southern Baptist-Anglican-Catholic route over the course of my conversion. If you ever have any questions, feel free to hollar
I actually read and considered both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox apologetic books and articles for a few years on my way to traditional Anglicanism, but thanks for the encouragement.
@Doubting Thomas interesting journey. I'm looking into lutheranism and Anglicanism. As I can't make that leap yet onto Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman catholicism. What's your opinion on lutheranism?
@@triplea6174 -I actually have a lot of appreciation for classical/confessional Lutheranism and consider classical Anglicanism and confessional Lutheranism close ‘cousins’ so to speak. I can say at this point in my life if there wasn’t a solid traditional Anglican parish in town, I’d have no qualms going to the local LCMS congregation.
I think Jesus smiles with a happy heart when His children get together to discuss what it means to be in His family like this. We remember His words and discuss what was meant, like a beloved parent that passed on... 🥰
I’m a grateful Catholic and I admire Gavin’s demeanor and the way he is. These two do a good job of being kind and good to each. They do a good job of disagreeing with ideas and not the person.
I like more conversations like this than debates. Thank you gentlemen.
What a treat this is! I'm a catholic. Thank you Gentleman 💕
Prayers for you in your time off in May. Also congrats on your new baby coming soon praying for him/her and your wife.
Thank you so much!
Great video. So respectful which helps all to understand. I grew up in a family where my Mom was Presbyteriani and my Dad was Catholic. Respect is the key. Over the years I have become firmly rooted in my Catholic Faith and had the good fortune of looking at both belief systems. I believe it was he respect of both of m parents who supported each other that allowed me to develop a strong faith and to see the need to be grounded in faith. As a young child I attended Sunday School and summer Bible school at my Mom’s church, I attended Catholic school for my education and my Mom is the one who taught me from the Catechism. She remained Protestant until shortly before she died and then converted to Catholicism. The issue that kept her from converting earlier was that she could not accept the doctrine of Transubstantiation and felt it would be hypocritical to convert. She was finally given the grace to believe shortly before her death. We are all on our individual faith journeys : love and respect will see us through. Thank you both for this beautiful thought provoking discussion. God bless.
Thank you for sharing that 😊
Thank you guys for meeting in person. I watch both of you and love both works! I love your spirit Gavin. Your demeanor is something I truly find inspirational. I aspire to conduct myself how you do. Thanks for this awesome video! God bless!
Glad you enjoyed, and thanks for the kind words!
I agree Elizabeth!! And I also desire the same disposition these two possess.
Trent and Gavin are two of the most respectful and respectable teachers
Great discussion. As a former catholic, I appreciated both sides and it has reaffirmed my belief about believers baptism. God bless.
@@bersules8 ?
@@bersules8 the word catholic means universal which all Christians are. But he's referring here to Roman Catholic.
Dr. Gavin you are the best, wow! God bless trent, as well. 😊
As the Baptist raised daughter of a mother who converted as a young woman after being raised Catholic, this was really fascinating. My mom has a lot of resentment towards Catholicism due to feeling like she was only taught how to go through the motions and not given a living faith. As I've investigated as an adult, I've found there's more nuance on either side than I'd previously thought.
The real issue is whether we are righteous in God's sight only by the righteousness of Jesus Christ imputed to us, or whether we are righteousness in God's sight by our own internal Righteousness, as the council of Trent, the Romanist gathering said that Christins are 'innocent' and 'immaculate.'. They did this by denying that 'venial sin' is really formally sin and by claiming that concupscience isn't sin. Even though Romans chapter 7 says that concupscience is sin. So by adopting a lower view of sin, they could pretend that Christians are innocent and Immaculate internally and don't need to trust in Christ and His righteousness alone.
@Saints and Scholars how do you know? What studies indicate that?
@Saints and Scholars understanding it makes it even worse
@Saints and Scholars do you have any evidence for your claim?
@@Psalm34rws that's not what Reformed Christians believe, so the wrong premise doesn't lead to that wrong conclusion. Sinners are always accepted only on the basis of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. We are only accepted in the sight of God on the basis of Jesus Christ, our righteousness (1 Corinthians chapter 1) who God made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him (2 Corinthians), or as Galatians puts it Christ became a curse for us, or Isaiah that the Lord has laid on Him the inquity if us all. Christ is perfectly holy and righteous, so our sins were imputed to him and He was punished for them, He is the propitiation for our sins according to 1 John, that God imputes rightouesness Apart from works, and God Declares Right the ungodly (Romans 3 and 4). The same Christ who makes the spiritually dead to alive, granting then repentence and the gift of trusting in Jesus, also gives the Holy Spirit to transform them by the renewing of their minds. So those whom God justifies (declares righteous by His blood, Romans 5) He also glorifies. When He appears, we will be like Him. Now, Christians have concupscience, which is sin, Romans 7, but when we are in the presence of Christ which is far better, even concupscience will be removed. So there will be no sin in the believers in Heaven when they see God. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified (declared righteous) by faith apart from the works of the law. If Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but NOT before God. Rome's idea of salvation doesn't remove boasting, and is impossible because concupscience is sin and is only removed in glory, not when a sinner is brought to spiritual life.
So whoever told you that was either ignorant or lying, and we know who the father of lies is, the fallen angel Satan. So God is not involved in any deception for declaring righteous the ungodly (please read Romans chapter 3 and 4), because Christ died for the ungodly, and righteousness is imputed to them. Note the word used is imputed, not infused. Not that we sent that Christ transformed believers, but the internal Righteousness of believers is their own righteousness, and is not perfect and cannot stand in the judgment of our holy God, because concupscience is sin, as it is written, if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us, 1 John. And read Roman 7.
What about you, are you still trusting that your own internal Righteousness is 'immaculate' and that you are 'innocent' as the council of Trent claims Christians are? Do you deny that your concupscience is sin, as Rome claims? Do you claim that what the Holy Spirit calls sin, is not really sin, but only leads to sin? Will you admit that so-called 'venial sin' is truly sin? How can a truly Holy God look at concupscience in believers here, and will you admit that the flesh lusts against the Spirit, as Galatians say? How can concuscpience be neither good nor bad, or even good, God forbid, when the Holy Spirit is against it?
+++ Gavin and Trent - the 2 best Christian gentlemen apologists on the internet! +++
PRAISE GOD FOR YOU BOTH! You put a smile on Gods face. Unity of dear brothers in CHRIST
Gavin, you bring me so much joy seeing how much passion, sincerity and kindness you have in your approach these dialogues. Thank you for being a shining example for a young man like myself who wants to enter these conversations, whether it be with fellow Christians or as an evangelist.
Keep it up, sir! ❤
Thanks Dylan! God bless you!
As a busy mother I find it so difficult trying to find the time to unpack all of these things. As a Catholic who is on an endeavour to learn more about my Faith, I'm very thankful for people such as Trent Horn who have obviously put in a lot of time and thinking to be as knowledgable as they are, and these types of videos are so helpful for me so thank you for the respectful dialogue and for Trent Horn who so beautifully and intelligently defends the faith in a way that I never could. God bless you both.
This is really awesome. 2 people who genuinely understand their own point of view discussing the what and why. Keep doing this please.
*Everyone can see Roman religion is a man made religion. Only RCs could not. 95% of RC doctrines and 95% of RC clergies did not come from God's Word. Why would a true religion have such statistics? Lucy has b - ded the eyes of RCs; so they could not C.*
1. Catholics say Mary was forever virgin. Yet Bible says Jesus had brothers and sisters. Mary was not perpetually virgin. Mk 6:3, Mat 13:55, Mat 27:56, Mar 6:3, Mar 15:40, Mar 15:47.
2. Catholics say clergies must be celibate. Yet BIBLE says Peter (supposed R Church first leader) had mother in law. Bible says celibacy is not a qualification for clergies. Mat 8:14-15, Mar 1:30-31, Luk 4:38-39.
3. Catholics say Mary was sinless. But Bible says Mary offered a sinner's offering. She was a sinner. Bible says Mary needed a Saviour. Lk 2:23-24, Lev 12:6-8, Rom 3:10.
4. Catholics say confess to R priests in a box. BIBLE says nothing about confessing to priests in a box. Bible says confess to God only. 1 John 1:9, Mat 6, Romans 10:9-10.
5. Catholics say drink of the physical blood of Jesus. Yet OT and NT both say do not drink blood. Acts 15, Lev 7:26.
6. Catholics say pray to passed on Mary and "saints". Yet Bible says do not contact the dead. NT Church did not record a single case of NT believers asking passed on saints to pray for them. Deut 18:11, Isaiah 8:19.
7. Catholics make and bow down to statues. Bible says do not bow down to graven images (statues). Deut 4, Exo 20:4-5.
8. Catholics sprinkles “holy water”. But NT Church of the Bible mentioned nothing about “holy water”. There was no record of any Apostles sprinkling “holy water” on believers. Catholics claimed “holy water” came from OT. Yet Num 5:17 says “holy water” was water used to test adulterous women in OT temple. Hardly the same. Those were for Old Covenant Jews. Not New Testament Christians.
9. Catholics say Peter was pope - bishop of all bishops. Yet Bible says Peter was just a leader of the Jerusalem Church. Bible says nothing of the office of bishop of bishops. Gal 2:9, Mat 16:18.
10. Catholics say there is a seat of Peter. Yet BIBLE says nothing about it. Jesus said “not to lord over others”.
11. Catholics has clergy priesthood. Bible says clergy priesthood was done away with in New Testament. There is no clergy priesthood in NT. Heb 7:27, 9:12, 10:10.
12. Catholics preaches Works Salvation (faith + good works + partake R sacraments + submit to R pontiff + be in R Church + devote to Mary = to be saved). Yet Bible says “believe in Jesus to be saved”. Bible says Works Salvation is cursed. Gal 1:8-9. Acts 16:30-31, John 3:16, Romans 10:9-10.
13. Catholics says they must do Penance to atone for their sins. Yet Bible says repent, confess and sins will be forgiven. Catholic Bible changes the word “repentance” in NT into “penance”. Original Greek NT does not use or mean the word penance. Penance = work to atone for sins. Repentance = change of heart. 1 John 1:9, Mat 6.
14. Catholics say Mary went straight to heaven without dying. Yet Bible says nothing about it.
15. Catholics say Islam and Christianity have the same God. Yet Islam doesn't believe in death and resurrection of Jesus and Trinity.
Amazing how much insight you can achieve when you don't treat each other as enemies. I hope you two do further discussions like this -- this was one of the most insightful discussions I've seen in a while.
I love this more informal style of dialogue. Both Gavin and Trent are such thoughtful and kind individuals, this is a wonderful conversation.
I give Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and even New Ager’s who dialogue respectfully with faithful Catholics credit for being open to challenges to their ideas. Many Buddhists start meditating on the mysteries of the rosary, and find themselves called into the Church
@@Danaluni59 Do you really think of protestants as outside the body of Christianity, like all the other religions or spiritism you mentioned?
I wish all followers of Jesus, like these two men, were as congenial and eager to seek the truth as Trent and Gavin. What a wonderful model of godly discourse and mutual respect even in matters where the positions are strongly opposed. Thank you, Lord, for Gavin and Trent!
I think the core theological difference here actually has to do with *how* God acts. Gavin's position seems totally sensible - if you *see* a change, there probably is a change. But I think the Catholic position here is much more true to who God is, especially in relation to creatures. The process of salvation is not something that can be quantified by any amount or quality of behavior, simply because we are not able to know and search hearts as God. Trent's wariness to ascribe a change in behavior to regeneration (instead of a million other psychological, social, etc. factors) is completely merited, even if that change in behavior is *radical*. That's because, again, only God searches and knows the heart, and his work (and presence) is often *invisible*.
I don't think for a second this means we can't "judge" behavior - but again, that judgement is reserved for behavior, not for gauging the amount of grace God has given to a particular individual. If you think about it, the idea that we can quantify grace using our own standards is kind of absurd - which is *exactly* why sacraments are *given* to us-as revelation-as an objective measure of grace conferred for specific occasions. Baptism doesn't offer us some kind of amorphous "change in behavior", but instead it gives us, by faith, an assurance of salvation-regardless of our inner psychological state. One doesn't have to arise from the waters *feeling* any particular thing (our feelings are fickle and wounded by sin), we arise *knowing* we have died and been brought to life *because God says so*.
I think this distinction really gets at the heart of Protestantism vs. Catholicism. Protestantism puts a lot of value and meaning on the interior psychological state of the *individual* - how he *feels* in relation to the world around him. And, to be clear, it's not as though those feelings and dispositions don't matter, but the Catholic would simply say that our salvation is not something that we can quantify by any measure of our own-even if it's something very close to us, like our own psychology. Instead, the Catholic affirms that salvation comes from the hand of God, *revealed to us* through *objective signs* so that our assurance can be tied to something outside of our own inward "sense".
That was really well put.
Well said !!! I have come near this thought but have failed to put it into words.
That is a great distinction! I notice a trend from Protestants which seems like an excessive preoccupation with their salvation that you don’t see as much in Catholicism. Maybe it’s the Sacraments that give us that peace?
Lutherans and Anglicans take the same type of position.
My personal experience is seeking Jesus diligently then getting baptized by water and hands and after that I was a new person! Never looked back! My entire life did a 360! So happy now, peace!!!
Great collaboration gentlemen. I'm RCC and lean on Trent alot (the apologist lol) but thought Gavin was suberb here and brought up real solid considerations.. Would like to see more here. Thanks guys.
I've made some comments on this video: "Reply to Baptist Gavin Ortlund on Baptism" [5-20-22 on my "Biblical Evidence for Catholicism" blog]
This was one of the finest, most excellent, Protestant-Catholic exchanges I have ever seen in my 42 years of committed Christian discipleship. This is how it ought to be done. I thoroughly enjoyed it and learned a lot of things. Super kudos to both Gavin and Trent!
Thanks Dave, so glad you enjoyed it and thanks for engaging
Appreciate this debate in tone and content, learned a lot, helped me clarify some things. I am with Gavin (except I am not a Calvinist so there were things that Trent said around faith that resonated with me :-) )
I love having dialogue with both of you who are so open to understanding both sides in a very kind way
love your spirit of grace and gentless, Dr. Ortlund. I've been watching debates for a long time and have never seen anyone with a level of patience and humility as you. your work is a real blessing!
gentleness*
An outward showing of an inward doing. I was baptized when I was 8. And felt the need to do it again when I was 20. Because I had gone astray. And wow. I am amazed they brought up the guy on the cross. Great discussion!
Thanks for the discussion Gavin!
I hate debates and this was so refreshing to listen to!
Uplifting to see two Christians coming together to see what we can say amen on. I pray one day we can be One Church again! May God bless both of these charitable men.
Trent Horn is amazing
This was an awesome dialogue. I’m on your side, Gavin. You guys should have more of these dialogues, it was informative.
This was a phenomenal dialogue. God bless you, both.
I haven't watched this yet but I'm more excited for this than I have been for any movie I've seen in a long time.
Hope you enjoy!
@@TruthUnites I really did! Thank you! And thank the Lord. May the Lord bless and keep you both.
Loved this graceful discussion. I kept thinking: God’s Grace is far beyond our attempts to understand Him and legalism doesn’t seem to be how He decides to show His love to the world. Thank you for this!
Can we liken baptism to a wedding? For a time the bride is wooed, then the brides heart is captured, then a proposal is accepted, then the actual wedding. Although it was a process leading up to the wedding, you are not married until the wedding day.
Yes because marriage is also a sacrament
Will miss your content during May. Happy rest month!
This conversation was so much more fruitful and more beautiful than the rebuttal videos. I really appreciate both of you! Thank you!
1:27:00 Fifth baby! Awesome Gavin! Congratulations! Hope your wife is doing OK with the pregnancy. Will pray for you! I think we are just about past our baby making years. Our youngest is four right now. I have her at home with croup and stridor. But it is so wonderful to have a lively family.
thanks for the prayers!
@@TruthUnites omgoodness!! God bless you and your family 💕💕💕🥰
What’s most excellent is when Dr teaches. Such an examplary, trustworthy Truth Teller !
Dr Gavin Ortlund, you’re a gem.
My heart broke when you said this will be your last video for a month... but praying this is a great period of rest for you! Looking forward to having you back soon!
Thank you for understanding! Trying to pace myself and be wise and healthy with it.
5:20 - cause
5:54 - coronation analogy
37:50 - exceptions
39:14, 39:37 - the sticking point for Gavin
40:36 - Trent’s response
42:20 - fallback denominations
42:50, 44:10 - Gavin’s point about inconsistent reliance on tradition concerning the salvation of dead infants
44:31, 45:17, 45:50 - Trent’s response
46:08 - tradition and usury
@YAJUN YUAN Nah, you’re more detailed and organize than I am.
I only did two stamps lol
I love these. I find them better than debates because ideas get more fleshed out
This as important topic but what truly stands out to me is this mutually respectful dialogue. I wish more of us (including and especially myself) did this when we disagree with people.
Best dialogue partners I have seen for one another….probably because it seems they could be friends.
I’m so glad you touched on Calvinism! Now I want to go find all of your vids on that topic, Gavin. Really interesting dialog. I so appreciate the calm demeanor expressed by you both. It’s like I’m eavesdropping on your talk over coffee. 😂
I enjoyed this video and appreciate the charitable dialogue. I hope for more and would appreciate hearing a discussion or debate between you two on sola scriptura as this is a point of particular conflict for me as a protestant as I have considered questions of canon. Thank you!
... it's wonderful we can meet - respectfully - in these conversations.
Thank you
Kind regards Kim
So grateful for Gavin!
Thanks much for this video.
Thanks Gavin for this discussion. Trent is very amazing.
Very interesting back and forth! For us Lutherans, Baptism is a gift from God that distributes His saving grace to us, absolving us from the stain of original sin through water by His Word.
Always enjoying listening to Gavin as a catholic
Baie dankbaar vir julle uiters sinvolle gesprek.
I align with my brother Baptist pastor. Great conversation Trent.
Two educated young men, theologically solid and grounded in both of their traditions , are candidly exchanging their own beliefs to find common ground and truth. The future is bright for Christendom if these men are anything to go by. (Irish Catholic here)
Please make this a regular segment or an add-on channel where you guys grab coffee once a week and unpack the major disputes between Calvinism/Protestant vs Catholic
That would be so helpful!
I appreciate the clarity and quality of the debate.. The Pastor clears up on his denomination having a clear teaching and that it shouldn't be confused with none Denominational Evangelical Protestant Churches. He's clear on what the original teaching of Baptists is and how it's some what diverged. I am a former Protestant Anglican and go with the Sacrement of Infant Baptism. Accepting Jesus as our Lord and Saviour is something we Confirm in the Confirmation as Catholics. The Pastors point on can we stray from our Christian faith after Baptism and Confirmation yes of course we can but so can people who take an Adult Verbal Confirmation as Taking Jesus as Our Lord and Saviour or full immersion Baptism as a Baptist. We can diverge from faith.. I like all points made by the Pastor and Trent. It was a worthwhile and informative chat.
Two of my favorites right here. Love both of your channels and ministries. Great talk guys!
Im low church protestant. Non denominational. But I was in the Philippines, and I met this woman who was Catholic and her eyes brightened up when she spoke about the Lord. I had to grapple with what I had been told about Catholics and modified my thoughts because of her. I definitely believe that that woman will be with the Lord. I think He knows our hearts and knows what we believe. He is a saving God, so I am a lot less judgmental about who will be entering Heaven. Of course they need to believe the things that all Believers of all Christian traditions teach. But I dont think that one tradition will have everything correct.
The Bible is clear on salvation . It's by faith alone and repentence is needed. And good works will be testament of that faith alone through Christ. If that catholic lady believed in the true gospel and repented, then she's saved😊 follow what Bible says over any institution or traditions
On a humorous note, Trent reminds me a lot of Raymond from the show Everybody Loves Raymond. Maybe I'm the only one who sees it.
Looking forward to the possibility of your debate in the fall and would enjoy being physically present if it were open to the public. This was time well spent. Thank you.
Trent Horn is a very good debater, very convincing .
I appreciate what this channel aims to do in terms of calmly working through these issues. I think a great many of us are well acquainted with the sense of intense unease, even anger, that accompanies hearing views quite contrary to our own from intelligent folks like Dr. Ortlund. (For my part, I’m an Anglican with what I’d term broadly Lutheran views on Baptism and the Lord’s Supper and something akin to N.T. Wright’s views on justification.) Even now I’m struggling to restrain “fighty” instincts that recoil from Dr. Ortlund’s views. (Was raised Lutheran so I am definitely working hard to embody the irenicism characteristic of the best of Anglicanism.)
Thanks for your efforts. It really is challenging but I’m convinced it’s worth it. Bless you
Loved this format, and think it's more fruitful/productive. Encourage this more between the two of you as I don't think others can pull this off. Debates sometimes feel like shoving beliefs against each other. Thia one has more search for the truth feels. Please do more of this, and maybe more fruitful discussions will occur with your example.
Yuuuuh, excited! And super early whoop whoop.
Hey Gavin, yes baptism is not the cause of salvation, but rather, the means of obtaining the gift of salvation by faith. Note the following two verses on baptism:
"buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him _through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead._ And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses" Col. 2:12-13 NKJV
Yeah, it seems that Paul here brings faith and baptism in the closest conjunction.
@@doubtingthomas9117 From those same verses notice also how one is co-buried and co-raised with Christ in baptism, and that baptism is also the point where one is forgiven of his sins and made alive. One must be baptized with this in mind in order for it to occur. Faith alone cannot save. Have a look at these scriptures and tell me all the things one must be willing to do to saved (Mk 16:15-16; Luke 13:5; Acts 17:30; Romans 10: 9-10; Acts 8:37; Acts 2:38; 22:16).
Excellent discussion!
Appreciate the respectful dialogue. I think Gavin was the most convincing here. Although some decent attempts from Horn.
Really great discussion love the demeanor of both
I love the charity displayed in the comments....💗🙏🙏💗
Two of my faves. Thanks!
Very appropriate discussion in good mutual understanding.
Such a great discussion from two of my favorite apologists!
Excellent! Excellent! Excellent! Thank you both. Man, you both have made me think and hunger for more.
A great dialog, I was looking forward to the two of you talking together really enjoyed it.
I imagine these kinds of dialogues take more prep than your solo videos but they are really helpful for someone considering both Catholicism and Protestantism in a very efficient manner. I think your potential topics would probably cover these off but in my process of thinking these issues through the two big points of disagreement that underpin others are ecclesial infallibility and the nature of the visible church (eg, structured under apostolic succession or not). It would be great if your future discussions could give these topics a substantive treatment. Thanks both!
@@timmaddock2672
Peace.
From a historical perspective, that is where Protestantism starts to unravel. 500 years ago, there was no debate. Each member of The Church professed: "I believe in One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church."
On the flipside we have:
"I believe in many (×many×many), dirty (but grace covered), protesting, churches that men began and directed by their own personal interpretations of the Bible, which was given to them by the same Church, against which they protested."
"To be deep in History, is to cease to be Protestant." -John Henry Cardinal Newman, convert to Catholicism from Anglicanism.
I loved the videos that you did with your brother (eric). Are you we going to be seeing more videos with the two of you conversing?
Thanks! I have done three, the most recent about a month ago. I am sure we will talk again at some point but I don't have anything planned.
Gavin Ortlund said 40:04... "...faith and baptism are both spoken of as causative for salvation, so we've got two causes here with one effect,
because of what baptism is, as a symbolical and representative event.
And I'm not saying it's just a symbol, it just doesn't seem at all strange to me to say 'Yeah you're saved at faith, and that leads up to baptism where it is kind of formally expressed.' "
It sounds like he has already decided that baptism is a symbolical and representative event, and after that, accommodates that scripture under this premise.
Really enjoyed this. Thanks guys
Reformed Presby here. Baptism saves 🔥🔥🔥🔥God loves and saves infants, as well ❤
God has saved us, will save us, and is saving us❤