Ask me Anything! (with Reason and Theology)

Рет қаралды 14,103

2 жыл бұрын

In this episode Trent gets “grilled” by Michael Lofton, the host of Reason and Theology, on all sorts of questions related to apologetics and theology.
To support this channel: / counseloftrent
Reason and Theology: / reasonandtheology

Пікірлер: 178

@BuffetNeverDies 2 жыл бұрын

Trent, you’re looking so healthy lately. Great job, man.

@jendoe9436 2 жыл бұрын

One of the things I appreciate about Trent is his charity towards others, especially in their expressions of faith (at least within reason). It's kind of sad and very frustrating when there's a group always trying to claim the spiritual high ground and looks down on people who aren't at their perceived level or refuse to realize people have different spiritual journeys and thresh holds. My family and friends are a mixed group like that, some are the bare basic Catholics, some put faith a bit more in their lives, and some have Trad tendencies which they fortunately try to balance. There are people I wish would put more in their faith, but at the end of the day I can only pray for them and live out my own faith with what works best for me. Recently had a conversation with a friend (a convert who I admire for his knowledge and zeal) and we talked about the usual topics. Reception of communion with hand vs tongue, should we kneel before receiving, music, "showing reverence," stuff like that. One thing he brought up was female altar servers and what I thought about it. Being a gal who became a server not long after receiving my First Holy Communion, I had to admit my position wouldn't be clear cut. Obviously, he was in the disagreement camp based on principle and point blank asked me, "Is the Church better off with you having served?" Honestly, I think the Church is. Serving is where I learned about the importance and events of the Mass, grew to love the people in my parish, and how I should conduct myself in areas like the Sanctuary. If I didn't serve, I could have ended up falling in the trap of Feminism, let the degradation of society corrupt me, or even broke away from the Catholic faith. The Church has a member who loves her faith and strives to do better. I am the fruit of the decision to open more opportunities for laymen and girls to participate in the Church. I get some people don't approve, but it's difficult for me to hear them out when their arguments sometimes boil down to "I don't like the decision the Church and Magisterium made, so therego it's a terrible decision because I say so." Like Trent said, it can be a trial of obedience in circumstances like that. Being a Catholic can be tough, for the reasons I mentioned and way more than I want to get into with this comment. I'll just say we should pray for one another and not let personal Pride get in the way of the Church's Truth. Side note: Trent's church looks so beautiful! I may have to brave a drive up I-45 one day to see it :)

@widdershins7628 2 жыл бұрын

God bless you two gentlemen. Couldn't thank both of you enough.

@virgiliolapidario5197 2 жыл бұрын

we needed more apologist like you Trent.God bless and will always included you in my evening prayers.

@tbojai 2 жыл бұрын

Two of the best apologists on KZfaq. Keep up the great work brothers!

@kevinkelly2162 2 жыл бұрын

Godsplainers.

@ntmn8444 2 жыл бұрын

@@kevinkelly2162 ha! I love this ❤️

@jeremysmith7176 Жыл бұрын

@@kevinkelly2162 Godsplaining is a great podcast from the Dominicans.

@kevinkelly2162 Жыл бұрын

@@jeremysmith7176 Irony is lost on them I suppose.

@Littlemermaid17 2 жыл бұрын

His channel definitely fills a void and discusses so many actually interesting and little talked about topics online. He needs more subscribers

@OstKatholik 2 жыл бұрын

Great duo!

@cosmicnomad8575 Жыл бұрын

What a beautiful Church Building they are in!

@davidgamboa9567 2 жыл бұрын

That was a really fun episode. Great job gentlemen.

@halleylujah247 2 жыл бұрын

Great back and forth.😁

@halleylujah247 2 жыл бұрын

@YAJUN YUAN and you need to accept you have no authority and become Catholic.

@xaviervelascosuarez 2 жыл бұрын

I wish we would stop talking about "conversion" when referring to Protestants and Orthodox becoming Catholic. Conversion is to turn towards Christ, and is a task of a lifetime for us sinners, and sometimes I feel like some of them are closer to Christ than many Catholics... I would call it "reunion" or "coming back home"... Or, even better, "to return to communion with Rome," as Michael puts it. It's very exciting to witness real time through the web the work the Holy Spirit is doing to bring all Christians back together.

@michellelaudet5363 2 жыл бұрын

Well said, Christ prayed in John 17 for the unity of his followers...

@markushill8639 11 ай бұрын

In fairness, conversion is a lifelong process. I need God to convert my heart to Him all the time. I don't think it's an inaccurate term.

@hrhnicholasable 2 жыл бұрын

This was a great conversation!

@yajunyuan7665 2 жыл бұрын

Timestamps: 2:43 Eucharist Ban (Nancy Pelosi) 14:56 Byzantine rite vs Roman rite 20:40 Apologetics 29:20 Old Testament Canon debate (Jonathan Sheffield) 36:34 Why Trent Horn isn't Protestant 44:23 Why Trent Horn isn't Orthodox 50:28 Why Trent Horn isn't Atheist 56:18 Benevacantism 1:03:09 Are anonymous ordinations valid but illicit (Dom Alcuin Reid) 1:11:04 Captured to Catholicism (Cameron Bertuzzi) 1:21:11 Does Trent Horn accept the material sufficiency of scripture (Start of questions from the live chat)

@julieoelker1865 2 жыл бұрын

You should also interview Bryan Mercier of Catholic Truth. He answers anti-Catholic speakers also.

@ntmn8444 2 жыл бұрын

I think this would be interesting!

@danielcavi4917 2 жыл бұрын

Good morning, Trent!

@trailrvs 2 жыл бұрын

Since St Thomas Aquinas and The Council of Trent both said the death penalty was legitimate, they could hardly withhold communion from someone for supporting it.

@brittoncain5090 2 жыл бұрын

@@tony1685 Saints are not infallible, and nothing the Church teaches as definitive is wrong

@watermelontreeofknowledge8682 2 жыл бұрын

@@tony1685 sorry, Tony. You’re wrong on this one. The Catholic Church is the one true faith guided by the Holy Spirit! Saint Thomas Aquinas was one of our great doctors of the Church who clarified philosophy and theology in such profound ways. All philosophers since Aquinas have to grapple with his philosophy so as to adapt or reject parts of it. He’s truly one of the most influential people in human history and did it all for the glory of Christ. Wishing you all the best and praying for you that you come to know the true faith!

@IM-tl7qv 2 жыл бұрын

@@tony1685 He also said other wrong things and some are quite awful but it's irrelevant, saints aren't infallible and make mistakes and have errors in their writings, the point the person was making is this is Church teaching with support and was held by thinkers like Aquinas, who obviously wouldn't be denied communion.

@brittoncain5090 2 жыл бұрын

@@tony1685 Firstly the Church is THE pillar of truth, not a pillar. Secondly, as I already said, nothing taught definitively by the Church is false.

@emilio6425 2 жыл бұрын

@@tony1685 the Catholic Church does keep the Lords day. It’s Sunday. If you’re trying to make a claim that it must be Saturday on our current calendar then prove that it must be Saturday. It doesn’t say that. Try again.

@LyubenV 2 жыл бұрын

Is there any list of questions I can skip around to?

@kimberHD45 2 жыл бұрын

Since when did being in favor of the death penalty become a cause to deny communion? The Catholic Church has always acknowledged the right of the state to make that determination in certain cases.

@littlerock5256 2 жыл бұрын

Francis changed the Catechism of the Catholic Church to declare the death penalty “inadmissible” given the “inviolability and dignity of the person” as understood “in the light of the Gospel.” If capital punishment is wrong in principle, then the Church has for two millennia consistently taught grave moral error and badly misinterpreted Sacred Scripture. The other option is that Francis is wrong. But given Catholic teaching on the papacy and the prerogatives promised it, how is that possible?

@urielsalinas2834 2 жыл бұрын

Can you give an analogy of increased justification?

@reginapontes5672 2 жыл бұрын

Trent, please reply about Nancy in light of the Pope giving her communion the other day!

@stafh8931 2 жыл бұрын

Hello Trent!!!

@KnuttyEntertainment 2 жыл бұрын

*Question:* Would you be interested in a debate with a Latter-Day Saint? (Mormon) I know people like Robert Boylan, Blake Ostler, or Jacob Hansen from Thoughtful faith would be more than interested in the idea, and it would be very easy to reach out.

@HaleStorm49 2 жыл бұрын

Do 50k+ sub non LDS channels have LDS apologists on their channels?? Seems like there is a disproportionate ie undesirable amount of downside risk.

@Michael-bk5nz 2 жыл бұрын

Debating Mormonism requires an enormous amount of specialized knowledge that few except former Mormons possess

@HaleStorm49 2 жыл бұрын

@@Michael-bk5nz That's a nice compliment. I would add to that if someone (ie Trent) creates videos, literature, or courses for monetary gain that the individual has already positioned themselves as an "expert" on that topic to a degree that easily merits a debate. That's why the debate is all downside risk. Instead of a debate he should do a friendly forum like "The state of the Church in 50 years" Protestant/evangelical churches are folding en masse. Church attendance and belief in God are on the downslope. Anyone who is an active Catholic knows what kind of problems they are dealing with financially and doctrinally. They are selling more.churches than they build. What is the vision and plan for the next 50-100 years in preparing the Earth for the Kingdom of God. This discussion is far more important than talking about the 1500 year old feud between prots and Catholics. I think most honest and humble truth seekers would be surprised to hear what comes out of a discussion like this. It also takes a very specialized type of expertise that escapes most scholars and historians.

@Michael-bk5nz 2 жыл бұрын

@YAJUN YUAN You need to know more than the doctrine you need to know the sources and the full history, it is not an easy thing to learn

@HaleStorm49 2 жыл бұрын

@YAJUN YUAN May be similar to others I have read but unfamiliar with that author. Any highlights for me?

@victoriathorlacius874 2 жыл бұрын

In fairness, Lofton has not been so great at handling the orthobro battalion. The only way to win there is not to play-and not because they have superior arguments, it is more a question of arms and tactics.

@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын

Trent: is Loftonian Magisterialism a permissible opinion that a faithful Catholic may hold?

@paularnold3745 2 жыл бұрын

@YAJUN YUAN You are very correct in this, but with Trent I would say the reply is pretty reliable. As for me, before even attempting to answer this question I would ask what is "Loftonian Magisterialism"? I've never heard of it.

@ana-7903 2 жыл бұрын

Isn't Gospel Simplicity guy Austin, not Alex?

@gregorybarrett4998 2 жыл бұрын

I would suggest that, at least in many cases, disputed questions remain disputed because they are improperly framed. I remember someone once saying that science is not the art of asking simple questions, but of asking questions with simple answers. In some cases, the matter might reduce to the suitability of the matter to a particular personality type or character of consideration. In some cases, the matter might reduce to an unrecognized matter of greater priority or centrality for the question at hand.

@tafazzi-on-discord 2 жыл бұрын

I don't think the standard model is particularily simple as an answer...

@gregorybarrett4998 2 жыл бұрын

@@tafazzi-on-discord Hi, Questa. Thanks for your reply. The same might be said for Maxwell's Equations. The idea is not that the answers are simplistic, but that they are integrative, compact, and powerful, both in scope of applicability and in obviation of what otherwise would necessitate a plethora of exceptions. With respect to the disputed questions illustrated in the video, the ability to communicate meaning necessitates the ability to reference structures of meaning in the mind of the recipient. Different minds operate in different ways, and so the ability to communicate meaning requires the ability to reference all three of: the range of elements of meaning in the message, including fact, interpretation, significance, and affective value; the ways in which each of those elements are available for appropriation in the recipient; and the identification of the integration of those elements in the message. Since different people have varying degrees of ability in each of these three skills, and varying weights to which they would otherwise assign these dimension of the message, the rendering explicit of these dimensions provides for a more successful communication of the message. As an illustration, One might say, "Do you remember how thrilled you were when Uncle Johnny got the job? That's how thrilled I was when I learned ... Of course, that's mixed with sadness because I will no longer be able to ..., but it's exciting because it's opening a new chapter in my life." Other cousins might be completely indifferent to Uncle Johnny's fate, and Uncle Johnny's fate has nothing to do with the information you're trying to convey, but your interlocutor will now be better able to understand the message you're trying to convey, for your having made the connection with meaningful questions of significance and affective value.

@marilynmelzian7370 2 жыл бұрын

There is a vast difference between the killing of the innocent and the killing of the guilty. Scripture clearly supports and even commands the death penalty in certain cases. One might come to the conclusion that in the modern state there are other alternatives, but those other alternatives are a huge burden on society. That said, I believe scripture requires that there must be witnesses to a crime in order to apply the death penalty, which is meant to be protection against the conviction of the innocent. Also, I failed to see how condemnation of the death penalty comes within development of doctrine. There is no trajectory away from it as far as I can see until you get to a much more liberal age in which humanity take center stage instead of God.

@jamesmisfeldt264 2 жыл бұрын

Casually dropping the "water is wet" statement. Wasn't prepared for this video to be so political.

@jongee4336 2 жыл бұрын

Wonder what the church fathers would say 🤣

@ironymatt 2 жыл бұрын

Sometimes it's cold and hard. Sometimes it's even hot and light.

@marklizama5560 2 жыл бұрын

I find arguing with non-believers much easier than debating with Protestants; mainly because, I frankly really don't like how Protestants blasphemy Our Lady.

@ntmn8444 2 жыл бұрын

It’s like talking to a 5 year old sometimes.

@jaredwilliams1031 2 жыл бұрын

Trent: I know you're interested in dialoging with people and traditions beyond just Protestantism or Eastern Orthodoxy. Have you considered talking to anyone about Heidegger's critique of metaphysics? I've seen Thomists come up with satisfying or at least decent responses to all kinds of arguments from various viewpoints, but I don't know of ANYONE that's commented on this, save one or two Philosophy paper-writers just finishing grad school or something.

@PalingenesisRebirth 2 жыл бұрын

hello

@MathAdam 2 жыл бұрын

11:48 WWAD?

@jakubr4634 2 жыл бұрын

I write this more for the algorithm but anyway I wanted to note that the talk about the organ being an instrument meant for Roman orgies sounds to me a little like a pope Francis-y ad hoc improvised statement. Unfortunately, cannot relate to it. Chants were sung in the orgies too. And various instruments were used in Old Testament either in the Jewish temple liturgy as well as in the pagan cults criticized by prophets.

@ntmn8444 2 жыл бұрын

You fail to realize that he was talking about how absurd TLM supporters get. They criticize NOM for using other instruments, but they fail to realize how scandalous it was back in the day to incorporate the organ into mass. He’s not wrong. He’s basically pointing out how absurd it is to attack something just because it’s new. I do appreciate also that he brought up the point that VII was supposed to engage people more with the mass. As someone who does prefer NOM over other rites I agree. That’s why I go to NOM and not any other mass. I have tried them all: Byzantine, TLM, etc. They’re all beautiful in their own way, but it’s not for me. I feel most engaged in the NOM. I’ve come to understand the Real Presence in the Eucharist from my experience. Yes, I’m aware it’s a new mass, but it works for me for its intended purpose. It’s helped me connect to God during mass.

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

Cyril of Jerusalem's instruction to his congregation wasn't necessarily normative for the universal church. But it's enough to establish that receiving Holy Communion on the hand wasn't unheard of in the early church. I imagine that if the bishop of Jerusalem had invented this practice in 348 AD there would've been an outcry from the other nearby bishops about liturgical innovation. If there was, I'm unaware of it but will gladly receive evidence to the contrary.

@littlerock5256 2 жыл бұрын

I posted this on another discussion thread, from Rorate Caeli. There is at least doubt that St. Cyril said this: ...pull out the following piece from the Mystagogical Catecheses attributed to Saint Cyril of Jerusalem: "When thou goest to receive communion go not with thy wrists extended, nor with thy fingers separated, but placing thy left hand as a throne for thy right, which is to receive so great a King, and in the hollow of the palm receive the body of Christ, saying, Amen." The Mystagogical Catecheses do not stop there, but continue: Then. carefully sanctifying the eyes by touching them with the holy Body, partake of it,(…) "Then, after you have partaken of the Body of Christ, come forward only for the cup of the Blood. Do not stretch out your hands but bow low as if making an act of obeisance and a profound act of veneration. Say 'Amen'. and sanctify yourself by partaking of Christ's Blood also. While the moisture is still on your lips, touch them with your hands and sanctify your eyes, your forehead, and all your other sensory organs…Do not cut yourselves off from Communion; nor deprive yourselves of these sacred and spiritual mysteries, not even if you are defiled by sins. The description of such a bizarre Communion Rite, which concludes with the exhortation to receive Holy Communion even if you are defiled by sins, was most certainly not preached by St. Cyril in the Church of Jerusalem, neither would it have been licit whatsoever in any other Church. What we have here is a rite which is a product of the imagination, oscillating between fanaticism and sacrilege, by the author of the Apostolic Constitutions: an anonymous Syrian

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

@@littlerock5256 This seems to be a highly edited and selective case of plagiarism from David Armstrong's "Patheos" article. So, not only are you un-original, but you also misrepresent what Armstrong says. And what he says in toto in fact contradicts your point altogether. Thus, I find this response both spiritually and intellectually dishonest. I ask anyone interested to go to Armstrong's article and compare it to what so-called "Little Rock" posted and tell me it's not a poorly done cut-and-paste "hit job". I personally have no dog in this fight. But unless someone can produce a conciliar or papal document explicitly proscribing Communion on the hand that is binding on the consciences of all Catholics, then it seems to me that this is purely an academic debate among and between Catholics. Again, I urge anyone interested in the early church to watch Dr. James L. Papandrea's short but informative KZfaq videos on the "original church." Pax vobsicum!

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

I proffered a link for the Armstrong piece but apparently KZfaq removed my original post. A basic internet search using Armstrong, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and Communion on the hand should bring the link for it right up.

@littlerock5256 2 жыл бұрын

I am presetly in the midst of a storm with no power or internet, but I will look 8nto that when I am able. As I said elsewhere, I got that from Rorate Caeli. My understanding is that Catholics are not required to receive in the hand but that some prelates treat it as if it were mandatory, or they take it upon themselves to make it mandatory.

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

@@littlerock5256 I apologize for the smear. But your source most certainly plagiarized from Armstrong and completely overlooked his evidence and arguments that contradict their opinions. I only know about this matter because my friend Dr. Jim Papandrea is actual an early-church scholar and has taught on this matter. So, if Dr. Jim cites Cyril (in his lectures) I know he can be trusted, as opposed to some random internet site. As a former fundamentalist Evangelical, my advice is stick to scholarly sources as opposed to pseudo-scholarly internet sites and sectarian resources. Go check out Dr. Papandrea's KZfaq channel (and, no, I'm not profiting in any way mentioning it!). Jim also has many publications on the early church. As an outsider I agree with your last point that that's the way it seems.

@hfritz82 4 ай бұрын

Love Trent, although 2 critiques would be that I find him somewhat avoidant of just how problematic some of Pope Francis’ actions have been. I’m sure he’s not ignorant of it, but I assume he goes easy on the topic because of his role at Catholic Answers and dialogues with Protestants. Nonetheless, it is a challenging area for faithful Catholics today to navigate. It’s not as simple as just obedience… second, I find it a little hard to take his critiques of TLM, since he himself has left the NO but becoming a Byzantine Catholic. It’s not wrong to want a beautiful and reverent liturgy without the 70s music.

@ericgutierrez2936 2 жыл бұрын

Ok, here's the argument and the people, lol. Why did the Church turn a blind eye to all the pedophile priests and direct Bishops to simply transfer them to another parish where they molested more victims? I don't know plainer I can be. Thank you, BVM, St. Joseph, and RuPaul. 🙏

@Stygard 2 жыл бұрын

I would like to see rebuttal videos against some of the youtube radtrads. I was sucked in right after my conversion 4 years ago and I am glad I got out. It got to a point where I felt like I was "protesting" again

@xaviervelascosuarez 2 жыл бұрын

Yes! That's right, isn't it? I call them "little Luthers". I would not call them "rad trads" though. I am radical traditionalist, because I love ALL the traditions, including that of love and respect for the Roman pontiff, our common father and symbol of unity, that they seem to conveniently forget. The problem with the rad trads is that they are not sufficiently rad.

@littlerock5256 2 жыл бұрын

Better yet, interview a "rad trad" and get it directly from the horses' mouth. What did you feel you were protesting?

@Stygard 2 жыл бұрын

@@littlerock5256 as I said I am a convert and a former Baptist minister. I felt like I was going down a path after my conversion back to rejecting the Catholic Church as a "catholic" I will say, I had some other issues going on and my own personality quirks that predisposed me to that. I don't know the heart of others, but for me I was on a dark path and I'm glad I left it.

@littlerock5256 2 жыл бұрын

@@Stygard The post Vatican II church contradicts previous Catholic Church teaching and that is likely the cause of your confusion. What you were protesting may have been conciliar church error.

@Stygard 2 жыл бұрын

@@littlerock5256 well youtube comments arnt the best place for deep serious conversation which this clearly is. For me I stepped away from following most of the controversies going on and have instead focused on my relationship with Jesus, the sacraments, and living out my vocation as a husband and Father. I have experienced greater joy since then. For me, being Catholic gives me the assurance that even if the Church is a mess, it will last and never die.

@youtubecharlie1 2 жыл бұрын

I didn’t know Michael watched Taylor Marshall so much 😂

@yajunyuan7665 2 жыл бұрын

Timestamp 1:31:53 Trent's thoughts on Taylor Marshall

@thomasjorge4734 2 жыл бұрын

You should have filmed you dinner together!

@Mr.Anglo1095 2 жыл бұрын

How do you deal with the current pontiff? Specifically in regards to nearing on what seems a universalist leaning, anti-proselytizing, and the pachamama incident?

@jimjim5865 2 жыл бұрын

Pray for him and the Church. It’s easy to feel scandalized by the state of the Church right now, but we have Christ as our head, and we have his promise. The gates of hell shall not prevail, and for that we have nothing to fear. The Church has been in bad states like this before, but it has never fallen.

@roan2288 2 жыл бұрын

Recognise that he is the Pontif and be obedient to him.

@Mr.Anglo1095 2 жыл бұрын

@@roan2288 well I’m actually a Protestant and that’s probably the biggest issue for me. I’m fallible, even if the evidence for me seems to point towards the papacy, there are a lot of others with coherent views that may have a better answer when they don’t have that question to deal with. It’s not just the historical evidence that I have to look into, it’s the sustainability of the worldview as a whole. If the pope is practicing heretical things, but its just being ignored because that would contradict the Catholic worldview that might mean I misinterpreted the other data despite what it seems. I can’t just check my mind at the door and embrace Catholicism. The current pope has done some awful things and scandalized millions to thinking getting to heaven is easy, sodomy is tolerable, we shouldn’t evangelize except with our actions, and we can attend false religious practices in good conscience. Those are all things that completely contradict the Christian worldview.

@paularnold3745 2 жыл бұрын

@@roan2288 We are not obliged to be obedient to the pope on every issue, only in matters of faith and morals where he is NOT saying or doing something that causes confusion with existing Church teaching. For example, I would never participate in any activity that involves things like pachamama. We are obliged to pray for him though, and that I do daily.

@paularnold3745 2 жыл бұрын

@@jimjim5865 Good point. I would add that even Jesus had Judas and the church still has Judases.

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

St. Cyril of Jerusalem in 348 AD gave this instruction to his congregation: “When you approach Holy Communion, make the left hand into a throne for the right, which will receive the King. With your hand hollowed, receive the Body of Christ and answer ‘Amen’".

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

@YAJUN YUAN Yes, they can err! But my point was twofold. 1) St. Cyril of Jerusalem's instruction on Communion in the hand provides at least one case of the practice in the early church, so to insist on reception of the Host on the tongue as the only way to receive is not at all historical; 2) if Cyril had innovated we would expect neighboring bishops to have protested, but we have no such evidence.

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

@YAJUN YUAN If you have positive evidence for some early church teaching and no evidence against it, then it's safe to say it's apostolic. The early church was inherently conservative. Innovation was always decried so there should be evidence against such a teaching or practice. If St. Cyril was inventing a practice then there should be evidence of that. If not, then what you have is simply an argument from silence.

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

@YAJUN YUAN This is basic historical reasoning. You have to have evidence for or against something. We have historical evidence that in no less than Jerusalem in the mid-4th c. Christians were allowed to receive Communion in the hand. Where's the evidence that this was wrong or verboten? If you have none, then it's safe to say that the teaching was supported by at least some leaders of the universal church at that time. Historical Methods 101!

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

@YAJUN YUAN So, show me the historical evidence that St. Cyril of Jerusalem was violating apostolic teaching and practice in this particular case.

@robertopacheco2997 2 жыл бұрын

I'd recommend my friend Dr. James L. Papandrea's KZfaq channel series on the "Original Church" where he deals with this and many other early-church topics. A basic internet search will bring it up. His channel also has his Garrett-Evangelical Seminary lectures on the history of the early church.

@gamefan8552 2 жыл бұрын

Great content however have seen you are silent on certain subjects which are very important for many people. First what does the Catholic Church teaches on gun control, and second issue is it morally acceptable to help Ukraine by providing them lethal weapons (rather than only humanitarian aid) according to the Catholic Church teaching ?

@marklizama5560 2 жыл бұрын

Maybe a Catholic Apologist should write a Book of Objections, in which he or she writes down all the objections to the Catholic Faith for those studying Apologetics to learn from.

@Runsfrombears 2 жыл бұрын

Check out the summa of st Thomas Aquinas. He goes through pretty much every objection and answers them all.

@tafazzi-on-discord Жыл бұрын

"A daily defense" by Jimmy Akin. It has 365 out of all the objections to the Faith

@thomasfolio7931 2 жыл бұрын

I wish I could believe Pope Benedict was still Pope, but I may not pray as hard for the Church and the Pope had he not resigned and Pope Francis have been elected. I try to look behind what the news spins when Pope Francis speaks, but I also look at St. Peter did and said, and would probably have been upset by his own impulsive behavior... So I must remember the man and the office may not always seem to fit, but then again, our Lord promised that He would not abandon the Church.

@MrMarcodarko Жыл бұрын

I live in canada where there is no gun culture. Very little murder, and never have school shooting or people killing each other over dumb stuff. Trents arguments defending Guns is a very American argument. Be more like Canada

@littlerock5256 2 жыл бұрын

If one is going to go back in Church history and looks for precedents, one will not find "pope emeritus."

@existentialzenji918 Жыл бұрын

If you mean that there have never been Popes that have resigned, you're wrong. Pope Marcellinus resigned in 308 Pope Liberius resigned in 366 Pope John XVIII resigned in 1009 Pope Benedict IX resigned in 1045 Pope Celestine V resigned in 1294 Pope Gregory XII resigned in 1415 All of these popes would have been considered, possibly even referred to directly as "Pope Emeritus" after their resignation while they were still alive.

@littlerock5256 Жыл бұрын

@@existentialzenji918 I am aware that popes have resigned. I was referring to the honorary title of pope emeritus. You: "possibly even referred to directly as "Pope Emeritus"". By the use of "possibly" it is clear that you did not find this term used in conjunction with any of the popes you list. In addition, their circumstances do not lend to such an unproven and unsubstantiated supposition. Lastly, not all of these abdicated. "Pope Marcellinus resigned in 308": "elected 30 June, 296; died 304...his reign of eight years." Didn't resign and was deceased before 308. "Pope Liberius resigned in 366": Per the Catholic Encyclopedia, no record of resignation. Papacy ended the day of his death. "John XVIII resigned in 1009": All I could substantiate on him was that only one source indicated he "died as a monk". The Catholic Encyclopedia did not say he abdicated. "Benedict IX resigned in 1045": resigned his office so he could marry, tried to get it back, was driven from Rome. Absolutely no indication he would have had an honorary title. "Pope Celestine V resigned in 1294": dressed as hermit, not in papal white, yearned for his cell, Pope Boniface confined him closely in a narrow room in the tower of a castle outside of the Vatican. All this clearly indicates against an honorary papal title. "Pope Gregory XII resigned in 1415": he went into obscurity, no successor named until after his death 2 years later. Again, no indication of an honorary title nor do circumstances lend to it. These popes are all vastly different from Benedict XVI.

@existentialzenji918 Жыл бұрын

@@littlerock5256 emeritus is simply a title referring to a previous holder of an office. Any past pope that resigned during their tenure could legitimately be referred to as emeritus even in retrospect; however I do agree that the title is usually honorary and it may not necessarily fit any or all of these popes. Also, I have found contradictory biographies of Pope Marcellinus, I've seen where it says that he died in 303 or 304 and other sources stating that he died after his resignation in 308. (I'll try to find more information about these popes and the source information about Marcellinus)

@littlerock5256 Жыл бұрын

@@existentialzenji918 "emeritus is simply a title referring to a previous holder of an office." Yes, but emeritus was never applied to a pope. That is completely novel with Benedict XVI. "I have found contradictory biographies of Pope Marcellinus." I think you may be confusing or conflating him with St. Marcellus I who was, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, "elected pope in May or June, 308; died in 309...seized and sent into exile. This took place at the end of 308 or the beginning of 309... which gives the length of the pontificate as no more than one year, six (or seven) months, and twenty days. Marcellus died shortly after leaving Rome." No abdication is mentioned for him, either.

@Netro1992 8 ай бұрын

This argument that people who see a decline in the church should just got out to their free speech zones and just be very obnoxious in that hidden away square while the church allows people in authority to actively support things against church teaching is one of the most self defeating arguments I have ever heard because all it does it make people question the intentions of the church and it's validity due to its fruits.

@Syed_12 2 жыл бұрын

( Do Christians And Jews and "OTHER" non-Muslims go to Heaven? ) Quran 2:62 '' Those who believe (in the Quran) and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures) and the Christians and the Sabians->ANYAllah< Is The Protector Of Monasteries, Churches, Synagogues And The Mosques ) Quran 22:40 [They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, " Our Lord is God " And were it not that God checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of God is much mentioned. And God will surely support those who support Him. Indeed, God is Powerful and Exalted in Might. Note: Why did Allah protected Churches and Synagogues if they worship false Allah ? ( Why Are There So Many Different Religions In The World ? ) Quran 5 48 ''...... If God wanted He could have made all of you a single nation.( ie single religion ) But He willed otherwise in order to test you in what He has given you (ie Scriptures) therefore try to excel one another in good deeds. Ultimately you all shall return to God then He will show you the truth of those matters in which you '' >DISPUTE verb < not noun like other religions Islam mean "submission" to God ( The above verse saying is that God will not accept a religion from the >MUSLIM< and the Non-Muslims but total "submission" to God ) Question: How Can Muslim And the Non-Muslim "submit" to the God? Answer: Be kind to other human beings and Do not lie, Do not steal, Do not cheat, Do not hurt others, Do not be prideful and Do the charity work. Note: If you obeyed all the ABOVE Allah-God's moral laws "YOU" submitted to God.( ie Islam mean "submission" to God ) The only people who will enter Paradise those who '' Submitted to God '' ( ie by Good Deeds ) God does NOT accept your religion of birth but only ''Your Total'' Submission to Him. ( God Allows Interfaith Marriages And Eat Food From the Christian And Jew And Vice Versa ) Quran 5:5 ''This day [all] good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture (ie Christian and Jew) is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. And lawful in marriage are chaste women from among the believers (ie Muslim ) and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture (ie Christian and Jew) before you, when you have given them their due compensation, desiring chastity not unlawful sexual intercourse or taking [secret] lovers. And whoever denies the faith - his work has become worthless and he in the Hereafter will be among the losers.'' Note: > Only < Islam allows interfaith marriages (>14 hundredsSame God< but They are >ALL Corrupt< more or less, some more than others from their original foundational teaching. The older religion are MORE corrupted than newer religion. Question to Muslim and Christian: Does God / Allah only answer your pray ? And God / Allah does not answer non Muslim / non Christian pray? Did Allah '' Canceled '' all other religions Judaism and Christianity? Quran 5:48 '' And We have revealed to you [O Muhammad] the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture ( ie New and old Testament ) and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. >>>TO EACH OF YOU WE PRESCRIBED A LAW AND A METHODone nation>differ qualified < for to enter Paradise ) On the day of judgement God will ''NOT'' judge humanity bases on Sunni Muslim sect VS Shia Muslim sect ''NOR'' by Muslim VS non-Muslim >but< Doer of Goods VS Doer of Evils. '' YOUR " birth in the Muslim's family is NOT a > qualification < for to enter the Paradise. '' YOUR " religion / sect / foot long beard is NOT a > qualification < for to enter the Paradise. The > qualification < to enter Paradise is > Faith in God and Good Work

@kimberHD45 2 жыл бұрын

So according to the Sira and Hadiths, how did Mohammed, the perfect Muslim who all Muslims must imitate, treat kafir? No cherry picking, please.

@SupremeSkeptic 11 ай бұрын

The off-putting catholic apologist... are you referring to "how to be a christian"?

@JohnEButton 2 жыл бұрын

Michael is great except when his politics colors his theological commentary

@ultimateoriginalgod 2 жыл бұрын

What specifically?

@RobRod305 2 жыл бұрын

Name an instance?

@taylorcanon8890 2 жыл бұрын

Give an example please. I genuinely have no idea what you’re talking about and I watch him all the time.

@Michael-bk5nz 2 жыл бұрын

Do his politics color his theology or is it the other way around and how can you tell?

@JohnEButton 2 жыл бұрын

@@Michael-bk5nz if you listen to the conversation the two have, it's fairly clear

@hillcatrogers9086 2 жыл бұрын

Trent coming to Christianity through history - tradition passed down through the ages - and philosophically - Aristotle's logic - is not the way one comes to the God of revelation disclosed in the alien righteousness of the cross. Catholicism's God is the philosophers God - who is dead (Nietzsche). The Crucified God comes via the Kerygma ( Luther).

@tafazzi-on-discord Жыл бұрын

meds