Dear Mike, if you see this: Please for the love of everything good. Just PLEASE have a public one on one discussion with Trent. It doesn’t have to be a debate. Just a discussion
That's how all con men act. They make you believe you can trust THEM, and will sound like the sincerest of all the sincere. And all the while every word they speak is a lie. The Devil is his teacher and Trent is a good pupil.
@@tony1685 I wonder why predominant church fathers agree that Eucharist is the real body and blood of Christ! Even in the pre nicene period! Ignatious Iraneus Jerome Tertullian I mean why? Why does it correspond when Jesus says My body is real Food??
He lost me when he went to the dictionary for the definition of merit. Might as well go into a courtroom and use the dictionary definition of assault instead of the code of criminal law.
Speaking as a convert, one of the biggest disconnects in thinking or general cognitive framework between the Protestant mind and the Catholic mind is the idea of "it is fitting..." vs "it is required..." I was never aware of this about myself as a Protestant when I was a Protestant. I only became aware of it after becoming a Catholic and running into a lot of instances (especially ancient and medieval sources) of the statement "it is fitting..." as a justification for an idea. At first, I really didn't like this. I didn't like it because to my Protestant mind to say something was "fitting" was ambiguous. I didn't want something to be "fitting" or "appropriate" I wanted it to be "demanded" or "necessary". I strongly suspect that this is an outgrowth of the fact that Protestantism is born out of modernity and one of the changes that leads to modern thought and becomes a hallmark of modern philosophy is the demand for mathematical certainty in ideas. In other words, something can only be believed if it is demanded by a kind of logical/mathematical certainty. As a Protestant when I made arguments for things, I was always looking for "it MUST mean this" or "this DEMANDS this view". To say "this view is fitting" to me was not an argument because it seemed totally inconclusive and uncertain. Eventually I realized that this mode of thinking (the Protestant demand for absolute requirements) is actually quite bad and has very bad results when it is applied to God. God is almost never, if ever, restrained by the kind of "must" and "demands" logic that Protestants are implicitly trained to think in. God almost always works on the principle of "it is fitting". You can see this distinction of thought in Mike's misunderstanding of Catholic teachings on Merit. On a certain level, he just lacks the categories to really comprehend what the Catholic view says. In Mike's mind, Merit can only mean "to earn". In his view, something is either demanded or it is not. Either we obligate God to owe us something, or whatever we get has nothing to do with us. He has no third category in-between in which What God gives us is not earned, but it is fitting. Which means we did not obligate God, or put God in our debt, but what God did was still in some sense a right and good response to what we did. For example: Let's say you go murder someone. It would not be fitting for God to reward that action by blessing you. God in his mercy may still give you grace by calling you to repentance, but that is not a reward for what you did. Now let's say you go out and you help the homeless in your community by feeding them and treating them with human kindness. You did not, by doing this, put God in your debt, or earn salvation, or earn anything else. In point of fact, you only did what was already your duty. You only did what you were already obligated to do. However, it is still fitting that God would reward this action by blessing you in some way. It's like a child who cleans up their room and the parent decides to reward them with ice cream. The parent was not obligated to pay the child. The child was only doing what they are already supposed to do. The parent is not in debt to their child because the child cleaned the room. However, it is fitting that the parent reward the child, if they feel so inclined.
so true. protestantism is such a natural consequence of early modern and enlightenment thinking. it blows my mind that so many protestants think they're part of a movement that's "reviving the original Church" and things like that, when in point of fact it's so obviously applying a completely novel hermeneutic to Scripture, which it seems to treat as if it were a single book that just miraculously fell from the sky, fully formed and leather-bound, in the 16th century. having been raised an atheist and recently converted, the more time I spend in Christianity, the more I have realized that protestantism is part of the same trajectory that ultimately results in atheism as well as these ultraliberal "woke" gospels that want all the warm fuzzy feelings with none of the real-world implications. in my mind, it's no coincidence that atheism is ascendant and has been accelerating rapidly in all the countries that played host to the protestant reformation and later protestant "revivals." western Europe, the US, Canada, etc. all took a nose dive in religiosity as protestant culture evolved into materialist culture. and only these past few years are we starting to see a large correction, which seems to be primarily mediated by people returning to more ancient Christian traditions.
@@ToxicallyMasculinelol All true. The sad reality is that our society is both breath-takingly ignorant, and also completely indoctrinated into a philosophy that most are completely unaware of. The combination of being indoctrinated but being unaware of the indoctrination means that most people just think their indoctrinated philosophy simply reality. For most people it is basically a given that ancient and medieval ideas and thoughts are "primitive" "unenlightened" stupid, uneducated, etc. Meanwhile the "fact" that we are enlightened, progressive, and well educated is also an undeniable given. When it comes to reading the bible, most protestants aren't even aware that they have a hermeneutic at all. They think they are just reading it at plain face value. That's what happens when you aren't even aware that you have a worldview, or a philosophy. They aren't making a conscious choice to prefer one philosophy of interpretation over the other... They are at a stage of ignorance where they don't even know that they don't know.
This "Either or" School of thought, i guess relate to something material or natural. Air is not water, wood is not steel.. But this "Either or", simply can not be applied to spiritual idea
Joshua, thank you for this post. It is extremely well put and poignant. I am also a convert, and as a young Baptist I thought exactly the way you described. I was never able to explain why there is a such a difference in approach to scripture but you nailed it. I always joked (even when I was a Baptist) that the Baptists may as well tear off the cover of the bible and put on a new one called “1000 Reasons Why You’re Going To Hell. PS. - Tithe” It is a very legalistic approach to scripture and being born of the enlightenment when our current mode of scientific thought was also being born, it follows that Protestant thought was born of that empirical mindset. It’s also notable that many protestants have no idea where the bible comes from, or when. Those are two incredibly valuable things to know which basically destroy much of the protestant view of theology.
@@mimi_j he spent so much time studying that he’s surpassed the 2000 year cumulative wisdom of the whole of Christendom. Quite an achievement pastor Winger!
As someone who has been watching both Mike and Trent for a while now (maybe years), I appreciate how respectful and thoughtful Trent's response is to him. I'd have a hard time doing that myself. I actually watched both Trent and Mike's videos on the subject before the rebuttals and it appears that Mike is leaning really hard on what he has personally come to understand Catholic teaching to be. But he doesn't seem to be very familiar with what the Catholic Church has interpreted those teachings to mean. It is amusing (and slightly frustrating) that Mike thinks that he knows more about what the Catholic Church teaches than a Catholic apologist. And I'm writing this as a protestant! I wish that Mike was more sincere and courteous in his rebuttal. When I watched Mike's video, I had to turn it off halfway and pick it up again later because I was getting worked up over how unfair he was being to Trent. I understand being passionate about leading people away from what he perceives as false teaching, but Mike's style only appeals to those who are already on his side of the fence. It doesn't help Catholics "see the truth". One of the reasons that I find Trent so compelling is that he's always very respectful and gives everyone a fair shake (Peter says in 1 Peter 3: 15-16).
I'm shocked you think Mike wasn't anything but graceful in his response. I was raised Catholic but left the religion for several practices I found contradictory to scripture. While I disagreed with almost everything Trent said, I found him to be respectful and graceful with the exception of a few misrepresented statements regarding Mike's arguments. It seems to me you find any argument opposing yours to be upsetting and I find it hard to believe you aren't Catholic. Any honest individual can admit they were both respectful in their debate.
@@jessb.2073 Mike Winger accused Trent of purposefully misrepresenting catholicism to trick protestants into converting. It was uncharitable and certainly hard to watch.
The disturbing thing is that Mike thinks HE is the one who is going to explain what the Catholic doctrine means, as if the Catholics themselves don't know.
Psalm 49:7-8. 7 No man can possibly redeem his brother or pay his ransom to God. 8 For the redemption of his soul is costly, and never can payment suffice . Now, explain how Indulgences are valid after scripture asserts that they are not.
@@markmeyer4532 - To understand indulgences, we must see the difference between temporary punishment and eternal punishment. Of course, eternal punishment is the afterlife of hell, so it is more serious than temporary punishment of this world. To understand what temporary punishment is, look at Mathew 18, verses 15 and 16: If your brother sins against you, go and confront him privately. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, regard him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. People who sin against us in this life need some temporary punishment. A person who commits crimes should serve a prison sentence. If people treat you badly you should not associate with them. Of course, the bible is usually more concerned about eternal punishment because eternal punishment is a much more serious matter than temporary punishment. What Psalm 49 is referring to is your eternal soul that God will judge. The kind of sin that carries eternal punishment is for God to judge. People cannot possibly remove someone else’s mortal sins (those that carry eternal punishment). Only Christ can atone for those sins.
Catholic theology has all the answers to these questions. It’s also in my experience the biggest stumbling block for Protestants who can’t understand why God would make the Faith so complicated. This is why the virtue of obedience and humility are the greatest.
It's because Catholic teaching is really precise, it's like distinction upon distinction, but you don't have to make it that complicated our faith is for every one from a 5 year old child to Thomas Aquinas, so it doesn't need to be that complicated either
It’s not that we don’t understand why God would make the Faith complicated. In fact, what Jesus taught about salvation was incredibly simplified from the very complicated religion that the Pharisees had built in Israel . We have a hard time understanding why none of the doctrines exclusive to Roman Catholicism are clearly outlined by God
@@SgtEnder *_In fact, what Jesus taught about salvation was incredibly simplified from the very complicated religion that the Pharisees had built in Israel ._* I would agree and disagree with this statement. Sure Jesus simplified it in Matthew 22:34-40 when he taught it all comes down to loving God and neighbor. Yep got rid of all of the old laws and simplified it down to 2. However, when we actually think about what this entails, we see that it isn't so simple after all. This is where the doctrines come in. At the end of the day God didn't outline every single scenario (past, present and future) that might be encompassed by loving God and neighbor. *_We have a hard time understanding why none of the doctrines exclusive to Roman Catholicism are clearly outlined by God_* Doctrines are Church teachings in matters of faith and morals. All Christian churches hold doctrines that aren't clearly defined by God. If they were clearly defined then there would be no debates on doctrine. Like I said above God didn't outline every single scenario. I'm sure you would agree that many Christian differences in doctrine (divorce and remarriage, abortion, assisted suicide, etc) come about because of the claim it isn't clearly defined. Basically, what I'm trying to say is it seems to me God didn't really outline anything, He left us a Church to outline it for Him as the world changes. Sure the Bible helps make it a little clearer and it's teachings are inspired by the Holy Spirit, however it wasn't "outlined" by God it was "outlined" centuries after it was written by Christ's Church. I mean this with all openness and honesty, this is not a gotcha, but have you ever honestly asked yourself why you are willing to accept the Church's doctrines (300 years after Christ) regarding which books belong in the Bible, which aren't clearly outlined by God? God Bless
“I do more to help you understand the catholic faith than Trent Horn does.”-the arrogance here. As a former Protestant, I can only endure short bursts of this man.
A few years ago, shortly after I became Catholic, I watched Trent's rebuttals of Mike's videos on why Catholicism is "false." Winger laid out the standard arguments against it, which I used to believe were rock solid. Then Trent so easily dismantled them, that I had actual visceral feelings of embarrassment for having thought they were serious criticisms.
I believe that arrogance is the real explanation for the who produced the separations from the catholic church and for who even being told the real teachings of the church still remains in his position.
For me it is the grace with which Trent address things without emotionalizing and even venturing into name-calling or judging intention that really impresses me. God bless your You and your work Trent!. Meanwhile I honestly pray you don't get distracted by someone like Mike who simpling stresses his hardwork and effort to understand Catholicism but closes his mind to the truth. Indeed "to those who believe( in the true Faith) no reason is necessary and to those who don't no reason is sufficient'. Unfortunately, Mike and the likes only see what their protestant eyes wants to see.
Trent's grace impresses me too. I've watched him enough to know there's been SO many opportunities where he could've said something smug and be 100% in the right. But, he never ventures down that path. That's some serious self-restraint!
One can claim Trent might have the wrong take on a particular issue, but I've never seen Trent purposely misrepresent or disingenuously strawman an opponent's arguement.
@@Thomas-dw1nb Sort of what he and William Albrecht did with James Whites case made ofr marion doctrins being gnostics. th-cam.com/video/0Q__WO7XK-Y/w-d-xo.html
Seems to be a frequent theme in anti-Catholic apologetics. Adopt a simplistic definition of a word used in many different complex ways and then draw many many erroneous conclusions based on your initial error.
It's always funny how Sola Scriptura Protestants don't think there can be an authority outside of the Bible, but then they go and hinge their argument on a definition by Merriam-Webster, an outside authority of the Bible. It's one that THEY agree with, so it's fine. They've now made their own Church of Merriam-Webster.
Actually, Sola Scriptura means that Scripture is the ULTIMATE authority; not the only authority. This is why we are able to submit to those in roles above us, such as parents or bosses, but disobey them if they are commanding us to sin. Same thing with accepting truths and facts that are not clearly stated in scripture. So when Protestants claim that the Papacy is not an authority, maybe there is a merit to that claim; maybe not. But what Protestants do have a problem with is that if the Pope, or any other, clearly contradicts Scripture, who is right? This is a major point of contention.
The charge that Trent Horn is a dishonest actor is pretty laughable considering the man numerous debates Horn has had with a variety of people; if he were truly dishonst, people would stop engaging him.
Yes this really put me off too. I have found all the apologist at Catholic Answers to be very sincere and thorough. Didn’t appreciate that statement at all. Overall was just really disappointed in Mike, but he does tend to have a problem with getting lost in the weeds. Which is not always bad but the constant insistence that all us Catholics are lost in those weeds with him is frustrating. As is the constant insistence that Catholics don’t know their religion.
What a fantastic video, Trent. You were patient, kind, and showed exactly where Mike errored. It's a shame that he's unwilling to truly dialogue with you - and humorously reminds me of how Richard Dawkins so adamantly opposed debating with Dr. William Lane Craig. Watching this, and of course your other videos, really makes me excited and proud to be a Catholic (once RCIA finishes and I receive my Baptism). As a former Protestant and fan of Mike, seeing the way he intentionally focuses on small, insignificant points instead of actually doing the research to understand where these examples come from (like here with merits) is really unfortunate, and I feel ashamed for letting that shape me for a time. God bless you Trent, and I can't wait to dive into your book, A Case for Catholicism, which I actually bought while watching this debate. God bless you!
I'll echo that, congratulations and welcome! I find that the Catholic life becomes more fulfilling and easier to understand with each passing year, you're in for a treat.
I'm not a Catholic, but I agree with you that Mike has mischaracterized the position. It seems to me that the actual point of difference is that Mike reduces justification to a salvation binary (you are saved, or you are not) whereas the Catholic concept of "justice received" in Trent is one of degree (that it can be "increased"). Missing that difference can easily lead to misreading Trent as some kind of works-based, earned salvation, and the suggestion that Catholic apologists are trying to weasel around it with wordplay.
As someone who likes shortcuts, the way I tackle this misunderstanding is by stating that the Church believes that if an unbeliever, after committing the gravest of sins, repents and gets baptized (or goes to confession if already baptized), and as he's leaving the baptismal font (or confessional) an assassin kills him... he will not go to hell, because he has a new life and hasn't stained it with sin. He hasn't done any good work, yet he will go to heaven.
It is not small subject. Protestants forget that we have to love God freely. And God loves us freely. God's grace comes to all men freely and we are free to deny it or accept it and later refuse it. If we accept God's grace we freely love God, thus we freely follow his commandments. It is not about fear of the commandments but fear of hurting our relationship. If we refuse to follow his commandments we lose salvation because we refuse the sonship he promises to us. The whole scripture from genesis to revelation speaks clearly about obeying God's commandments.
@Brian Farley To be balanced here, there is a "salvation binary" in a sense. We are sheep or goats. We will be "in paradise" or we will not. Speaking to the Trent declaration, justice is "received" and "preserved", or it is not. It's also true that "increase" in the sense we're using it here can't be described except by analogy. If we don't know exactly what it is, we don't know exactly what we are correcting each other about either. We're very much children regarding all matters of heaven, so best not to be overly confident children.
Wow. Tell a guy who works for Catholic Answers that he's getting catholicism wrong. Takes a lot of nerve. Thankfully these protestant con-men have ALWAYS had that in great abundance. How many times have I heard "Oh, I went to catholic school" or "I asked a catholic professor". A tried and true tactic of the heretic.
I’m not even sure what to say in those scenarios. That comes up a lot, and all I think of is that it’s sad they weren’t better taught their faith and the depths of it. I was baptized last year and I’m continually learning deeper things about Catholicism through books and videos. They should be teaching Catholic school students the roots of Catholicism and not just brush over holidays.
I honestly do not think Mike Winger is a con man. I personally think he has misunderstood what Trent was saying, and what the RCC teaches, and maybe with his bias, does not see where he is wrong. Alan Parr on the other hand, I have watched where he outright misrepresents what Catholics believe, so to have the two side by side seems a little odd, almost like they are pumping each other up. Just my thoughts 😊
@@AJanae.you are still not thinking as catholic ...average catholic has faith that somone somewhere KNOW..that is importan difirence between catholic and protestan faith..different maindset
This is a guy who’s quite good at playing hungry hungry hippos going up against a master at 4-D chess. Roman Catholicism is operating at such a deeper level than these “Jesus plus nothing equals salvation” modern Protestants. Excellent job Trent.
I'm currently a protestant and even I can see the level of depth in the one with 2000 years of history far exceeding that of the one with 500. Its part of why I've been exploring catholicism, mainstream protestantism is in many ways so shallow.
@@bencook6585 If you like the intellectual depth of the Church, check out a video called Protestantism's Big Justification Lie. It systemically dismantles Protestant soteriology by exposing the contradictions and flaws at the very heart of their system. It's irrefutable and once you understand the argument being made, there's no turning back.
@@TheBookgeek7 Hi, geek. Thanks for your comment. It corresponds with things that Pastor Mike has said in various ways. Also, if he does have the idea that Trent is a person of bad character, as he has indicated is his understanding, it would be no more than prudent for Pastor Mike to avoid putting himself in a situation in which he might find himself compromised.
@@gregorybarrett4998 a debate wouldn’t be good simply because Mike would be flustered as he has such a little understanding of what he talking about regarding Catholicism. It’s easy to sit behind a computer and fire shots
@@TheBookgeek7 it's cowardly. Be honest. He's like a guy hitting someone behind their back and then running off when he's even slightly challenged. Lost a lot of respect for him.
I converted to Catholicism. I found that my Protestantism had been built on a protest against a strawman. The world went sideways when I realized I had been taught propaganda, and a lot of t it, about Catholicism.
Let's put your new religion to the test shall we? Do you believe that the God you worship is the same deity as the one that Muslims worship? Do you believe a good Muslim can be saved by being true to their conscience? *But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God* , who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things, and as Saviour wills that all men be saved. *Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life* . (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium Para 16)
@@solacanonicascriptura6139 This copy and paste quote very popular among protestants is incomplete and again, another case of propaganda. Read the whole article and the references to other documents where this paragraph was actually explained. You have again proved the commenter's claim true. By the way, by what authority can you (including Mike Winger and other self-proclaimed infallible teachers) tell us what is correct about the Christian faith and what is not? Are you one of the twelve apostles? Have you been alive for the past two thousands years? On what grounds can you teach infallibly what is correct? It's actually Protestantism that needs to pass the test, not the other way.
Am I wrong about Catholic Theology? No. It must be that Catholic Apologists are wrong about what they believe and teach, and they have never been corrected by the magisterium. (Or they are lying, and the Church encourages it, lol)
@@brendansheehan6180 He actually conflated the merit that Christ has with *everything* else. 🤦♂️ Yes, Christ can *strictly* merit because He is God. In the earlier video, it was obvious Trent was talking about merit of salvation which we cannot *strictly* merit. Salvation is a reward, a completely free gift. How can Mike Winger not know the different uses in the term if he has truly studied this? 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Trent, thank you for keeping this civil. I watched Mike's whole video and I felt he characterised you as some sort of dishonest, Catholic gremlin who was seeking to trick Protestants. Mike needs to engage in actual dialogue otherwise he'll forever be accused of misrepresenting Catholicism. Good work.
@lothara.schmal5092 well he did claim Mike Winger represents scripture perfectly, which everyone knows is not true, which Mike even would agree with and admitted in his arguments. So, Mark was wrong on at least some part of his statement.
Mike constantly says "I've spent hours studying Catholic theology" Anytime I hear someone CONSTANTLY say how much they've studied something, the more I think they don't know it. He constantly needs to reaffirm his audience that he REALLY knows Catholic theology, but he just doesn't
That's the whole point, his audience already comes in with a bias so claiming you're a Catholic scholar only bolsters his flawed arguments for them. "Don't ask questions, just listen to me" seems to be the strategy here.
Exactly! When I heard Mike stress how much he studied and knew Catholicism, my first thought was how it sounded just like so many non-practicing Catholics claiming they knew the Catholic faith because they went to Catholic school.
It's right up there with the ex-Catholic who has now become an anti-Catholic that CONSTANTLY has to tell every Catholic they talk to that they grew up in a devout Catholic family, was an altar boy and went through 12 years of Catholic school, so shouldn't it be obvious that they REALLY KNOW what the Catholic Church teaches. 😉 God Bless
Winger takes modern language and points of views and applies it to ancient doctrine, teaching and word use! Great example of modernism! Another proof how it’s the summation of all heresies.
Because he has studied scripture and the Gospels without a bias or through the lens of any church theology. Because, he meditated on the Word and learned to understand it in context and, sources exclusively from it regarding matters of faith and practice as a Christian, and from that he can be trusted; as his position aligns perfectly with scripture. That is exactly how we know him to be reliable. If you cannot source only from scripture, you cannot be trusted in regards to matters of faith and practice as a Christian at all, and there is absolutely no exemption to this rule; and that is exactly what destabilizes Catholic theology: Scripture. Catholicism cannot be defended.
@@markmeyer4532 if he did that why is he using modern use of English words in studying ancient text? That’s a contradiction. You should become a Christian and cease in your 15th century protestant heresy.
Trent, your analogy is GREAT, exactly because it not only explains the difference between merit and earn, but also employs the father figure that God chose to reveal Himself through! It helped me months ago, and now explained in more detail, it is really enlightening! Thank you! It's very difficult for me to follow Mike, his sources are hierarchically disordered - sometimes he cites the Gospel, then the Cathechism, then some random answers from forums. It's confusing.
@@isaacleillhikar4566 If you mean merit being a gift and reward, the Council of Trent itself backs that up: From session 6 of the Council of Trent on Justification, chapter 16 (which *is* the chapter on merit): "Neither is this to be omitted,-that although, in the sacred writings, so much is attributed to good works, that Christ promises, that even he that shall give a drink of cold water to one of his least ones, shall not lose his reward; and the Apostle testifies that, That which is at present momentary and light of our tribulation, worketh for us above measure exceedingly an eternal weight of glory; nevertheless God forbid that a Christian should either trust or glory in himself, and not in the Lord, whose bounty towards all men is so great, that He will have the things which are His own gifts be their merits." Notice that it cites Christ saying whoever gives "one of his least ones" a cup of cold water, he won't lose his reward. And at the very end of the quote it says that the Lord wants His gifts to be their merits. ----So as the way the Council of Trent is using it here, merit is a reward and a gift from God. Trent Horn is right on the money, and Mike Winger is wrong. Mike Winger fails to distinguish between strict merit, condign merit and congruent merit. We make that distinction, but his failure to distinguish them causes him to misread the documents, to misunderstand the Catholic faith and also commit the fallacy of equivocation.
@@isaacleillhikar4566 It doesn't matter who defines a word. What really matters is the meaning attributed to it, i.e. how it is used. That's why it's always advisable to define words before debating, so that everybody can be on the same page per the meaning of the word being used, regardless whether it is a dictionary definition or made up definition. The intended usage is all that matters and of course communicating the intended meaning to avoid any misunderstanding.
@@Inari1987 You have to understand that Protestants use whatever lens the culture they live provides. The Catholics go to the 2000-year old cranky metal box inside the Church to take out the apostolic lens handed down generation after generation. That's the good side of tradition.
I've noticed a trend with Winger when watching several of his videos. He seems to not fully grasp the complexities of the topic he is tackling (I'm not sure if he's unable or unwilling), and then offers an overconfident simplistic analysis. In this case, he continues to repeat things that simply are not true about Catholic teaching and belief ("you have to get a certain amount of grace to be saved," "grace is like a substance you have to get more of," etc.) or simply fails to grasp the depth of Catholic theology. He says "any work added to grace is not grace," then when offered relevant and thoughtful distinctions to help him understand the Catholic position, he either misunderstands it or willfully misrepresents it. And then keeps falling back on his simplistic view as if that were some kind of virtue. It's frustrating.
It comes from the technicality language be needs for sola scriptura to work. It's a form of reading so common to our modern scientism stage that loses all nuance when approaching topics like this and is what devolves into fundamentalism.
I really used to like watching his videos until my knowledge of Catholicism grew and it became clear that his biased against them was based on ignorance. I enjoy history so while he was doing his Mark series his videos were very enjoyable. Now I've kinda replaced him with better sources and moved on.
Because he has. He has studied scripture and the Gospels without a bias or through the lens of any church theology. Because, he meditated on the Word and learned to understand it in context and, sources exclusively from it regarding matters of faith and practice as a Christian, and from that he can be trusted; as his position aligns perfectly with scripture. That is exactly how we know him to be reliable. If you cannot source only from scripture, you cannot be trusted in regards to matters of faith and practice as a Christian at all, and there is absolutely no exemption to this rule; and that is exactly what destabilizes Catholic theology: Scripture. Catholicism cannot be defended.
@@markmeyer4532 Even if true, he would still have to demonstrate his knowledge rather than just claim it. But more to the point, he could not have read the Bible without preconceived biases or notions. You would have to cease to be human to do such a thing.
As a Protestant I must admit that Trent is absolutely clear on this issue giving a precise explanation of justification according to the RCC. I think Mike is missing "merit" making his response miss the mark. Currently reading The Case for Catholicism btw, great book! I still don't have great protestant responses to your critique of Sola Scriptura yet, but I'm thrilled to learn more about Catholicism.
"Repent, believe and be baptized. Then if you commit mortal sin: Repent, believe and confess." Wow, I love this. Thank you Trent for Jimmy Aiken's wonderful quote.
@@brittoncain5090 Jesus Christ's substitutionary death on the cross for my sins is a complete and finished work. It isn't necessarily for him to make any more payment for me. Hope that answers your vague question.
His life is invested in Trent being wrong. If Trent were right, Mike Winger would have to do some serious soul searching that I don’t think he’s prepared to do.
Why doesn't Mike understand what meritocracy means. As a veteran I remember them using this word all the time. I received a Meritorious Service Medal essentially everyone who joined after 9/11 received this medal we didn't earn it IMHO we just happened to join and or served for 2 conservative years following the events of 9/11. Myself and my husband received a Navy and Marine Corps achievement medal I don't think I should have received it I was just doing my job honestly I think I got it bc I'm a woman my husband however worked 20 hour days doing the work of like 3 people bc his crew were lazy and apparently didn't care if the ship went down or not.. He to doesn't really believe he earned it, he feels he was doing what was right going above and beyond is just part of who he is He didn't want his ship to sink or be dead in the water. I believe he merited it. Or let's use my cousin his humvee was blown us by an IED half of his platoon was killed. him and his best friend received a purple hearts. Meritorious Honor for Valor again they were just doing their job however the "Top Brass" believe they merited such high honor. If we use the "Top Brass" as an example of God than you can easily explain meritocracy using the military you can actually use the military to explain many things regarding the Kingdom like the Roman centurion he understood Faith and a Believers authority more than all the children of the promise This doesn't seem like rocket science but folks like Mike Allen John MacArthur James White etc hate the Catholic church so much they refuse to see the truth
Thank you for your service! And I think "medals of honor" are a great analogy to merit. It would be crass to say someone "earned" a medal of honor. You are "awarded" it because of faithful service and love of country.
In CHRIST's parable/teaching, the Good Samaritan *merited commendation by CHRIST as the true and loving neighbor* for doing works of love or good works.
If this analogy holds for salvation, then only some people who had enough merit will be singled out for the reward (of life in heaven with God?) Others (like certain other soldiers in the army) do not receive the award. The decision is made by God based on the things the people did (can we call those good works?) I don’t understand how this isn’t salvation based on works of righteousness which we have done.
Hi there. I’m not sure if anybody will see this comment but I just wanted to chime in because I find myself in the middle of these kind of discussions all the time. I’ve been watching Mike for 7 or 8 months and Trent for 5 or 6. I’ve been Protestant my whole life but have only recently (early 2021) started asking questions about the Catholic tradition. It has been wonderful learning about the beauty of the Catholic Church. Most of my preconceived notions of Catholicism have been torn down (most recently the Immaculate Conception) and it has been very difficult emotionally. Thankfully there is a Catholic community at my college that welcomes me with open arms non-stop to answer questions , offer me prayer, friendship and emotional support. For most of this journey I find it hard to sway one side or the other because every time I listen to people’s perspectives it all sounds like solid interpretations. So I guess what I’m asking for is more prayer 😂 Also: I would love to see a debate between Trent Horn and the guy from Truth Unites; I think his name is Gavin. Anyways, God bless you all!
I traveled a similar path into Catholicism, and I had a similar experience of emotional upheaval. It was a difficult time to say the least, but our Lord is faithful and I have definitely reaped joy from the tears sown. Jesus loves you, and you can trust that he will lead you to the fullness of truth. God bless you on your journey.
I’m smiling to myself because “Isaac Cohen” just seems like you would be coming from a culturally Jewish background. It’s like when we went to schedule our wedding 30 years ago and our date was already taken by the Greenbaum wedding at our parish. lol I’m so very glad you have a good group of young Catholics who are open and welcoming to you. I’ve added your name to my prayer list for tonight that you find peace and Truth, and that your faith sustains and nourishes you in this life and brings you to perfect joy in the next.
@@ohmightywez Thank you for the kind words :) my family is culturally Jewish and we’ve even celebrated Hanukkah a couple times over the years. Most people recognize that by my last name as well lol
@@isaaccohen2533 although it isn’t discussed much, Catholicism is the natural outgrowth of the Jewish faith and Jewish traditions. We have the red lamp on the altar to symbolize the Holy of Holies. We have our priesthood who approaches the altar to make the sacrifice on behalf of the people. We cover our head with ashes to show public repentance, and we have periods of fast and abstinence just like in Judaism which we then celebrate with a feast. You’ve made a longer yet place in my prayers Isaac. I hope someday you will be able to experience the gift and miracle of receiving the body, blood,soul, and divinity. If you’re in the right place in your spiritual arc, it will be the most overwhelmingly beautiful and heart stopping moment of your life. Bless you on your way, Isaac.
The clarity on that parable about the workers really helped me! I've been wondering about that for years. If NOBODY'S work would ever merit, in a strict sense, a days wage, then obviously it makes no sense to get mad that somebody gets it after 1 hour, or 12 hours. Honestly, that blew my mind. Thanks Trent. I never thought about that before and it makes all the sense in the world. The idea is if we agree to do as we are asked we recieve a pay far greater than anything we deserve.
I don't think that was what this parable meant. What was being taught is that anyone can come to Christ for salvation at anytime in their life. A person can obtain their faith in Christ, and therefore their salvation, at a very young age. Others may find Christ much later in life. However, no matter when you come to Christ, the gift of salvation is the same.
@@brendansheehan6180 I guess what I am saying, based on this parable, is that works or any merits you do, whether rewarded or not, have nothing to do with obtaining salvation. The workers who only worked for one hour receive the same gift of salvation as someone who has worked for 8 hours. Salvation is based on faith.
@@brendansheehan6180 I think we agree here. No work, merit or anything else can assist you in obtaining salvation or increasing your justification for salvation. Christ's gift of justification (salvation) cannot be supplemented in any way. It was and is perfect.
Let’s continue to pray for Pastor Mike Winger. Honestly. His ego gets under my skin, but then I remember that people who have had Protestant leadership and then have come into the realization that the Church is the church Christ instituted, it was difficult for them. It can break a person. Their whole world gets turned upside down. They lose a position of power they once had. Every thing they’ve held as truth is suddenly revealed as false. Their families are heavily impacted. This type of revelation affects everything. Pastor Mike is just not at this point yet. He’s in defense mode. That’s okay. Everything is in God’s timing. Perhaps he will get there. Perhaps not. My only quip is, he needs to stop expecting that you, Trent, and anyone else won’t rebut him every time he attacks our faith. He needs to be willing to dialogue if he continues to do this. He tells his church members to go out and speak with Catholics but he does not do the same.
Yes! I was a Protestant who converted, and yes, my whole worldview had to turn upside down. I felt/feel very much like Jacob/Israel in Genesis who was blessed when he wrestled with God but "walked with a limp for the rest of his life" because of what that wrestling costed. And I was just an individual. I could only imagine what pastors/preachers/elders/deacons of Protestant faiths who have jobs, paychecks, reputations, and flocks under their care must have to deal with. Many (myself once included) will almost put up any block in the way, as long as it means Catholicism remaining wrong.
Mike is not a pastor. He--like any protestant--has zero Authority from God to preach and teach in His Name. But they take upon themselves Authority which has never been given to them. This is spiritual thievery, and very arrogant. Yes, prayers for him.
Mike always comes across as having a somewhat condescending attitude when speaking on Catholicism. Thank you, Trent, for always assuming a more humble, charitable approach.
Pastors will be held to a higher standard upon death Hopefully God will show him mercy for helping to mislead 1000s away from the one true Carholic church.
The fruits of the Holy Spirit. That’s how you know the Holy Spirit is with someone: charity, joy, peace, kindness, gentleness, faith. We can always see the Holy Spirit working on someone, we see it, we feel it through these actions
Mike used Webster's dictionary to give a one-sided definition of merit. Even Webster fave multiple definitions of merit. It shows merit does not always mean earn. Mike misrepresents Catholicism and Webster dictionary.
Trent Horn rude? What is this guy smoking? If Trent is rude then who can be considered nice?!! Trent is the nicest and most caring apologist I’ve ever seen! He is extremely charitable in all debates I’ve seen him engage. Mike needs HELP. Honestly he should just wander off and try to help others. We Catholics KNOW the truth we don’t need Mike’s misguided “help”
Thank you Mike Winger, for allowing Trent Horn to dive a bit deeper into this. I love it when Trent is able to dive deeper into Catholic teaching, but I will say that I am disappointed in Mike Winger and his misconceptions about Catholicism. He claims that he tries to represent Catholicism correctly, but I just don’t see him doing that, but I don’t know the hidden elements in his mind that may be hindering him.
Trent, thank you for your perpetual effort in representing the Catholic Church helping others in such a charitable way. Many of us would express emotions that would only push those who have yet to understand away, but you tirelessly engage them in new ways to see the beautiful Faith Christ gave to us! Thank you and know my prayers continue to be with you 👍🏻
I find it interesting how Protestant Pastors seem to spend an inordinate amount of time railing against the Catholic Church that could be spent ministering to their flock. Catholic Priest seem to rarely mention Protestants and usually do only in the context of praying for them to return to the true church. Protestant gunna protest I guess.
Mikisms dont translate well in syria, or cambodia, or russia. At best they translate to his clone somewhere, which is generally in his own trailer park.
@@dodleymortune4312 assuming a pastor can define the true meaning of scripture. There is not a single human capable of that. That is why I rely on the church fathers and the magisterium of the Catholic Church. 2000 years of wisdom going back to the first Christians and what they believe. You can keep your Bible degree pastor.
@@Buckeye-gj4oi The magisterium is not infaillible just like the authorities God appointed for the people of Israël were not and needed to be corrected: Do all they say but not what they do Jesus said. And he also say that some of their tradition they make equal with the commandment of God and not follow that example. How would the people make the distinction between the leaders tradition that Jesus spoke about and the real commandment of God ? To be able to do that their must be some other reference than the leaders themselves that is of greater authority than the leaders, what is it ?
Mike’s biggest stumbling block in his “research” on Catholicism is not realizing it’s a *living* authority. You don’t have to try and figure out what *you* think Catholicism teaches. You can go to the living magisterium for clarification. Approaching Catholic teaching with a Sola Scriptura posture (aka: Sola what-I-think-it-teaches) leads to the confusion many non-Catholic Christians have. Incredible job Trent. So much clarity and charity!
Let's put your magisterium to the test shall we? Do you believe that the God you worship is the same deity as the one that Muslims worship? Do you believe a good Muslim can be saved by being true to their conscience? *But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God* , who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things, and as Saviour wills that all men be saved. *Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life* . (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium Para 16)
@@josephmoya5098 You believe that Allah and the God you worship are one and the same? You believe that a Muslim can be saved by being "good"? Please confirm.
I just checked out the comments section on Mike’s page and there were tons of people calling him out on his unwillingness to dialogue about such an important topic. Maybe we can pray that one day he actually will sit down and talk with Trent face-to-face. Thank you for always being such an example of charity and kindness, Trent! You are an inspiration.
I think this makes us and Trent look bad. Respect his wishes to not engage trent. Besides, it does make him look like a coward. And his crocodile tears at Trent for twisting his words, etc is just lame.
@@danielcarriere1958 it’s a pity that he won’t engage. If it’s such an important thing that Mike spends two hours rebutting the rebuttal, it’s disappointing he won’t engage. But noted on your observation and I’ve edited my original post.
@@johnyang1420 he clearly is not convinced of the Catholic Church’s authority or connection to the person of Christ. As a former Protestant, i know the arguments they use against the CC but I will never understand the unwillingness to learn with an open mind.
A quick note, let us, commenting as Catholics, assume that Mike Winger is as sincere as we would ask him to assume Trent Horn is. Yes, it was quite troubling for him to claim that Trent and Jimmy attempt to misrepresent Catholicism to get protestants to convert, but to turn around and claim that Mike is a sort of charlatan is uncharitable on our part. We ought to treat our interlocutors as Christ would, or as His misguided children. Edit: I made this comment partway into the video, and am, much like Trent Horn and my fellow Catholics in the comment section, baffled by the sheer amount of misrepresentations of Catholic theology from Mike Winger. However, I still hold that we ought to assume the misrepresentations are largely due to Mike Winger engaging with the materials he cites from a perspective that leads to him misinterpreting the material. This would not be due to some moral failing on his part, but rather, this would be due to him genuinely trying to engage with the material and failing to do so. There is nothing wrong with that, there would only be fault, if, after having received a reasonable correction, he would refuse to clarify and/or correct his previous statements.
but if it were proven that he knew about these things such as the types of Merit, and about Catholics needing enough works to enter heaven, but willingly decided not to include them in the video, would that not show that at least his actions are deceptive?
@@Daniel_Abraham1099 I suppose, but this has yet to be proven. He can be misinterpreting words such as "merit" from genuine ignorance rather than us supposing he is doing so deviously. It is far better to assume sincerity on his part than to assume the opposite.
Mike Winger committed calumny against Trent, he’s either absurdly stupid or absurdly disingenuous. I think he’s reaching levels that charlatan is a reasonable explanation to his disgusting behaviour.
I've said it before, I don't know how you do it Trent. 9 minutes in and I'm shouting at my phone like a total lunatic. It's just so dang hard to listen to Winger. Thanks for doing the hard part.
Yeah, like Mike Winger is the worst. Even someone like James White or John MacArthur is so much more palatable because they aren’t pretending to nice or folksy.
I'm so glad you do this too! It's so frustrating hearing someone double down on their ignorance. His "research" is what happens when you begin with the end in mind. Sigh.
As a convert I found the greatest barriers between protestant catholic discussion is we used the same words but mean different things. Sometimes the definition each side use are radically different but many times they are subtle and hard to see the difference but the implications of the differences lead to misunderstandings.
@@stcolreplover linguistics is a complicated mess of time and culture. We see this change over time. Look at English in the States vs that of other English speakers. Or even in the US. Parts of the country have different words for carbonated drinks, soda, pop, soft drink, and some even use "Coke" as a catch all for all sodas. Then there is etymology. Even with words sharing same roots you can have radically different paths.
@@Stygard lol, sorry Louie I was joking. I understand it can be hard to differentiate between satire and a mike winger fan but I’ll try better next time.
@@stcolreplover by your own words, then paul and james contradicts each other. Bothe of them use justification, the whole gospel might be wrong to your theology for jesus saying God will REWARD anyone who does keep the commandments. How about that mate? Im confused here with your logic.
If you read the comments everywhere on TH-cam/his social media (even in his rebuttal video); I seriously don't get why him/his fans have this impression that Trent Horn is in attack-hate-mode or something; Trent is super charitable and nice; and 90% of his followers are pretty chill.
I commented it somewhere else where it's clear one of Mike's goals is to discredit Trent to his fans by painting him as some sort of toxic apologist. It's hilarious. 99% of the people Trent has debated/dialogued with (this includes atheists, agnostics, other denominations) would completely disagree with him. He definitely manipulates his fans by saying stuff like "I'm concerned about Catholicism and it's theology" and so on. And after watching his debate with Matt Dillahunty it's clear why he doesn't want to debate/dialogue, because in situations where you have to face criticism/other points of view face to face, he doesn't do well, because his arguments don't hold up
@@chrisvalenzuela7911 Yeah Dillahunty was inches away from ending this guy’s career. It was an embarrassment. And in that debate I was rooting for Winger but was quickly disappointed lol
@@Mkvine At this point this is exactly what I’m thinking. Maybe commenters that are really bad are trolling him or just causing issues but the majority of comments-if not the only ones were charitable and challenging what was stated
Jon Steingard is not even an atheist apologist, but he had a thousand times more decency than Mike in engaging Trent, and even had a friendly 2-hour chat with Trent without spiralling into chaos, even while holding on to his disagreement. Mike's problem isn't even a difference in theology; it's a severe lack of charity.
@Super Mario "Various reasons," indeed. But I was assuming that Trent was talking about a casual conversation, not a debate. A debate would, without question, go very, very badly for Mike. But so would a casual conversation. Trent has a lot of experience using the Socratic method (known to Protestants as Greg Koukl's Tactics, and to Atheists as "Street Epistemology"). If you want to see how Winger does in conversation with someone who knows how to use such methods, just look at his conversations with PineCreek. Winger is shrewd enough not to put himself in that position again. So, he contents himself to snipe at Trent and Holy Mother Church from within his protective bubble, for the gratification of his bigoted Catholicism-slandering Chuck Smith groupies.
@Athanasius that’s not necessarily true. He may know that he is not a good debater and would not be prepared to answer Trent in a rapid fire. There are highly intelligent people who are poor debaters. But give them time to respond to an opposing position and they will come up with a rather persuasive argument. Good debater does not equal truth teller.
Winger: Catholicism isn’t a cult. Also Winger: Puts out a video with on Catholicism with cults in the title, puts Catholicism with several religions that are cults, and treats Catholicism exactly the same as the others. Also associates with people who do think Catholicism is a cult. (See Melissa Dougherty.)
To be fair, that particular video was up on Mr. Parr's channel, so the thumbnail and organization isnt Mr. Winger's fault. Winger's channel breaks the one long video up into different videos on each of the topics they discussed, and his thumbnails are more charitable
First off, sorry for waiting so long to get back to you. Second, I want to say it was in the interview she did with Dallas Jenkins, but my memory’s terrible. I might be thinking of a different video.
Just listened to it all. Mike could simply clear up his "misrepresentation" by having a simple talk with Trent or any other Catholic apologist. That way the confusion can be cleared up right then and there.
@@RedWolf5 He won’t do it because then his pride would suffer a monumental blow, and, forced to admit the truth of Catholicism, his entire career/ministry would be in jeopardy. Mike Winger needs our prayers.
@@jonphinguyen I agree I don’t see with not, specially with Trent out of all people. Trent is so gracious and kind all of the time. I read Trent has even offered a written debate so it can be published on a free ebook but Mike doesn’t wanna do it! That’s very suspicious to me.
Trent, I don't how you do it, but what an AMAZING retort! The way he analyzed your retort and his view of the Catholic Catechism, is in line (in a way) with his "sola scriptura" method of interpretation......and I thought, it was only towards the Bible. You literally schooled Mike Winger and you did so with utter class. Let's just hope that Mike Winger actually learned something from this "schooling" by you.
Trent, thank you for all the hard work you pour into this ministry and for your humility. Unfortunately, Mike is making false accusations against you even so much as reading into your motives, painting you as one who is dishonest and playing games. That is not Christian. I think he is reaching. He seems nervous. May God bless him.
To all Catholics reading this, I ask that you begin praying (and fasting?) for Mike Winger, that the Lord would open his heart & mind, that the Lord would galvanize him to the truth, and that he be humbled before Holy Mother Church.
I can't stand Mike's passive aggressive smiling and sarcasm...then I realize that he feels his position so threatened as a protestant...and I can go on listening to him
Gavin Ortlund and Jordan B Cooper have this same type of condescending passive aggressiveness. Actually, I've noticed quite a few prots like this. I think it's overcompensation for their lack of humility and obedience.
I spent the first 30 years of my life in the Calvary Chapel movement; there is a whole lot of good that goes on there. But man, watching this takes me back to some of those very frustrating bible study discussions that basically boiled down to arguing over the meaning of words. Catholic theology's insistence on properly defining words and establishing semantic distinctions is a whole different paradigm that I've grown accustomed to, and it's somewhat maddening to listen someone say that Catholics believe something when we don't believe that -- it feels like gaslighting. I don't believe it's intentional; evangelicals are so saturated with wrong ideas about what Catholicism is that it it's very challenging to convince them that they do not actually understand Catholicism.
Mic drop. You have spoken well. I am a Catholic with Protestant relatives and this is spot on. I don’t bother anymore. I pray for them and when they have sincere questions, I answer them.
Frustration is really an understatement 😂. I only thank God they help to understand the Catholic faith better. Trust me without their effort am not sure many Catholics will delve deeper in faith and knowledge of the faith.
@@jacowoest2523 We understand salvation as a process in which we freely choose to cooperate with God, by His grace. It is God that provides the grace to enable us to cooperate, and it is God who has made salvation possible at all. There is no “work” that we do that makes us eligible for salvation. Baptism is a gift of God. Perseverance, which is to say a life of repentance and striving for obedience, is something we do in cooperation with God, but it doesn’t “earn” salvation - we are saved through baptism, we persevere in that salvation through not falling away and we are aided by God’s grace. If we do fall away, we are restored through repentance. Sacraments are the gift of God through which he gives us the grace to do this. Is Paul referring to earning his salvation in the following passage from 1 Corinthians? 1 Corinthians 9:24-27: “Do you not know that in a race all the runners compete, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. Well, I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air; but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.”
I think the semantics problem comes from an intrinsic technicality that comes from American thinking and modern scientism English language. It becomes blunt and loses its ability to see nuance as it forces itself into fundamentalism in order to continue to function. Catholic answers has a really good article on this. And we are all susceptible to it
Mike Winger: I present Roman Catholicism more honestly then Trent Horn does, I know a ton about what Roman Catholics teach on justification, you can trust me I talked to the experts Also Mike Winger: *Thinks that Fr. stands for Friar*
That man really went to an online dictionary to find common English definitions to change the meaning of words as they are used in a theological context. Protestantism is nothing but a heresy of ignorance covered in arrogance.
This is what Mike Winger does. In his mind anyone who disagrees with his interpretation of anything isn't being an honest actor and is just misrepresenting. He does this to everyone, not just Catholics lol. Mike wants to be a victim of whoever he thinks is out to get him and would rather point at the people "attacking" him rather than dealing with people.
Hi, Ivy. You may have put your finger on something here. Pastor Mike identifies himself as having put a lot of time and effort into research by which he comes to understand both the matter under consideration and argument of the person expressing a position with which Pastor Mike takes issue. Pastor Mike thereby recognizes himself as having developed an informed understanding of the matter at hand. All of this is praiseworthy on the part of Pastor Mike. There is an outstanding issue which has bearing on at least two categories of thought, which bears witness to Trent's policy of generosity in dealing with people who express divergent perspectives. The issue is the question of psychological oversight, in failing to recognize that having developed an understanding is not the same thing as having a correct understanding, and so the pursuit must be not for an understanding but rather for as many understandings as the available data will bear, and the further questions which will enable the identification of the correct understanding. This has bearing both on the question of the meaning of the matter under consideration and on the question of the motive, disposition, and character of persons who express divergent understandings. There are some people, certain types of mind, who only with difficulty and ongoing support are able at least to accept that others' minds work differently from their own and engage questions differently from their own manner. This is entirely different from the question of native intelligence or education. It's possible that Pastor Mike has such a character of mind as would interfere with his ability to recognize that a light bulb turning on in his mind, bringing a particular understanding, does not mean that such understanding is correct. His operating with a prior understanding of revelation would indeed induce a paradigm, a model, a framework, by which he would naturally evaluate what he encounters, and this may indeed be enough to account for his manner of dealing with these matters, but if he is so afflicted as I have discussed above, then his difficulty would be compounded, and this would make him more to be pitied, corrected, and prayed for, than to be despised and derided. Indeed, he becomes an object lesson of fear for us, habitually to offer petition that we not be, or worse, remain, blind to our own blindness.
@@gregorybarrett4998 Wonderfully said. I feel like this can (unfortunately) apply to a lot of people. I find it frustrating on so many levels when I encounter those who have such blindness, but who are otherwise intellectually sharp and able to absorb information. To be blessed with the gift of intelligence but also be blinded by your inability to recognize when you shouldn't make such authoritative stances due to your still-present informational deficiencies on the topic at hand is such a bummer. And, it can be an especially dangerous mindset to have when said people hold positions of influence or are otherwise considered trusted sources of information. Such misguided conclusions from them can spread around like a cancer - in that sense, Trent's public offers to debate are, in a way, like chemotherapy for the forum of ideas.
"Trent Horn is misrepresenting Catholicism. I've spent so much time reading the councils and the catechism and official church documents" Literally a minute later: "So this is from the council of Trent [quotes a document that is not from the council of Trent]"
I’m a convert to the catholic faith. These conversations are so hard to have with my Protestant friends. Many of them, not all, are so stuck in one way of thinking they can’t allow themselves to see that they have been misinformed about Catholicism
That’s what I call “ideological anti-Catholicism”. As any ideology, it does not need to make sense but to make followers. It is insanely strong in the USA and specially in some Evangelical circles.
@@Justas399 well for instance, my father in law insists that Catholics worship Mary and he uses an article from the 1800’s about my Mariolatry which is Mary worship. I even showed him the catechism and it’s passage on Mariology which is marian theology and the prohibition of worshipping Mary. Regardless of how much data I show him. He refuses to accept the facts. Or, I’ve asked Protestants to show where the Bible explicitly states the Bible alone is our sole authority. Even after showing them it’s not in there. They still assert it’s an obvious doctrine that doesn’t need explicit wording in the Bible.
Maybe I am the only one that thinks this way but watching Mike Winger use his chuckle, though seemingly disarming, is in actuality no different than if he would get "John MacArthur angry" with respect to the Church's teachings. In both cases, their deliveries are ugly and uncharitable.
I think this was the best video in this whole dispute. I never understood better than now after you went over the kinds of merits. This is how we should start talking about justification with protestants. I can tell it took the Church many many years studying scripture to discern the different types of merits which are seen in the different Bible passages. I still think authority is a better way to debate with protestant because their ideas are not congruent with the Bible because they were not taught how to read the Bible by the apostles so their opinions carry no weight.
Unfortunately, as a protestant, I don't find Mike all that charitable in his reading, and his philosophy seems pretty shallow. More than that he seems unwilling to actually engage the arguments made, and is more concerned about making sure he is right, than about actually reaching the truth - whoever's side that balance might ending up being on. Which is incredibly frustrating as someone who is questioning. I have found Trent (and others) and his arguments immensely compelling; including the one here on merit, which was actually really really helpful and cleared up a lot of things for me. What I would like to find though are solid Protestant arguments against, and to be able to weigh them up to see where the truth actually lies. But thus far all the protestants I've seen or read are more interested in proving catholics wrong than they are about defending the truth of their own position. Theologically, logically, and philosophically. Until then, I rather think that the Church has the edge.
You should study the papacy in light of Scripture and early church history and you will find the claims of the papacy to be false. Even Catholic scholars acknowledge this.
@@Justas399 hmmm, that's an interesting claim. Just to be clear, do you mean claims that the papacy has made? Or claims to the legitimacy of the papacy? Which Catholic scholars are you referring to? If this is true I would like to read up on it!
@@Justas399 Yeah bring the quotes buddy, because I can point to cradle and former Protestants and church fathers who would disagree with this statement.
Trent THANK YOU. Thank you for always being so patient and graceful in answering and clarifying these things. It shows that God can use “bad” situations to bring MORE LIGHT. Thank you. You inspire me!
Its sad how Winger and other protestants just ignores the entire Gospels over and over again, rewards are promissed everywhere in the gospels as response to our actions. But they prefer to scream ROMANS4 and ignore all!!!! Its like if Paul came to teach something different from Jesus.
Mike seems to have a bad case of word-concept fallacy. And the fact that he explicitly stated that Trent is operating in bad faith (trying to trick people into becoming Catholic) caused me to lose some respect for him.
Without even listening to any arguments these two men put forth, just look at their personalities. Trent is patient, charitable, kind, and humble. Mike is rude and arrogant. You tell me which one really knows Christ
I am not catholic and don’t agree with everything put forward. However I found this very helpful in understanding things that I had heard but did not understand. Without hearing thorough discussion on ideas with people that understand makes it very difficult to understand doctrines. I have talked with Catholics before and never got a very good answer and would say that in some respects their views fly in the face of what Trent said. But I understand that for any church if you are not asking some one who truly digs deep in to their faith and doctrine in would be hard to answer. I now believe that we believe things a lot closer than I had thought and perhaps on some things the catholic view is correct. Thanks Trent for this video. I will say that as good as the internet is it has its hardships. I should probably not look at the comments because most do not add helpful information or discussion to the video and some actually muddle the issues and take away from it. Thanks again.
Mike Winger is so adamant. He says the Catholic Church claims that you have to work for Salvation. Then, why do infants (that do no work or have no knowledge) get baptized in the Catholic Church? He says Grace and works do not go together. That is sooo wrong. Grace and works certainly goes together. It's just that you need Grace before your works pleases the Father. It is not works before grace; it is grace before works. And regarding the issue of meritorious grace, it only happens when you are in the state of grace. If you do not have the grace of Christ that is freely given, then meritorious grace does not apply. And by the way, meritorious grace is not earned but given as a reward by God on account of His divine justice.
@@tony1685 in Acts 16:15 and Acts 16:33, all in the household were baptized. Are we to believe that babies did not exist in the time that Acts was written?
@@williammagsambol2143 You can't just establish a doctrine of baptism out of an assumption. You assume there was an infant present. Don't add to the scriptures. 1Corinthians 4:6 says " don't go beyond what is written. " Bible says that God opened Lydia's heart to heed what Paul was saying Acts16:14 Infants can't heed the gospel so how can they be baptized? Catholicism simply make up doctrine.
@@brutus896 It isn't likely that the early Christians, who knew Jesus and/or within generations of Our Lord, were wrong for thousands of years and some guy on TH-cam in 2021 actually has the answers. If you're Protestant, you should know that Luther supported infant baptism.
@@williammagsambol2143 Luther had it wrong as well. And Lutherans still have it wrong. Mike Winger has it right. But it's not his invention, he's just going by scripture. 👍
My man really said he's emailed Harvard professors about the defintions / meanings and then, instead of pulling any of those receipts out, he went to Webster dictionary... That was such a good laugh.
In all honesty, it seems like a lot of Protestant criticism of the Catholic Church comes down to semantics. Not all of it, but a good deal. For example, the hounding on the word merit, without really looking at the bigger concept contained within the word. It seems like a similar issue with the word works too. Because most Protestants I talk to in my personal life agree that you should do things to be a good person....they just have an issue with the terminology. Philosophically (not even theologically), works make sense, and they seem to understand it, but don't want to accept it. The way I understand works is: if there are actions that result in you turning your back to God and leading towards eternal damnation, there have to be corresponding actions that turn your face towards God and away from eternal damnation (though it must be added, these actions don't guarantee you salvation, only lessen your chances of separating yourself from God forever, since you are actively trying to follow God). To be fair, I'm young and not sure if I'm missing some nuances, but most Protestants I talk to agree with this basic concept....but not the word for it. It's odd. I've recently stumbled upon this channel and am really grateful for it! I'm going to go watch a video specifically on works now haha
Words definitely get in the way. The two communities often have different definitions of the same word and without realizing that, end up talking past each other if focused on terms instead of concepts.
I cringe everytime I hear "Roman Catholic." I know our diocese uses the term on it's webpage but when people outside the Church insist on calling it the "Roman Catholic" Church instead of just the Catholic Church it feels disparaging. I am trying to be charitable but it really grates on my nerves.
I just find it laughable they are trying to make it into just another group, but Byzantine, Maronites, and the other rites of the Catholic church all agree on the theology they try to attack. There's actual unity within catholicism unlike the ecumenism core to the ever splintering Protestantism.
Go Catholicism. We believe in one holy CATHOLIC and apostolic Church. Also the Orthodox allow divorce which is directly against the commandments of Jesus.
So sad that these so called learned protestants won't debate Catholic Apologists but mention like crazy that they did extensive research 😳 not realizing you did the same...Mike needs our prayers.
As a protestant, I find Trent's differentiation of merit very insightful. I am also challenged by Romans 2:7, especially since I love Matthew Henry's commentaries and I was surprised to see that's how Henry views it too
Trent: Let's debate. Winger: It's too much of a time commitment. Winger in his rebuttal: I've spent countless hours researching the councils, theologians, and doctrines of Catholicism. He just knows that he will get clobbered.
Or maybe he just isn't good with rhetoric and doesn't wanna risk saying something stupid? That doesn't mean he is wrong. Everyone has a right to decline a debate. It doesn't mean they are scared or not well-versed in the subject. No matter how experienced I would be, I would probably never accept a public spoken debate because it's just not for me. The same could be the case about Mike. Asking people to debate, then when they say no, claim they are "scared," is just a tactic to make it seem like all of your opposition has bad arguments.
@x-popone6817 Mike does have a right to decline debate but it does say something about him. Trent offered to do a debate that wasn't live so he could have all the time in the world to respond and present his case exactly as he wanted to. Mike has made a ton of anti Catholic videos and never stops mentioning how much he has studied. He says he's open to correction but he's studied so much, implying that he knows Catholicism so well that there are no corrections to be made. I think if you are that confident and that dedicated to making anti Catholic content, it shouldn't be an issue to do a dialogue that isn't live. I don't believe he will stop making this kind of content but he probably will continue to refuse to speak with any Catholics.
To my protestant brothers and sisters who are seeking to become Catholic... please don't let a protestant teach you Catholicism because they will try and confuse you like this guy. they do not want you to escape from their clutches
Trent, keep up the good work. Before I made my Marian consecration, I had questions about our Lady I wanted answered, and I found your rebuttals to Winger's propositions, which helped address my concerns. Prayers for you 🙏🏼
Bro you are so nice that people don't want to engage in a debate with you anymore. I think this is edactly what Christ intended. To be truthfull but also kind to opponents. You are doing an awesome job.
I dont think Mike intended to strenghten catholics with his video 😂 but through your response, Trent, you have surely strenghtened my faith! Such rich and simple explanations! I love it! God bless you!
Winger reminds me of the old canard of calling Catholicism "semi-pelagian." Curious about what that was, I wrote a paper on it for my first class on writing research papers (at a Baptist seminary). I did serious research, which came to 27 pages that I trimmed down to 17 (6 pages above the limit). But the professor said if it was good enough, he'd still allow it. The evidence showed it to be a canard Protestants (initially Lutherans) tried to stick to Catholicism, in spite of the Catholic Church having been the theological vanguard that opposed both Pelagianism, and Semi-pelagianism. Someone else liked it so much, they basically re-wrote it, and published it online under their name. Oh, well. What Winger is doing basically the same thing Lutherans had done. Why? Because he doesn't want to admit that, when looked at closely, Trent Horn (and thus, Catholicism) is right on these issues. There are, indeed, TRUE and IMPORTANT subtle distinctions in these theological terms, definitions, and uses. Frankly, it doesn't matter what a Harvard professor says, if he's not in depth on the subtleties of the arguments from within Catholicism. These are not distinctions without differences. They are substantive differences in definitions, and uses of terms. But for those who DON'T WANT to acknowledge them (which would disarm their arguments, and leave them without a valid objection), no argument is good enough, no matter how clearly it is stated, and pointed out.
It's a shame that false teachers like mike has hundreds of thousands of subs while trent has 30k. Im at the point where i no longer watch any protestants cuz it's just non stop misrepresentation , hatred and unbiblical
@@Mkvine Same. I supported him for years until he showed his disdain and dishonesty. I would still watch protestants when they deal with the Trinity and other topics that are in accordance with catholicism, cuz they put out good material there. But on other topics nope. Maybe in a few years again when i wana rebut their positions better, but until then...
I guess youll might be knowing about Sam Shamoun. At the beginning he was against the Catholic Church teachings but now he is supporting it. He also has a deep knowledge about scriptures and he analyses them as Catholic theologians do.
I straddle both these youtubers channels and appreciate both of them,so your partisan and gross misrepresentation of mike winger offends me,whats disappointing is the number of likes you got. Why don't you subscribe to winger and actually engage in the breadth of his teaching then you would be informed.
Dear Mike, if you see this:
Please for the love of everything good. Just PLEASE have a public one on one discussion with Trent. It doesn’t have to be a debate. Just a discussion
🤣🤣
I have never seen Trent attack anyone or talk down to anyone. He always presents his arguments with true grace no matter the attack on character.
@@tony1685 ha? You are wrong territory bro.
That's how all con men act.
They make you believe you can trust THEM, and will sound like the sincerest of all the sincere.
And all the while every word they speak is a lie.
The Devil is his teacher and Trent is a good pupil.
@@parrisroy I rebuke you in Jesus name. You and all the others that flood in to cause discourse based on your lies.
@Tony: We celebrate the Mass on Saturday as well.
@@tony1685 I wonder why predominant church fathers agree that Eucharist is the real body and blood of Christ! Even in the pre nicene period!
Ignatious
Iraneus
Jerome
Tertullian
I mean why? Why does it correspond when Jesus says My body is real Food??
He lost me when he went to the dictionary for the definition of merit. Might as well go into a courtroom and use the dictionary definition of assault instead of the code of criminal law.
“But your Honour, it’s right here on Wikipedia!!”
That dude went to Merriam Webster bruh
yea that’s really tough lmao how can you even take winger seriously
He went to the Binger school of apologetics and prosecution
@@stcolreplover lol
Speaking as a convert, one of the biggest disconnects in thinking or general cognitive framework between the Protestant mind and the Catholic mind is the idea of "it is fitting..." vs "it is required..."
I was never aware of this about myself as a Protestant when I was a Protestant. I only became aware of it after becoming a Catholic and running into a lot of instances (especially ancient and medieval sources) of the statement "it is fitting..." as a justification for an idea. At first, I really didn't like this. I didn't like it because to my Protestant mind to say something was "fitting" was ambiguous. I didn't want something to be "fitting" or "appropriate" I wanted it to be "demanded" or "necessary".
I strongly suspect that this is an outgrowth of the fact that Protestantism is born out of modernity and one of the changes that leads to modern thought and becomes a hallmark of modern philosophy is the demand for mathematical certainty in ideas. In other words, something can only be believed if it is demanded by a kind of logical/mathematical certainty.
As a Protestant when I made arguments for things, I was always looking for "it MUST mean this" or "this DEMANDS this view". To say "this view is fitting" to me was not an argument because it seemed totally inconclusive and uncertain.
Eventually I realized that this mode of thinking (the Protestant demand for absolute requirements) is actually quite bad and has very bad results when it is applied to God. God is almost never, if ever, restrained by the kind of "must" and "demands" logic that Protestants are implicitly trained to think in. God almost always works on the principle of "it is fitting".
You can see this distinction of thought in Mike's misunderstanding of Catholic teachings on Merit. On a certain level, he just lacks the categories to really comprehend what the Catholic view says.
In Mike's mind, Merit can only mean "to earn". In his view, something is either demanded or it is not. Either we obligate God to owe us something, or whatever we get has nothing to do with us. He has no third category in-between in which What God gives us is not earned, but it is fitting. Which means we did not obligate God, or put God in our debt, but what God did was still in some sense a right and good response to what we did.
For example:
Let's say you go murder someone. It would not be fitting for God to reward that action by blessing you. God in his mercy may still give you grace by calling you to repentance, but that is not a reward for what you did.
Now let's say you go out and you help the homeless in your community by feeding them and treating them with human kindness. You did not, by doing this, put God in your debt, or earn salvation, or earn anything else. In point of fact, you only did what was already your duty. You only did what you were already obligated to do. However, it is still fitting that God would reward this action by blessing you in some way.
It's like a child who cleans up their room and the parent decides to reward them with ice cream. The parent was not obligated to pay the child. The child was only doing what they are already supposed to do. The parent is not in debt to their child because the child cleaned the room. However, it is fitting that the parent reward the child, if they feel so inclined.
I am coming out of the same mode of thinking on this specific issue as one currently moving through RCIA and headed on my way to confirmation.
so true. protestantism is such a natural consequence of early modern and enlightenment thinking. it blows my mind that so many protestants think they're part of a movement that's "reviving the original Church" and things like that, when in point of fact it's so obviously applying a completely novel hermeneutic to Scripture, which it seems to treat as if it were a single book that just miraculously fell from the sky, fully formed and leather-bound, in the 16th century. having been raised an atheist and recently converted, the more time I spend in Christianity, the more I have realized that protestantism is part of the same trajectory that ultimately results in atheism as well as these ultraliberal "woke" gospels that want all the warm fuzzy feelings with none of the real-world implications. in my mind, it's no coincidence that atheism is ascendant and has been accelerating rapidly in all the countries that played host to the protestant reformation and later protestant "revivals." western Europe, the US, Canada, etc. all took a nose dive in religiosity as protestant culture evolved into materialist culture. and only these past few years are we starting to see a large correction, which seems to be primarily mediated by people returning to more ancient Christian traditions.
@@ToxicallyMasculinelol All true.
The sad reality is that our society is both breath-takingly ignorant, and also completely indoctrinated into a philosophy that most are completely unaware of.
The combination of being indoctrinated but being unaware of the indoctrination means that most people just think their indoctrinated philosophy simply reality.
For most people it is basically a given that ancient and medieval ideas and thoughts are "primitive" "unenlightened" stupid, uneducated, etc. Meanwhile the "fact" that we are enlightened, progressive, and well educated is also an undeniable given.
When it comes to reading the bible, most protestants aren't even aware that they have a hermeneutic at all. They think they are just reading it at plain face value. That's what happens when you aren't even aware that you have a worldview, or a philosophy.
They aren't making a conscious choice to prefer one philosophy of interpretation over the other... They are at a stage of ignorance where they don't even know that they don't know.
This "Either or" School of thought, i guess relate to something material or natural. Air is not water, wood is not steel.. But this "Either or", simply can not be applied to spiritual idea
Joshua, thank you for this post. It is extremely well put and poignant. I am also a convert, and as a young Baptist I thought exactly the way you described. I was never able to explain why there is a such a difference in approach to scripture but you nailed it. I always joked (even when I was a Baptist) that the Baptists may as well tear off the cover of the bible and put on a new one called “1000 Reasons Why You’re Going To Hell. PS. - Tithe”
It is a very legalistic approach to scripture and being born of the enlightenment when our current mode of scientific thought was also being born, it follows that Protestant thought was born of that empirical mindset. It’s also notable that many protestants have no idea where the bible comes from, or when. Those are two incredibly valuable things to know which basically destroy much of the protestant view of theology.
Imagine how confused Christians were for 2000 years before Mike Winger came along to set us all straight
I tell you.
Trust him he’s studied it for them all 😭
With his Webster’s dictionary 😐
@@mimi_j he spent so much time studying that he’s surpassed the 2000 year cumulative wisdom of the whole of Christendom. Quite an achievement pastor Winger!
@@Vereglez-d4z just like the church fathers
As someone who has been watching both Mike and Trent for a while now (maybe years), I appreciate how respectful and thoughtful Trent's response is to him. I'd have a hard time doing that myself. I actually watched both Trent and Mike's videos on the subject before the rebuttals and it appears that Mike is leaning really hard on what he has personally come to understand Catholic teaching to be. But he doesn't seem to be very familiar with what the Catholic Church has interpreted those teachings to mean. It is amusing (and slightly frustrating) that Mike thinks that he knows more about what the Catholic Church teaches than a Catholic apologist. And I'm writing this as a protestant!
I wish that Mike was more sincere and courteous in his rebuttal. When I watched Mike's video, I had to turn it off halfway and pick it up again later because I was getting worked up over how unfair he was being to Trent. I understand being passionate about leading people away from what he perceives as false teaching, but Mike's style only appeals to those who are already on his side of the fence. It doesn't help Catholics "see the truth". One of the reasons that I find Trent so compelling is that he's always very respectful and gives everyone a fair shake (Peter says in 1 Peter 3: 15-16).
Agreed
here here
As a Catholic, I thank you for your fairness.
I'm shocked you think Mike wasn't anything but graceful in his response. I was raised Catholic but left the religion for several practices I found contradictory to scripture. While I disagreed with almost everything Trent said, I found him to be respectful and graceful with the exception of a few misrepresented statements regarding Mike's arguments. It seems to me you find any argument opposing yours to be upsetting and I find it hard to believe you aren't Catholic. Any honest individual can admit they were both respectful in their debate.
@@jessb.2073 Mike Winger accused Trent of purposefully misrepresenting catholicism to trick protestants into converting. It was uncharitable and certainly hard to watch.
The disturbing thing is that Mike thinks HE is the one who is going to explain what the Catholic doctrine means, as if the Catholics themselves don't know.
Jonathan Lewis. Great comment. I give thumbs down to Mike Winger videos. He does the same thing to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Catholics need to see the youtube video "Council of Trent vs Catholic Apologists, Which is right?"
Psalm 49:7-8.
7 No man can possibly redeem his brother or pay his ransom to God.
8 For the redemption of his soul is costly, and never can payment suffice
.
Now, explain how Indulgences are valid after scripture asserts that they are not.
@@markmeyer4532 - To understand indulgences, we must see the difference between temporary punishment and eternal punishment. Of course, eternal punishment is the afterlife of hell, so it is more serious than temporary punishment of this world. To understand what temporary punishment is, look at Mathew 18, verses 15 and 16:
If your brother sins against you, go and confront him privately. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, regard him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
People who sin against us in this life need some temporary punishment. A person who commits crimes should serve a prison sentence. If people treat you badly you should not associate with them. Of course, the bible is usually more concerned about eternal punishment because eternal punishment is a much more serious matter than temporary punishment. What Psalm 49 is referring to is your eternal soul that God will judge. The kind of sin that carries eternal punishment is for God to judge. People cannot possibly remove someone else’s mortal sins (those that carry eternal punishment). Only Christ can atone for those sins.
But. They don't.
Catholic theology has all the answers to these questions. It’s also in my experience the biggest stumbling block for Protestants who can’t understand why God would make the Faith so complicated. This is why the virtue of obedience and humility are the greatest.
It's because Catholic teaching is really precise, it's like distinction upon distinction, but you don't have to make it that complicated our faith is for every one from a 5 year old child to Thomas Aquinas, so it doesn't need to be that complicated either
It’s not that we don’t understand why God would make the Faith complicated. In fact, what Jesus taught about salvation was incredibly simplified from the very complicated religion that the Pharisees had built in Israel . We have a hard time understanding why none of the doctrines exclusive to Roman Catholicism are clearly outlined by God
@@SgtEnder
Why is your lack of understanding an issue? I don't get it
@@tony1685 What are the odds, Tony, that a Catholic hasn't already answered these objections?
@@SgtEnder *_In fact, what Jesus taught about salvation was incredibly simplified from the very complicated religion that the Pharisees had built in Israel ._*
I would agree and disagree with this statement. Sure Jesus simplified it in Matthew 22:34-40 when he taught it all comes down to loving God and neighbor. Yep got rid of all of the old laws and simplified it down to 2. However, when we actually think about what this entails, we see that it isn't so simple after all. This is where the doctrines come in. At the end of the day God didn't outline every single scenario (past, present and future) that might be encompassed by loving God and neighbor.
*_We have a hard time understanding why none of the doctrines exclusive to Roman Catholicism are clearly outlined by God_*
Doctrines are Church teachings in matters of faith and morals. All Christian churches hold doctrines that aren't clearly defined by God. If they were clearly defined then there would be no debates on doctrine. Like I said above God didn't outline every single scenario. I'm sure you would agree that many Christian differences in doctrine (divorce and remarriage, abortion, assisted suicide, etc) come about because of the claim it isn't clearly defined.
Basically, what I'm trying to say is it seems to me God didn't really outline anything, He left us a Church to outline it for Him as the world changes. Sure the Bible helps make it a little clearer and it's teachings are inspired by the Holy Spirit, however it wasn't "outlined" by God it was "outlined" centuries after it was written by Christ's Church.
I mean this with all openness and honesty, this is not a gotcha, but have you ever honestly asked yourself why you are willing to accept the Church's doctrines (300 years after Christ) regarding which books belong in the Bible, which aren't clearly outlined by God?
God Bless
“I do more to help you understand the catholic faith than Trent Horn does.”-the arrogance here. As a former Protestant, I can only endure short bursts of this man.
He’s really arrogant. I can barely listen to him.
A few years ago, shortly after I became Catholic, I watched Trent's rebuttals of Mike's videos on why Catholicism is "false." Winger laid out the standard arguments against it, which I used to believe were rock solid. Then Trent so easily dismantled them, that I had actual visceral feelings of embarrassment for having thought they were serious criticisms.
I believe that arrogance is the real explanation for the who produced the separations from the catholic church and for who even being told the real teachings of the church still remains in his position.
@@Mkvine he thinks his specific interpretation of scripture is 100% correct just like every other protestant
@@Numenorean921 Yup
Mike winger is the king of "word thinking". He's insisting on words meaning certain things instead of arguing real concepts.
sola my interpertation
... then blames Trent for wandering in rebuttals
That's how many in politics and social subjects evolve around issues, instead of solving them. lol
@@holdenedwards8506 lol..that's a good one !
Mike Winger is very wrong. He does have some truth….a lot of nontruth too.
For me it is the grace with which Trent address things without emotionalizing and even venturing into name-calling or judging intention that really impresses me. God bless your You and your work Trent!. Meanwhile I honestly pray you don't get distracted by someone like Mike who simpling stresses his hardwork and effort to understand Catholicism but closes his mind to the truth. Indeed "to those who believe( in the true Faith) no reason is necessary and to those who don't no reason is sufficient'. Unfortunately, Mike and the likes only see what their protestant eyes wants to see.
Trent's grace impresses me too. I've watched him enough to know there's been SO many opportunities where he could've said something smug and be 100% in the right. But, he never ventures down that path. That's some serious self-restraint!
Well, thats not what Pauls You Tube vloggs are like. I hope those epistles in the 1st Century have followers though.
One can claim Trent might have the wrong take on a particular issue, but I've never seen Trent purposely misrepresent or disingenuously strawman an opponent's arguement.
@@Thomas-dw1nb Sort of what he and William Albrecht did with James Whites case made ofr marion doctrins being gnostics. th-cam.com/video/0Q__WO7XK-Y/w-d-xo.html
Winger has a MASSIVE audience and MANY Catholics listen to his program so it is indeed important to address his slander.
Seems to be a frequent theme in anti-Catholic apologetics. Adopt a simplistic definition of a word used in many different complex ways and then draw many many erroneous conclusions based on your initial error.
It's always funny how Sola Scriptura Protestants don't think there can be an authority outside of the Bible, but then they go and hinge their argument on a definition by Merriam-Webster, an outside authority of the Bible.
It's one that THEY agree with, so it's fine. They've now made their own Church of Merriam-Webster.
Sola my interpretation
@@holdenedwards8506 Oooof. This is actually a decent point. Lol.
Actually, Sola Scriptura means that Scripture is the ULTIMATE authority; not the only authority. This is why we are able to submit to those in roles above us, such as parents or bosses, but disobey them if they are commanding us to sin. Same thing with accepting truths and facts that are not clearly stated in scripture.
So when Protestants claim that the Papacy is not an authority, maybe there is a merit to that claim; maybe not. But what Protestants do have a problem with is that if the Pope, or any other, clearly contradicts Scripture, who is right? This is a major point of contention.
@Delicue sola scriptura means exactly that--scripture ALONE.
@@DelicueMusic "Sola" literally means "Only"
The charge that Trent Horn is a dishonest actor is pretty laughable considering the man numerous debates Horn has had with a variety of people; if he were truly dishonst, people would stop engaging him.
Yes this really put me off too. I have found all the apologist at Catholic Answers to be very sincere and thorough. Didn’t appreciate that statement at all. Overall was just really disappointed in Mike, but he does tend to have a problem with getting lost in the weeds. Which is not always bad but the constant insistence that all us Catholics are lost in those weeds with him is frustrating. As is the constant insistence that Catholics don’t know their religion.
What a fantastic video, Trent. You were patient, kind, and showed exactly where Mike errored. It's a shame that he's unwilling to truly dialogue with you - and humorously reminds me of how Richard Dawkins so adamantly opposed debating with Dr. William Lane Craig. Watching this, and of course your other videos, really makes me excited and proud to be a Catholic (once RCIA finishes and I receive my Baptism). As a former Protestant and fan of Mike, seeing the way he intentionally focuses on small, insignificant points instead of actually doing the research to understand where these examples come from (like here with merits) is really unfortunate, and I feel ashamed for letting that shape me for a time. God bless you Trent, and I can't wait to dive into your book, A Case for Catholicism, which I actually bought while watching this debate. God bless you!
Wo hoo, a preemptive WELCOME HOME
Welcome home...
I'll echo that, congratulations and welcome! I find that the Catholic life becomes more fulfilling and easier to understand with each passing year, you're in for a treat.
I'll be praying for you, brother!
Congratulations brother! But, weren't you baptized as Protestant?
I'm not a Catholic, but I agree with you that Mike has mischaracterized the position.
It seems to me that the actual point of difference is that Mike reduces justification to a salvation binary (you are saved, or you are not) whereas the Catholic concept of "justice received" in Trent is one of degree (that it can be "increased"). Missing that difference can easily lead to misreading Trent as some kind of works-based, earned salvation, and the suggestion that Catholic apologists are trying to weasel around it with wordplay.
As someone who likes shortcuts, the way I tackle this misunderstanding is by stating that the Church believes that if an unbeliever, after committing the gravest of sins, repents and gets baptized (or goes to confession if already baptized), and as he's leaving the baptismal font (or confessional) an assassin kills him... he will not go to hell, because he has a new life and hasn't stained it with sin. He hasn't done any good work, yet he will go to heaven.
@Brian Farley exactly and because it’s BIBLICAL to work out your own salvation 🤦🏽♀️
It is not small subject. Protestants forget that we have to love God freely. And God loves us freely. God's grace comes to all men freely and we are free to deny it or accept it and later refuse it. If we accept God's grace we freely love God, thus we freely follow his commandments. It is not about fear of the commandments but fear of hurting our relationship. If we refuse to follow his commandments we lose salvation because we refuse the sonship he promises to us.
The whole scripture from genesis to revelation speaks clearly about obeying God's commandments.
@Brian Farley To be balanced here, there is a "salvation binary" in a sense. We are sheep or goats. We will be "in paradise" or we will not. Speaking to the Trent declaration, justice is "received" and "preserved", or it is not.
It's also true that "increase" in the sense we're using it here can't be described except by analogy. If we don't know exactly what it is, we don't know exactly what we are correcting each other about either. We're very much children regarding all matters of heaven, so best not to be overly confident children.
@@Lerian_V What happens, if in a few days, he lies?
Wow. Tell a guy who works for Catholic Answers that he's getting catholicism wrong. Takes a lot of nerve. Thankfully these protestant con-men have ALWAYS had that in great abundance. How many times have I heard "Oh, I went to catholic school" or "I asked a catholic professor". A tried and true tactic of the heretic.
I’m not even sure what to say in those scenarios. That comes up a lot, and all I think of is that it’s sad they weren’t better taught their faith and the depths of it. I was baptized last year and I’m continually learning deeper things about Catholicism through books and videos. They should be teaching Catholic school students the roots of Catholicism and not just brush over holidays.
I honestly do not think Mike Winger is a con man. I personally think he has misunderstood what Trent was saying, and what the RCC teaches, and maybe with his bias, does not see where he is wrong.
Alan Parr on the other hand, I have watched where he outright misrepresents what Catholics believe, so to have the two side by side seems a little odd, almost like they are pumping each other up.
Just my thoughts 😊
@@Pac81 yeah..Mike is not cin man..he is simply intelectualy insuficient to understand
@@AJanae.you are still not thinking as catholic ...average catholic has faith that somone somewhere KNOW..that is importan difirence between catholic and protestan faith..different maindset
@@bernardokrolo2275 You think he is not smart enough? That's on you man, personally I wouldn't say that at all.
This is a guy who’s quite good at playing hungry hungry hippos going up against a master at 4-D chess. Roman Catholicism is operating at such a deeper level than these “Jesus plus nothing equals salvation” modern Protestants. Excellent job Trent.
I'm going to steal this analogy for sure! Thanks!
I'm currently a protestant and even I can see the level of depth in the one with 2000 years of history far exceeding that of the one with 500. Its part of why I've been exploring catholicism, mainstream protestantism is in many ways so shallow.
@@bencook6585 Before I converted to Catholicism I noticed the same problem with protestantism. It just seemed way to dry
@@bencook6585 If you like the intellectual depth of the Church, check out a video called Protestantism's Big Justification Lie. It systemically dismantles Protestant soteriology by exposing the contradictions and flaws at the very heart of their system. It's irrefutable and once you understand the argument being made, there's no turning back.
"I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father except through me."
Trent hit the nail on the head...you don't go to a layman's dictionary for technical terms....
Laughable
We all know why mike wont engage on a public platform. Its nice and comfy behind his computer screen with noone to pressure him.
There's nothing wrong with that! It just means he wants to think his objections, etc., through instead of getting flustered in the moment!
@@TheBookgeek7 Hi, geek.
Thanks for your comment. It corresponds with things that Pastor Mike has said in various ways. Also, if he does have the idea that Trent is a person of bad character, as he has indicated is his understanding, it would be no more than prudent for Pastor Mike to avoid putting himself in a situation in which he might find himself compromised.
@@gregorybarrett4998 a debate wouldn’t be good simply because Mike would be flustered as he has such a little understanding of what he talking about regarding Catholicism. It’s easy to sit behind a computer and fire shots
@@TheBookgeek7 it's cowardly. Be honest. He's like a guy hitting someone behind their back and then running off when he's even slightly challenged. Lost a lot of respect for him.
He still hasn't recovered from Dillahunty....
I converted to Catholicism. I found that my Protestantism had been built on a protest against a strawman. The world went sideways when I realized I had been taught propaganda, and a lot of t it, about Catholicism.
True….many antiCatholics never take an RCIA course to learn Catholicism from the Catholic church.
Let's put your new religion to the test shall we?
Do you believe that the God you worship is the same deity as the one that Muslims worship?
Do you believe a good Muslim can be saved by being true to their conscience?
*But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God* , who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things, and as Saviour wills that all men be saved. *Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life* . (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium Para 16)
@@solacanonicascriptura6139 This isn't a test, it's a long winded, non-point diatribe. Kudos for copy/pasting this throughout, time is of the essence.
@@TheRedRaven_ Of course it's a test. It's a very good test to see if your magisterium has the truth. Are you afraid? ;)
@@solacanonicascriptura6139 This copy and paste quote very popular among protestants is incomplete and again, another case of propaganda. Read the whole article and the references to other documents where this paragraph was actually explained. You have again proved the commenter's claim true.
By the way, by what authority can you (including Mike Winger and other self-proclaimed infallible teachers) tell us what is correct about the Christian faith and what is not? Are you one of the twelve apostles? Have you been alive for the past two thousands years? On what grounds can you teach infallibly what is correct?
It's actually Protestantism that needs to pass the test, not the other way.
Mike Winger: "I am open to correction"
Also Mike Winger: *doubles down and refuses to be corrected*
Am I wrong about Catholic Theology?
No. It must be that Catholic Apologists are wrong about what they believe and teach, and they have never been corrected by the magisterium. (Or they are lying, and the Church encourages it, lol)
@@brendansheehan6180 ?
@@brendansheehan6180 He actually conflated the merit that Christ has with *everything* else. 🤦♂️
Yes, Christ can *strictly* merit because He is God. In the earlier video, it was obvious Trent was talking about merit of salvation which we cannot *strictly* merit. Salvation is a reward, a completely free gift.
How can Mike Winger not know the different uses in the term if he has truly studied this? 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
@@Inari1987 We see what we want to see. It's very hard to break from that. And Mike's entire life hangs in the balance.
@@sebastos- I'm doing that Principal Skinner meme format.
"if you guys think I'm arrogant or pompous..." then proceeds to tell you why he knows better than practicing Catholics 😳
😂😂
Protestants like to drive through the weeds. It's clear. They often are not very well rounded in their education.
Trent, thank you for keeping this civil. I watched Mike's whole video and I felt he characterised you as some sort of dishonest, Catholic gremlin who was seeking to trick Protestants. Mike needs to engage in actual dialogue otherwise he'll forever be accused of misrepresenting Catholicism. Good work.
Mike was projecting his own flaws on to Trent
God has already accursed the Catholic Church. Catholicism can do nothing to Mike, who represents scripture and the Gospels perfectly.
@@markmeyer4532 If God has accured his Church then He is a liar, seen as that is impossible, I'm more tempted to think Mark Meyer is simply wrong
@lothara.schmal5092 well he did claim Mike Winger represents scripture perfectly, which everyone knows is not true, which Mike even would agree with and admitted in his arguments. So, Mark was wrong on at least some part of his statement.
Mike constantly says "I've spent hours studying Catholic theology"
Anytime I hear someone CONSTANTLY say how much they've studied something, the more I think they don't know it.
He constantly needs to reaffirm his audience that he REALLY knows Catholic theology, but he just doesn't
What it tells me is he's at best done a crash course most likely watched and read other protestants
Mike spent years studying Catholicism and then mispronounces papacy over and over again for hours.
That's the whole point, his audience already comes in with a bias so claiming you're a Catholic scholar only bolsters his flawed arguments for them. "Don't ask questions, just listen to me" seems to be the strategy here.
Exactly! When I heard Mike stress how much he studied and knew Catholicism, my first thought was how it sounded just like so many non-practicing Catholics claiming they knew the Catholic faith because they went to Catholic school.
It's right up there with the ex-Catholic who has now become an anti-Catholic that CONSTANTLY has to tell every Catholic they talk to that they grew up in a devout Catholic family, was an altar boy and went through 12 years of Catholic school, so shouldn't it be obvious that they REALLY KNOW what the Catholic Church teaches. 😉
God Bless
Winger takes modern language and points of views and applies it to ancient doctrine, teaching and word use!
Great example of modernism! Another proof how it’s the summation of all heresies.
my thoughts exactly. :)
Because he has studied scripture and the Gospels without a bias or through the lens of any church theology. Because, he meditated on the Word and learned to understand it in context and, sources exclusively from it regarding matters of faith and practice as a Christian, and from that he can be trusted; as his position aligns perfectly with scripture. That is exactly how we know him to be reliable. If you cannot source only from scripture, you cannot be trusted in regards to matters of faith and practice as a Christian at all, and there is absolutely no exemption to this rule; and that is exactly what destabilizes Catholic theology: Scripture.
Catholicism cannot be defended.
@@markmeyer4532 if he did that why is he using modern use of English words in studying ancient text? That’s a contradiction. You should become a Christian and cease in your 15th century protestant heresy.
@@markmeyer4532 Scripture led me to the Catholic Church.
@@markmeyer4532That’s crazy, because as a Protestant I studied scripture without a bias or lens and became a Catholic.
Trent, your analogy is GREAT, exactly because it not only explains the difference between merit and earn, but also employs the father figure that God chose to reveal Himself through! It helped me months ago, and now explained in more detail, it is really enlightening! Thank you! It's very difficult for me to follow Mike, his sources are hierarchically disordered - sometimes he cites the Gospel, then the Cathechism, then some random answers from forums. It's confusing.
Are they the official definitions ? Like, did Pope Leo the great say it ?
@@isaacleillhikar4566 If you mean merit being a gift and reward, the Council of Trent itself backs that up:
From session 6 of the Council of Trent on Justification, chapter 16 (which *is* the chapter on merit):
"Neither is this to be omitted,-that although, in the sacred writings, so much is attributed to good works, that Christ promises, that even he that shall give a drink of cold water to one of his least ones, shall not lose his reward; and the Apostle testifies that, That which is at present momentary and light of our tribulation, worketh for us above measure exceedingly an eternal weight of glory; nevertheless God forbid that a Christian should either trust or glory in himself, and not in the Lord, whose bounty towards all men is so great, that He will have the things which are His own gifts be their merits."
Notice that it cites Christ saying whoever gives "one of his least ones" a cup of cold water, he won't lose his reward. And at the very end of the quote it says that the Lord wants His gifts to be their merits.
----So as the way the Council of Trent is using it here, merit is a reward and a gift from God. Trent Horn is right on the money, and Mike Winger is wrong.
Mike Winger fails to distinguish between strict merit, condign merit and congruent merit. We make that distinction, but his failure to distinguish them causes him to misread the documents, to misunderstand the Catholic faith and also commit the fallacy of equivocation.
@@isaacleillhikar4566 It doesn't matter who defines a word. What really matters is the meaning attributed to it, i.e. how it is used. That's why it's always advisable to define words before debating, so that everybody can be on the same page per the meaning of the word being used, regardless whether it is a dictionary definition or made up definition. The intended usage is all that matters and of course communicating the intended meaning to avoid any misunderstanding.
@@Inari1987 You have to understand that Protestants use whatever lens the culture they live provides. The Catholics go to the 2000-year old cranky metal box inside the Church to take out the apostolic lens handed down generation after generation. That's the good side of tradition.
I've noticed a trend with Winger when watching several of his videos. He seems to not fully grasp the complexities of the topic he is tackling (I'm not sure if he's unable or unwilling), and then offers an overconfident simplistic analysis. In this case, he continues to repeat things that simply are not true about Catholic teaching and belief ("you have to get a certain amount of grace to be saved," "grace is like a substance you have to get more of," etc.) or simply fails to grasp the depth of Catholic theology.
He says "any work added to grace is not grace," then when offered relevant and thoughtful distinctions to help him understand the Catholic position, he either misunderstands it or willfully misrepresents it. And then keeps falling back on his simplistic view as if that were some kind of virtue.
It's frustrating.
It comes from the technicality language be needs for sola scriptura to work. It's a form of reading so common to our modern scientism stage that loses all nuance when approaching topics like this and is what devolves into fundamentalism.
Winger often falls back on the “trust me, I’ve really studied this stuff” argument which isn’t an argument at all.
Like how atheists talk about the Bible.
LOL Spot-on!
I really used to like watching his videos until my knowledge of Catholicism grew and it became clear that his biased against them was based on ignorance. I enjoy history so while he was doing his Mark series his videos were very enjoyable. Now I've kinda replaced him with better sources and moved on.
Because he has. He has studied scripture and the Gospels without a bias or through the lens of any church theology. Because, he meditated on the Word and learned to understand it in context and, sources exclusively from it regarding matters of faith and practice as a Christian, and from that he can be trusted; as his position aligns perfectly with scripture. That is exactly how we know him to be reliable. If you cannot source only from scripture, you cannot be trusted in regards to matters of faith and practice as a Christian at all, and there is absolutely no exemption to this rule; and that is exactly what destabilizes Catholic theology: Scripture.
Catholicism cannot be defended.
@@markmeyer4532 Even if true, he would still have to demonstrate his knowledge rather than just claim it. But more to the point, he could not have read the Bible without preconceived biases or notions. You would have to cease to be human to do such a thing.
"But he said legally!" --- Come on man that was just a simple example for understanding. SMH no charity or understanding at all
As a Protestant I must admit that Trent is absolutely clear on this issue giving a precise explanation of justification according to the RCC. I think Mike is missing "merit" making his response miss the mark.
Currently reading The Case for Catholicism btw, great book! I still don't have great protestant responses to your critique of Sola Scriptura yet, but I'm thrilled to learn more about Catholicism.
"Repent, believe and be baptized. Then if you commit mortal sin: Repent, believe and confess." Wow, I love this. Thank you Trent for Jimmy Aiken's wonderful quote.
Yes!!! My Jesus is Superior to Roman Catholicism!
@@forgiven2812 What?
@@brittoncain5090 Jesus Christ's substitutionary death on the cross for my sins is a complete and finished work. It isn't necessarily for him to make any more payment for me.
Hope that answers your vague question.
@@forgiven2812 did Jesus not have to raise from the dead?
@@forgiven2812 How does the temporary death of an innocent for 3 days substitute for the eternal punishment of the guilty?
Mike is reading Catholic teachings like an atheist reading the Bible.
"I know what I'm reading, guys. I don't need anybody to teach me." 🤡
Fr
His life is invested in Trent being wrong. If Trent were right, Mike Winger would have to do some serious soul searching that I don’t think he’s prepared to do.
This 👆
@@DanUtley and left his ministry and his sheeps, his mean of life....
Korek
I feel like I finally got my head around strict/condign merit thanks to this video. So, thanks Mike!
Same. Mike Winger, making Catholics more Catholic with every “refutation” lol.
Hopefully one day he will join us! Pray for him. And James White, who I think would be a great credit to the Church :)
Why doesn't Mike understand what meritocracy means. As a veteran I remember them using this word all the time. I received a Meritorious Service Medal essentially everyone who joined after 9/11 received this medal we didn't earn it IMHO we just happened to join and or served for 2 conservative years following the events of 9/11.
Myself and my husband received a Navy and Marine Corps achievement medal I don't think I should have received it I was just doing my job honestly I think I got it bc I'm a woman my husband however worked 20 hour days doing the work of like 3 people bc his crew were lazy and apparently didn't care if the ship went down or not..
He to doesn't really believe he earned it, he feels he was doing what was right going above and beyond is just part of who he is He didn't want his ship to sink or be dead in the water. I believe he merited it. Or let's use my cousin his humvee was blown us by an IED half of his platoon was killed. him and his best friend received a purple hearts. Meritorious Honor for Valor again they were just doing their job however the "Top Brass" believe they merited such high honor.
If we use the "Top Brass" as an example of God than you can easily explain meritocracy using the military you can actually use the military to explain many things regarding the Kingdom like the Roman centurion he understood Faith and a Believers authority more than all the children of the promise
This doesn't seem like rocket science but folks like Mike Allen John MacArthur James White etc hate the Catholic church so much they refuse to see the truth
Thank you for your service
God Bless
Thank you for your service! And I think "medals of honor" are a great analogy to merit. It would be crass to say someone "earned" a medal of honor. You are "awarded" it because of faithful service and love of country.
This is another beauty of the Catholic Church, that is coheres so much with with basic understanding of human interaction and not on strict word play.
In CHRIST's parable/teaching, the Good Samaritan *merited commendation by CHRIST as the true and loving neighbor* for doing works of love or good works.
If this analogy holds for salvation, then only some people who had enough merit will be singled out for the reward (of life in heaven with God?) Others (like certain other soldiers in the army) do not receive the award. The decision is made by God based on the things the people did (can we call those good works?)
I don’t understand how this isn’t salvation based on works of righteousness which we have done.
Hi there. I’m not sure if anybody will see this comment but I just wanted to chime in because I find myself in the middle of these kind of discussions all the time. I’ve been watching Mike for 7 or 8 months and Trent for 5 or 6. I’ve been Protestant my whole life but have only recently (early 2021) started asking questions about the Catholic tradition. It has been wonderful learning about the beauty of the Catholic Church. Most of my preconceived notions of Catholicism have been torn down (most recently the Immaculate Conception) and it has been very difficult emotionally.
Thankfully there is a Catholic community at my college that welcomes me with open arms non-stop to answer questions , offer me prayer, friendship and emotional support.
For most of this journey I find it hard to sway one side or the other because every time I listen to people’s perspectives it all sounds like solid interpretations. So I guess what I’m asking for is more prayer 😂
Also: I would love to see a debate between Trent Horn and the guy from Truth Unites; I think his name is Gavin. Anyways, God bless you all!
I traveled a similar path into Catholicism, and I had a similar experience of emotional upheaval. It was a difficult time to say the least, but our Lord is faithful and I have definitely reaped joy from the tears sown. Jesus loves you, and you can trust that he will lead you to the fullness of truth. God bless you on your journey.
You're in my prayers, Isaac.
I’m smiling to myself because “Isaac Cohen” just seems like you would be coming from a culturally Jewish background. It’s like when we went to schedule our wedding 30 years ago and our date was already taken by the Greenbaum wedding at our parish. lol
I’m so very glad you have a good group of young Catholics who are open and welcoming to you. I’ve added your name to my prayer list for tonight that you find peace and Truth, and that your faith sustains and nourishes you in this life and brings you to perfect joy in the next.
@@ohmightywez Thank you for the kind words :) my family is culturally Jewish and we’ve even celebrated Hanukkah a couple times over the years. Most people recognize that by my last name as well lol
@@isaaccohen2533 although it isn’t discussed much, Catholicism is the natural outgrowth of the Jewish faith and Jewish traditions.
We have the red lamp on the altar to symbolize the Holy of Holies. We have our priesthood who approaches the altar to make the sacrifice on behalf of the people. We cover our head with ashes to show public repentance, and we have periods of fast and abstinence just like in Judaism which we then celebrate with a feast.
You’ve made a longer yet place in my prayers Isaac. I hope someday you will be able to experience the gift and miracle of receiving the body, blood,soul, and divinity. If you’re in the right place in your spiritual arc, it will be the most overwhelmingly beautiful and heart stopping moment of your life.
Bless you on your way, Isaac.
The clarity on that parable about the workers really helped me! I've been wondering about that for years. If NOBODY'S work would ever merit, in a strict sense, a days wage, then obviously it makes no sense to get mad that somebody gets it after 1 hour, or 12 hours. Honestly, that blew my mind. Thanks Trent. I never thought about that before and it makes all the sense in the world. The idea is if we agree to do as we are asked we recieve a pay far greater than anything we deserve.
I don't think that was what this parable meant. What was being taught is that anyone can come to Christ for salvation at anytime in their life. A person can obtain their faith in Christ, and therefore their salvation, at a very young age. Others may find Christ much later in life. However, no matter when you come to Christ, the gift of salvation is the same.
@@timmcvicker5775 I think we are saying the same things from different angles. I agree with you.
@@brendansheehan6180
I guess what I am saying, based on this parable, is that works or any merits you do, whether rewarded or not, have nothing to do with obtaining salvation. The workers who only worked for one hour receive the same gift of salvation as someone who has worked for 8 hours. Salvation is based on faith.
@@timmcvicker5775 They *were* all working. But their work didn't merit the pay.
@@brendansheehan6180
I think we agree here. No work, merit or anything else can assist you in obtaining salvation or increasing your justification for salvation. Christ's gift of justification (salvation) cannot be supplemented in any way. It was and is perfect.
Let’s continue to pray for Pastor Mike Winger. Honestly. His ego gets under my skin, but then I remember that people who have had Protestant leadership and then have come into the realization that the Church is the church Christ instituted, it was difficult for them. It can break a person. Their whole world gets turned upside down. They lose a position of power they once had. Every thing they’ve held as truth is suddenly revealed as false. Their families are heavily impacted. This type of revelation affects everything. Pastor Mike is just not at this point yet. He’s in defense mode. That’s okay. Everything is in God’s timing. Perhaps he will get there. Perhaps not.
My only quip is, he needs to stop expecting that you, Trent, and anyone else won’t rebut him every time he attacks our faith. He needs to be willing to dialogue if he continues to do this. He tells his church members to go out and speak with Catholics but he does not do the same.
Very well put! 🙏🙌
Well said.
Yes! I was a Protestant who converted, and yes, my whole worldview had to turn upside down. I felt/feel very much like Jacob/Israel in Genesis who was blessed when he wrestled with God but "walked with a limp for the rest of his life" because of what that wrestling costed. And I was just an individual. I could only imagine what pastors/preachers/elders/deacons of Protestant faiths who have jobs, paychecks, reputations, and flocks under their care must have to deal with. Many (myself once included) will almost put up any block in the way, as long as it means Catholicism remaining wrong.
Mike is not a pastor. He--like any protestant--has zero Authority from God to preach and teach in His Name. But they take upon themselves Authority which has never been given to them. This is spiritual thievery, and very arrogant.
Yes, prayers for him.
Is Mike a pastor? I wonder how he gets a following
Mike always comes across as having a somewhat condescending attitude when speaking on Catholicism. Thank you, Trent, for always assuming a more humble, charitable approach.
Its just not Catholicism he's the Webster Dictionaries example of the Dunning Kruger effect
@@JJ-zr6fu Very, very true.
Pastors will be held to a higher standard upon death Hopefully God will show him mercy for helping to mislead 1000s away from the one true Carholic church.
The fruits of the Holy Spirit. That’s how you know the Holy Spirit is with someone: charity, joy, peace, kindness, gentleness, faith. We can always see the Holy Spirit working on someone, we see it, we feel it through these actions
@@mapaz555 You need more indicators conmen will eat you up by those standards.
Mike used Webster's dictionary to give a one-sided definition of merit. Even Webster fave multiple definitions of merit. It shows merit does not always mean earn. Mike misrepresents Catholicism and Webster dictionary.
Trent Horn rude? What is this guy smoking? If Trent is rude then who can be considered nice?!! Trent is the nicest and most caring apologist I’ve ever seen! He is extremely charitable in all debates I’ve seen him engage. Mike needs HELP.
Honestly he should just wander off and try to help others. We Catholics KNOW the truth we don’t need Mike’s misguided “help”
Thank you Mike Winger, for allowing Trent Horn to dive a bit deeper into this. I love it when Trent is able to dive deeper into Catholic teaching, but I will say that I am disappointed in Mike Winger and his misconceptions about Catholicism. He claims that he tries to represent Catholicism correctly, but I just don’t see him doing that, but I don’t know the hidden elements in his mind that may be hindering him.
Trent, thank you for your perpetual effort in representing the Catholic Church helping others in such a charitable way. Many of us would express emotions that would only push those who have yet to understand away, but you tirelessly engage them in new ways to see the beautiful Faith Christ gave to us! Thank you and know my prayers continue to be with you 👍🏻
I find it interesting how Protestant Pastors seem to spend an inordinate amount of time railing against the Catholic Church that could be spent ministering to their flock. Catholic Priest seem to rarely mention Protestants and usually do only in the context of praying for them to return to the true church. Protestant gunna protest I guess.
What's he ministering? There's no sacraments.
Mikisms dont translate well in syria, or cambodia, or russia. At best they translate to his clone somewhere, which is generally in his own trailer park.
Refuting false teaching that can make the flock eir is also a part of the pastors job.
@@dodleymortune4312 assuming a pastor can define the true meaning of scripture. There is not a single human capable of that. That is why I rely on the church fathers and the magisterium of the Catholic Church. 2000 years of wisdom going back to the first Christians and what they believe. You can keep your Bible degree pastor.
@@Buckeye-gj4oi
The magisterium is not infaillible just like the authorities God appointed for the people of Israël were not and needed to be corrected:
Do all they say but not what they do Jesus said.
And he also say that some of their tradition they make equal with the commandment of God and not follow that example. How would the people make the distinction between the leaders tradition that Jesus spoke about and the real commandment of God ?
To be able to do that their must be some other reference than the leaders themselves that is of greater authority than the leaders, what is it ?
The man realizes his flawed reasoning as he speaks, its actually quite something to behold.
@@tony1685 when r u gonna admit that u sub Trent just to comment your slogans every time he uploads....
@@tony1685 "1k+ comments" on Trent's channel. Yikes.
Maybe that’s why he spends 10 minutes to respond to 10 seconds of Trent’s video?
@@tony1685 lol how do you have 1k comments on a Catholic channel lol?
@@tony1685 Why must you keep this up?
Mike’s biggest stumbling block in his “research” on Catholicism is not realizing it’s a *living* authority. You don’t have to try and figure out what *you* think Catholicism teaches. You can go to the living magisterium for clarification. Approaching Catholic teaching with a Sola Scriptura posture (aka: Sola what-I-think-it-teaches) leads to the confusion many non-Catholic Christians have.
Incredible job Trent. So much clarity and charity!
I fully agree with you brother. Mike assumes sola Scriptura is the standard method even for understanding Catholic doctrine.
Let's put your magisterium to the test shall we?
Do you believe that the God you worship is the same deity as the one that Muslims worship?
Do you believe a good Muslim can be saved by being true to their conscience?
*But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God* , who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things, and as Saviour wills that all men be saved. *Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life* . (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium Para 16)
@@solacanonicascriptura6139 Can you explain to me why you believe this is in error?
@@solacanonicascriptura6139 pls explain how this is an error
@@josephmoya5098 You believe that Allah and the God you worship are one and the same? You believe that a Muslim can be saved by being "good"? Please confirm.
I just checked out the comments section on Mike’s page and there were tons of people calling him out on his unwillingness to dialogue about such an important topic. Maybe we can pray that one day he actually will sit down and talk with Trent face-to-face.
Thank you for always being such an example of charity and kindness, Trent! You are an inspiration.
I think this makes us and Trent look bad. Respect his wishes to not engage trent. Besides, it does make him look like a coward. And his crocodile tears at Trent for twisting his words, etc is just lame.
@@danielcarriere1958 it’s a pity that he won’t engage. If it’s such an important thing that Mike spends two hours rebutting the rebuttal, it’s disappointing he won’t engage.
But noted on your observation and I’ve edited my original post.
Mike wont debate because the facts are not on his side. Jesus started Catholic church. Mike wants you out of it. Why?
@@johnyang1420 he clearly is not convinced of the Catholic Church’s authority or connection to the person of Christ. As a former Protestant, i know the arguments they use against the CC but I will never understand the unwillingness to learn with an open mind.
Yes, those were all Catholics flooding his comment section. Protestants haven’t done the same to Trent’s though. Go figure.
If you look up "person" in Merriam-Webster, "human" is listed as a synonym.
So the Trinity is just 3 fellow human beings?
Yay for the dictionary.... oh wait!
A quick note, let us, commenting as Catholics, assume that Mike Winger is as sincere as we would ask him to assume Trent Horn is. Yes, it was quite troubling for him to claim that Trent and Jimmy attempt to misrepresent Catholicism to get protestants to convert, but to turn around and claim that Mike is a sort of charlatan is uncharitable on our part. We ought to treat our interlocutors as Christ would, or as His misguided children.
Edit: I made this comment partway into the video, and am, much like Trent Horn and my fellow Catholics in the comment section, baffled by the sheer amount of misrepresentations of Catholic theology from Mike Winger. However, I still hold that we ought to assume the misrepresentations are largely due to Mike Winger engaging with the materials he cites from a perspective that leads to him misinterpreting the material. This would not be due to some moral failing on his part, but rather, this would be due to him genuinely trying to engage with the material and failing to do so. There is nothing wrong with that, there would only be fault, if, after having received a reasonable correction, he would refuse to clarify and/or correct his previous statements.
Agreed
but if it were proven that he knew about these things such as the types of Merit, and about Catholics needing enough works to enter heaven, but willingly decided not to include them in the video, would that not show that at least his actions are deceptive?
@@Daniel_Abraham1099
I suppose, but this has yet to be proven. He can be misinterpreting words such as "merit" from genuine ignorance rather than us supposing he is doing so deviously. It is far better to assume sincerity on his part than to assume the opposite.
Mike Winger committed calumny against Trent, he’s either absurdly stupid or absurdly disingenuous. I think he’s reaching levels that charlatan is a reasonable explanation to his disgusting behaviour.
I've said it before, I don't know how you do it Trent. 9 minutes in and I'm shouting at my phone like a total lunatic. It's just so dang hard to listen to Winger.
Thanks for doing the hard part.
Yeah, like Mike Winger is the worst. Even someone like James White or John MacArthur is so much more palatable because they aren’t pretending to nice or folksy.
I'm so glad you do this too! It's so frustrating hearing someone double down on their ignorance. His "research" is what happens when you begin with the end in mind. Sigh.
He's really bad, but I think when Trent sees his video he sees easy content. Mike's arguments are so bad Trent doesn't really have to think.
As a convert I found the greatest barriers between protestant catholic discussion is we used the same words but mean different things. Sometimes the definition each side use are radically different but many times they are subtle and hard to see the difference but the implications of the differences lead to misunderstandings.
No! words only have one meaning and one meaning only and so say otherwise is trickery!!!
@@stcolreplover linguistics is a complicated mess of time and culture. We see this change over time. Look at English in the States vs that of other English speakers. Or even in the US. Parts of the country have different words for carbonated drinks, soda, pop, soft drink, and some even use "Coke" as a catch all for all sodas. Then there is etymology. Even with words sharing same roots you can have radically different paths.
Baptism is one of those words....Christianity is bewildered on what it truly means.
@@Stygard lol, sorry Louie I was joking. I understand it can be hard to differentiate between satire and a mike winger fan but I’ll try better next time.
@@stcolreplover by your own words, then paul and james contradicts each other. Bothe of them use justification, the whole gospel might be wrong to your theology for jesus saying God will REWARD anyone who does keep the commandments. How about that mate? Im confused here with your logic.
Has anyone else responded to your rebuttals? I'm not surprised that they would be afraid to have a formal discussion with you.
If you read the comments everywhere on TH-cam/his social media (even in his rebuttal video); I seriously don't get why him/his fans have this impression that Trent Horn is in attack-hate-mode or something; Trent is super charitable and nice; and 90% of his followers are pretty chill.
Probably because Winger is misleading them to believe that. I think Mike is the one who exposed himself as a bad character.
I commented it somewhere else where it's clear one of Mike's goals is to discredit Trent to his fans by painting him as some sort of toxic apologist. It's hilarious. 99% of the people Trent has debated/dialogued with (this includes atheists, agnostics, other denominations) would completely disagree with him. He definitely manipulates his fans by saying stuff like "I'm concerned about Catholicism and it's theology" and so on. And after watching his debate with Matt Dillahunty it's clear why he doesn't want to debate/dialogue, because in situations where you have to face criticism/other points of view face to face, he doesn't do well, because his arguments don't hold up
@@chrisvalenzuela7911 Yeah Dillahunty was inches away from ending this guy’s career. It was an embarrassment. And in that debate I was rooting for Winger but was quickly disappointed lol
@@Mkvine At this point this is exactly what I’m thinking. Maybe commenters that are really bad are trolling him or just causing issues but the majority of comments-if not the only ones were charitable and challenging what was stated
Thank you Trent for your holy and informed arguments!
"I've offered to publicly engage Mike on all of this and he's declined." That says it all.
Jon Steingard is not even an atheist apologist, but he had a thousand times more decency than Mike in engaging Trent, and even had a friendly 2-hour chat with Trent without spiralling into chaos, even while holding on to his disagreement.
Mike's problem isn't even a difference in theology; it's a severe lack of charity.
@Super Mario "Various reasons," indeed. But I was assuming that Trent was talking about a casual conversation, not a debate. A debate would, without question, go very, very badly for Mike. But so would a casual conversation. Trent has a lot of experience using the Socratic method (known to Protestants as Greg Koukl's Tactics, and to Atheists as "Street Epistemology"). If you want to see how Winger does in conversation with someone who knows how to use such methods, just look at his conversations with PineCreek. Winger is shrewd enough not to put himself in that position again. So, he contents himself to snipe at Trent and Holy Mother Church from within his protective bubble, for the gratification of his bigoted Catholicism-slandering Chuck Smith groupies.
@Super Mario Very well said! Slimy is the word Mike should’ve looked up in the dictionary.
@Athanasius that’s not necessarily true. He may know that he is not a good debater and would not be prepared to answer Trent in a rapid fire. There are highly intelligent people who are poor debaters. But give them time to respond to an opposing position and they will come up with a rather persuasive argument. Good debater does not equal truth teller.
Mike actually explained why he doesn’t do debates. I think he does it in the video that Trent is responding to.
Was waiting for this. Hope you both can engage in a discussion/debate
That all depends on Winger, seems like he gave some excuses for not wanting to. But Trent is ready to go.
Seems that if you engage on the internet you should be man enough to take on criticisms person to person.
Go to his page and ask him to debate Trent.
Winger: Catholicism isn’t a cult.
Also Winger: Puts out a video with on Catholicism with cults in the title, puts Catholicism with several religions that are cults, and treats Catholicism exactly the same as the others. Also associates with people who do think Catholicism is a cult. (See Melissa Dougherty.)
What video did Melissa say Catholicism is a cult?
To be fair, that particular video was up on Mr. Parr's channel, so the thumbnail and organization isnt Mr. Winger's fault. Winger's channel breaks the one long video up into different videos on each of the topics they discussed, and his thumbnails are more charitable
First off, sorry for waiting so long to get back to you. Second, I want to say it was in the interview she did with Dallas Jenkins, but my memory’s terrible. I might be thinking of a different video.
Just listened to it all. Mike could simply clear up his "misrepresentation" by having a simple talk with Trent or any other Catholic apologist. That way the confusion can be cleared up right then and there.
Why doesn’t he want to do it? A friendly debate could clear this out for everyone, including Mike’s listeners.
@@RedWolf5 He won’t do it because then his pride would suffer a monumental blow, and, forced to admit the truth of Catholicism, his entire career/ministry would be in jeopardy.
Mike Winger needs our prayers.
@@RedWolf5 Not sure. Doesn't even have to be a debate. Could simply be a discussion. Trent is a very friendly personality so I don't see why not
@@jonphinguyen I agree I don’t see with not, specially with Trent out of all people.
Trent is so gracious and kind all of the time.
I read Trent has even offered a written debate so it can be published on a free ebook but Mike doesn’t wanna do it! That’s very suspicious to me.
Trent, I don't how you do it, but what an AMAZING retort! The way he analyzed your retort and his view of the Catholic Catechism, is in line (in a way) with his "sola scriptura" method of interpretation......and I thought, it was only towards the Bible. You literally schooled Mike Winger and you did so with utter class. Let's just hope that Mike Winger actually learned something from this "schooling" by you.
Trent, thank you for all the hard work you pour into this ministry and for your humility. Unfortunately, Mike is making false accusations against you even so much as reading into your motives, painting you as one who is dishonest and playing games. That is not Christian. I think he is reaching. He seems nervous. May God bless him.
Hi Louis, loved you on Pints with Aquinas! I would love to see more interactions like that from you.
@@michaelscofield1970 thank you. God bless you.
@@Lmerosne Priest need to see the youtube video "Council of Trent vs Catholic Apologists, Which is right?"
To all Catholics reading this, I ask that you begin praying (and fasting?) for Mike Winger, that the Lord would open his heart & mind, that the Lord would galvanize him to the truth, and that he be humbled before Holy Mother Church.
I can't stand Mike's passive aggressive smiling and sarcasm...then I realize that he feels his position so threatened as a protestant...and I can go on listening to him
Mike doesn’t realize that he’s actually embarrassing himself and making the Protestant side look bad. Honestly, what an airhead!
Mike is a coward, in my eyes. He keeps making video after video of his Catholicism obsession yet won’t go live with an actual Catholic.
Gavin Ortlund and Jordan B Cooper have this same type of condescending passive aggressiveness. Actually, I've noticed quite a few prots like this. I think it's overcompensation for their lack of humility and obedience.
@@alphonsustheleast1537 I think they embody the spirit of protestantism...the doctrine is something secondary
The soyboy passive aggressiveness
Once again, the depth of Catholicism blows protestantism out of the water without even trying.
The depth? The depth of scripture blows all of us out of the water.
@@Justin-ShalaJC The canon of the New Testament is a direct product of Catholicism
@grimey_bruh Actually the direct product of the Holy Spirit.
@@ramoth777 Working through the Catholic Church, yes.
@grimey_bruh If that were true, then the two would never contradict each other.
God has given us Trent, Jimmy and Scott. It's good to be catholic today.
Fallible men who are all wrong. I’ll take God’s Word every day.
I spent the first 30 years of my life in the Calvary Chapel movement; there is a whole lot of good that goes on there. But man, watching this takes me back to some of those very frustrating bible study discussions that basically boiled down to arguing over the meaning of words. Catholic theology's insistence on properly defining words and establishing semantic distinctions is a whole different paradigm that I've grown accustomed to, and it's somewhat maddening to listen someone say that Catholics believe something when we don't believe that -- it feels like gaslighting. I don't believe it's intentional; evangelicals are so saturated with wrong ideas about what Catholicism is that it it's very challenging to convince them that they do not actually understand Catholicism.
Mic drop. You have spoken well. I am a Catholic with Protestant relatives and this is spot on. I don’t bother anymore. I pray for them and when they have sincere questions, I answer them.
Frustration is really an understatement 😂. I only thank God they help to understand the Catholic faith better. Trust me without their effort am not sure many Catholics will delve deeper in faith and knowledge of the faith.
So do Catholics not believe that people earn their salvation in any way?
@@jacowoest2523
We understand salvation as a process in which we freely choose to cooperate with God, by His grace. It is God that provides the grace to enable us to cooperate, and it is God who has made salvation possible at all. There is no “work” that we do that makes us eligible for salvation. Baptism is a gift of God. Perseverance, which is to say a life of repentance and striving for obedience, is something we do in cooperation with God, but it doesn’t “earn” salvation - we are saved through baptism, we persevere in that salvation through not falling away and we are aided by God’s grace. If we do fall away, we are restored through repentance. Sacraments are the gift of God through which he gives us the grace to do this.
Is Paul referring to earning his salvation in the following passage from 1 Corinthians?
1 Corinthians 9:24-27: “Do you not know that in a race all the runners compete, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. Well, I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air; but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.”
I think the semantics problem comes from an intrinsic technicality that comes from American thinking and modern scientism English language. It becomes blunt and loses its ability to see nuance as it forces itself into fundamentalism in order to continue to function.
Catholic answers has a really good article on this. And we are all susceptible to it
Please do not stop rebutting any videos that misrepresent the Catholic church! Everybody is enlightened, everybody wins!
Mike Winger: I present Roman Catholicism more honestly then Trent Horn does, I know a ton about what Roman Catholics teach on justification, you can trust me I talked to the experts
Also Mike Winger: *Thinks that Fr. stands for Friar*
Haha, I didn't expect the world-famous Settler's Lament here!
Wow it's the true and honest Settler's Lament
Right! I noticed that too watching Mike’s video lol.
lol
Me hearing that: *incoherent screeching and laughing*
That man really went to an online dictionary to find common English definitions to change the meaning of words as they are used in a theological context. Protestantism is nothing but a heresy of ignorance covered in arrogance.
Yes!!!!
ignorance of false teachings?????
This is what Mike Winger does. In his mind anyone who disagrees with his interpretation of anything isn't being an honest actor and is just misrepresenting. He does this to everyone, not just Catholics lol. Mike wants to be a victim of whoever he thinks is out to get him and would rather point at the people "attacking" him rather than dealing with people.
Hi, Ivy.
You may have put your finger on something here. Pastor Mike identifies himself as having put a lot of time and effort into research by which he comes to understand both the matter under consideration and argument of the person expressing a position with which Pastor Mike takes issue. Pastor Mike thereby recognizes himself as having developed an informed understanding of the matter at hand. All of this is praiseworthy on the part of Pastor Mike.
There is an outstanding issue which has bearing on at least two categories of thought, which bears witness to Trent's policy of generosity in dealing with people who express divergent perspectives. The issue is the question of psychological oversight, in failing to recognize that having developed an understanding is not the same thing as having a correct understanding, and so the pursuit must be not for an understanding but rather for as many understandings as the available data will bear, and the further questions which will enable the identification of the correct understanding.
This has bearing both on the question of the meaning of the matter under consideration and on the question of the motive, disposition, and character of persons who express divergent understandings. There are some people, certain types of mind, who only with difficulty and ongoing support are able at least to accept that others' minds work differently from their own and engage questions differently from their own manner. This is entirely different from the question of native intelligence or education. It's possible that Pastor Mike has such a character of mind as would interfere with his ability to recognize that a light bulb turning on in his mind, bringing a particular understanding, does not mean that such understanding is correct.
His operating with a prior understanding of revelation would indeed induce a paradigm, a model, a framework, by which he would naturally evaluate what he encounters, and this may indeed be enough to account for his manner of dealing with these matters, but if he is so afflicted as I have discussed above, then his difficulty would be compounded, and this would make him more to be pitied, corrected, and prayed for, than to be despised and derided. Indeed, he becomes an object lesson of fear for us, habitually to offer petition that we not be, or worse, remain, blind to our own blindness.
@@gregorybarrett4998 Wonderfully said. I feel like this can (unfortunately) apply to a lot of people. I find it frustrating on so many levels when I encounter those who have such blindness, but who are otherwise intellectually sharp and able to absorb information. To be blessed with the gift of intelligence but also be blinded by your inability to recognize when you shouldn't make such authoritative stances due to your still-present informational deficiencies on the topic at hand is such a bummer. And, it can be an especially dangerous mindset to have when said people hold positions of influence or are otherwise considered trusted sources of information. Such misguided conclusions from them can spread around like a cancer - in that sense, Trent's public offers to debate are, in a way, like chemotherapy for the forum of ideas.
Mike definitely frames things like if you disagree with him, you disagree with God.
"Trent Horn is misrepresenting Catholicism. I've spent so much time reading the councils and the catechism and official church documents"
Literally a minute later:
"So this is from the council of Trent [quotes a document that is not from the council of Trent]"
and then he goes to Merriam Webster to show how trent misrepresents catholicism.
I’m a convert to the catholic faith. These conversations are so hard to have with my Protestant friends. Many of them, not all, are so stuck in one way of thinking they can’t allow themselves to see that they have been misinformed about Catholicism
That’s what I call “ideological anti-Catholicism”. As any ideology, it does not need to make sense but to make followers. It is insanely strong in the USA and specially in some Evangelical circles.
Do you have an example?
@@Justas399 well for instance, my father in law insists that Catholics worship Mary and he uses an article from the 1800’s about my Mariolatry which is Mary worship. I even showed him the catechism and it’s passage on Mariology which is marian theology and the prohibition of worshipping Mary. Regardless of how much data I show him. He refuses to accept the facts. Or, I’ve asked Protestants to show where the Bible explicitly states the Bible alone is our sole authority. Even after showing them it’s not in there. They still assert it’s an obvious doctrine that doesn’t need explicit wording in the Bible.
Welcome home!!!
@@Justas399 Dont talk to Justas!!!!
Maybe I am the only one that thinks this way but watching Mike Winger use his chuckle, though seemingly disarming, is in actuality no different than if he would get "John MacArthur angry" with respect to the Church's teachings. In both cases, their deliveries are ugly and uncharitable.
I think this was the best video in this whole dispute. I never understood better than now after you went over the kinds of merits. This is how we should start talking about justification with protestants. I can tell it took the Church many many years studying scripture to discern the different types of merits which are seen in the different Bible passages. I still think authority is a better way to debate with protestant because their ideas are not congruent with the Bible because they were not taught how to read the Bible by the apostles so their opinions carry no weight.
Unfortunately, as a protestant, I don't find Mike all that charitable in his reading, and his philosophy seems pretty shallow. More than that he seems unwilling to actually engage the arguments made, and is more concerned about making sure he is right, than about actually reaching the truth - whoever's side that balance might ending up being on.
Which is incredibly frustrating as someone who is questioning. I have found Trent (and others) and his arguments immensely compelling; including the one here on merit, which was actually really really helpful and cleared up a lot of things for me. What I would like to find though are solid Protestant arguments against, and to be able to weigh them up to see where the truth actually lies. But thus far all the protestants I've seen or read are more interested in proving catholics wrong than they are about defending the truth of their own position. Theologically, logically, and philosophically. Until then, I rather think that the Church has the edge.
You should study the papacy in light of Scripture and early church history and you will find the claims of the papacy to be false. Even Catholic scholars acknowledge this.
@@Justas399 hmmm, that's an interesting claim. Just to be clear, do you mean claims that the papacy has made? Or claims to the legitimacy of the papacy? Which Catholic scholars are you referring to? If this is true I would like to read up on it!
@@Justas399 Yeah bring the quotes buddy, because I can point to cradle and former Protestants and church fathers who would disagree with this statement.
You are a solid gift to the Catholic Church. You uphold Christianity in truth and transparency, without fear. God bless you.
Trent THANK YOU. Thank you for always being so patient and graceful in answering and clarifying these things. It shows that God can use “bad” situations to bring MORE LIGHT. Thank you. You inspire me!
Its sad how Winger and other protestants just ignores the entire Gospels over and over again, rewards are promissed everywhere in the gospels as response to our actions. But they prefer to scream ROMANS4 and ignore all!!!! Its like if Paul came to teach something different from Jesus.
Heaven itself, salvation is not a reward, it's a grace. One did no work that made him merit salvation.
Mike seems to have a bad case of word-concept fallacy. And the fact that he explicitly stated that Trent is operating in bad faith (trying to trick people into becoming Catholic) caused me to lose some respect for him.
Without even listening to any arguments these two men put forth, just look at their personalities. Trent is patient, charitable, kind, and humble. Mike is rude and arrogant.
You tell me which one really knows Christ
I am not catholic and don’t agree with everything put forward. However I found this very helpful in understanding things that I had heard but did not understand. Without hearing thorough discussion on ideas with people that understand makes it very difficult to understand doctrines. I have talked with Catholics before and never got a very good answer and would say that in some respects their views fly in the face of what Trent said. But I understand that for any church if you are not asking some one who truly digs deep in to their faith and doctrine in would be hard to answer. I now believe that we believe things a lot closer than I had thought and perhaps on some things the catholic view is correct. Thanks Trent for this video. I will say that as good as the internet is it has its hardships. I should probably not look at the comments because most do not add helpful information or discussion to the video and some actually muddle the issues and take away from it. Thanks again.
Mike Winger is so adamant. He says the Catholic Church claims that you have to work for Salvation. Then, why do infants (that do no work or have no knowledge) get baptized in the Catholic Church? He says Grace and works do not go together. That is sooo wrong. Grace and works certainly goes together. It's just that you need Grace before your works pleases the Father. It is not works before grace; it is grace before works.
And regarding the issue of meritorious grace, it only happens when you are in the state of grace. If you do not have the grace of Christ that is freely given, then meritorious grace does not apply. And by the way, meritorious grace is not earned but given as a reward by God on account of His divine justice.
Good question, why do Infants get baptized in the Catholic church?
@@tony1685 in Acts 16:15 and Acts 16:33, all in the household were baptized. Are we to believe that babies did not exist in the time that Acts was written?
@@williammagsambol2143 You can't just establish a doctrine of baptism out of an assumption. You assume there was an infant present. Don't add to the scriptures. 1Corinthians 4:6 says " don't go beyond what is written. "
Bible says that God opened Lydia's heart to heed what Paul was saying Acts16:14
Infants can't heed the gospel so how can they be baptized? Catholicism simply make up doctrine.
@@brutus896 It isn't likely that the early Christians, who knew Jesus and/or within generations of Our Lord, were wrong for thousands of years and some guy on TH-cam in 2021 actually has the answers. If you're Protestant, you should know that Luther supported infant baptism.
@@williammagsambol2143 Luther had it wrong as well. And Lutherans still have it wrong.
Mike Winger has it right. But it's not his invention, he's just going by scripture. 👍
My man really said he's emailed Harvard professors about the defintions / meanings and then, instead of pulling any of those receipts out, he went to Webster dictionary... That was such a good laugh.
I love me some Trent videos on a cold winter night 😁🙏
In all honesty, it seems like a lot of Protestant criticism of the Catholic Church comes down to semantics. Not all of it, but a good deal. For example, the hounding on the word merit, without really looking at the bigger concept contained within the word. It seems like a similar issue with the word works too. Because most Protestants I talk to in my personal life agree that you should do things to be a good person....they just have an issue with the terminology. Philosophically (not even theologically), works make sense, and they seem to understand it, but don't want to accept it. The way I understand works is: if there are actions that result in you turning your back to God and leading towards eternal damnation, there have to be corresponding actions that turn your face towards God and away from eternal damnation (though it must be added, these actions don't guarantee you salvation, only lessen your chances of separating yourself from God forever, since you are actively trying to follow God). To be fair, I'm young and not sure if I'm missing some nuances, but most Protestants I talk to agree with this basic concept....but not the word for it. It's odd.
I've recently stumbled upon this channel and am really grateful for it! I'm going to go watch a video specifically on works now haha
Words definitely get in the way. The two communities often have different definitions of the same word and without realizing that, end up talking past each other if focused on terms instead of concepts.
Trent, your amount of patience with this man is astounding. I’m sure it’s, dare I say…meritorious.
I cringe everytime I hear "Roman Catholic." I know our diocese uses the term on it's webpage but when people outside the Church insist on calling it the "Roman Catholic" Church instead of just the Catholic Church it feels disparaging. I am trying to be charitable but it really grates on my nerves.
I just find it laughable they are trying to make it into just another group, but Byzantine, Maronites, and the other rites of the Catholic church all agree on the theology they try to attack. There's actual unity within catholicism unlike the ecumenism core to the ever splintering Protestantism.
It is intentional
It is people like Mike Winger and people like Trent Horn that makes me very glad to be Catholic.
Very glad/thankful/excited you decided to 'bend your rule' here.
Thanks for the rebuttals I am protestant who is looking into Catholicism and orthodox !
Go Catholicism. We believe in one holy CATHOLIC and apostolic Church. Also the Orthodox allow divorce which is directly against the commandments of Jesus.
@@DorperSystems I can't just belive Ure claim I want to spend a lot of time in this
@@catbilota2492 ok take your time
@@DorperSystems you divorce too, you just have to go through loads of legalistic mental gymnastics and call it “annulment”.
@@catbilota2492 yeah, you should take your time. Faith is a journey. Let the Spirit guide you.
So sad that these so called learned protestants won't debate Catholic Apologists but mention like crazy that they did extensive research 😳 not realizing you did the same...Mike needs our prayers.
As a protestant, I find Trent's differentiation of merit very insightful. I am also challenged by Romans 2:7, especially since I love Matthew Henry's commentaries and I was surprised to see that's how Henry views it too
Trent: Let's debate.
Winger: It's too much of a time commitment.
Winger in his rebuttal: I've spent countless hours researching the councils, theologians, and doctrines of Catholicism.
He just knows that he will get clobbered.
Or maybe he just isn't good with rhetoric and doesn't wanna risk saying something stupid? That doesn't mean he is wrong. Everyone has a right to decline a debate. It doesn't mean they are scared or not well-versed in the subject. No matter how experienced I would be, I would probably never accept a public spoken debate because it's just not for me. The same could be the case about Mike. Asking people to debate, then when they say no, claim they are "scared," is just a tactic to make it seem like all of your opposition has bad arguments.
@@x-popone6817 I feel like if you do a public rebuttal to someone like Mike did you should also be willing to debate that person publicly.
@x-popone6817 Mike does have a right to decline debate but it does say something about him. Trent offered to do a debate that wasn't live so he could have all the time in the world to respond and present his case exactly as he wanted to. Mike has made a ton of anti Catholic videos and never stops mentioning how much he has studied. He says he's open to correction but he's studied so much, implying that he knows Catholicism so well that there are no corrections to be made. I think if you are that confident and that dedicated to making anti Catholic content, it shouldn't be an issue to do a dialogue that isn't live. I don't believe he will stop making this kind of content but he probably will continue to refuse to speak with any Catholics.
To my protestant brothers and sisters who are seeking to become Catholic... please don't let a protestant teach you Catholicism because they will try and confuse you like this guy. they do not want you to escape from their clutches
Yes, the reason Mike Winger is studying Catholicism so carefully is not to UNDERSTAND it, it is only to disprove it.
Trent, keep up the good work. Before I made my Marian consecration, I had questions about our Lady I wanted answered, and I found your rebuttals to Winger's propositions, which helped address my concerns. Prayers for you 🙏🏼
Bro you are so nice that people don't want to engage in a debate with you anymore. I think this is edactly what Christ intended. To be truthfull but also kind to opponents. You are doing an awesome job.
I dont think Mike intended to strenghten catholics with his video 😂 but through your response, Trent, you have surely strenghtened my faith! Such rich and simple explanations! I love it! God bless you!
Winger reminds me of the old canard of calling Catholicism "semi-pelagian."
Curious about what that was, I wrote a paper on it for my first class on writing research papers (at a Baptist seminary). I did serious research, which came to 27 pages that I trimmed down to 17 (6 pages above the limit). But the professor said if it was good enough, he'd still allow it.
The evidence showed it to be a canard Protestants (initially Lutherans) tried to stick to Catholicism, in spite of the Catholic Church having been the theological vanguard that opposed both Pelagianism, and Semi-pelagianism.
Someone else liked it so much, they basically re-wrote it, and published it online under their name.
Oh, well.
What Winger is doing basically the same thing Lutherans had done. Why? Because he doesn't want to admit that, when looked at closely, Trent Horn (and thus, Catholicism) is right on these issues. There are, indeed, TRUE and IMPORTANT subtle distinctions in these theological terms, definitions, and uses.
Frankly, it doesn't matter what a Harvard professor says, if he's not in depth on the subtleties of the arguments from within Catholicism. These are not distinctions without differences. They are substantive differences in definitions, and uses of terms.
But for those who DON'T WANT to acknowledge them (which would disarm their arguments, and leave them without a valid objection), no argument is good enough, no matter how clearly it is stated, and pointed out.
Great analysis
It's weird how he can look outside the dictionary for definitions when it comes to cults, but not merit.
I can’t anymore with this Mike guy. Kudos to you for your patience.
I was thinking the same thing about 20 minutes into this video
It's a shame that false teachers like mike has hundreds of thousands of subs while trent has 30k.
Im at the point where i no longer watch any protestants cuz it's just non stop misrepresentation , hatred and unbiblical
That’s why I stopped watching Anthony Rogers, a guy I used to watch all the time.
@@Mkvine Same. I supported him for years until he showed his disdain and dishonesty.
I would still watch protestants when they deal with the Trinity and other topics that are in accordance with catholicism, cuz they put out good material there. But on other topics nope. Maybe in a few years again when i wana rebut their positions better, but until then...
I guess youll might be knowing about Sam Shamoun. At the beginning he was against the Catholic Church teachings but now he is supporting it. He also has a deep knowledge about scriptures and he analyses them as Catholic theologians do.
I only watch their engagements with muslims. David Wood and Christian Prince to be specific. Mike is much worse than both those channels.
I straddle both these youtubers channels and appreciate both of them,so your partisan and gross misrepresentation of mike winger offends me,whats disappointing is the number of likes you got.
Why don't you subscribe to winger and actually engage in the breadth of his teaching then you would be informed.