DIALOGUE: Does Sola Scriptura Even Make Sense?

[@shaquilledaytoy3927]

Kelly Powers kept on repeating “aligning with scriptures” but he actually means “aligning with his interpretation of scriptures” as if he has the charism of infallibility.

[@rhwinner]

Correct. There are millions of people, some right here in the comments, whose interpretation of Scripture would make a Baptist (or a Methodist, or a Lutheran, or a Presbyterian...) cringe.

[@DarkHorseCrusader]

Every Protestant ends up becoming his own pope.

[@GhostBearCommander]

The problem is, the Pope and the Vatican tend to be very non-infallible on the best of days. Given how progressive the Pope is, the average American Baptist is likely more literate in the Bible than he is.

[@duocred1535]

​@@DarkHorseCrusader It depends, they normaly accept a confesion of faith

[@EpoRose1]

Yeah… it took him a long time to even answer when Trent asked him what he meant by it.

[@kylej.reeves4268]

🤣 Trent’s face at the end when he’s citing St. Gregory and St. Cyril… Trent knows the response to that so well.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

haha! -Vanessa

[@johnmorgan327]

Lol Trent knows it babbel

[@robsunners]

I think Kelly had been watching Bryan Wolfmueller for prep first. It didn't work out very well.

[@Nrev973]

🤦🏾‍♂️ when I was a Protestant the doctrine of sola scriptura makes it so hard to see anything outside of it. Watching him struggle in this way was fascinating. What makes it worse is that it’s self refuting and arbitrary 😱. Thank you Trent for this conversation, when he brought up the church fathers I knew you were gonna go in for the kill (metaphorically).

[@TruthHasSpoken]

He didn't really understand who he was quoting, Catholic Bishops who celebrated the Mass as Trent highlighted.

[@EucharisticFeces]

Leave it to a Catholic to "go in for the kill", as you say. 😂

[@manuelpompa-u5e]

yeah, it's easier when you have something like the roman catholic church tell you what to think...

[@frederickanderson1860]

Read Isaiah chapter 29 why the Jews rejected jesus and the truth of the prophecies was sealed from them. Romans chapter 11 goes against the Catholic church dogma of them as the true successors.

[@Nrev973]

@@frederickanderson1860 could you explain what verse? And why?

[@johnsayre2038]

Good talk. Grew up non-denom, pastored by a Dallas Theological grad (a good man). Reading the Bible was the very thing that started my journey out of Protestantism, to my mind it pointed beyond itself, and the paradigm/ ecclesiology I grew up with seemed to me then and now incoherent and lacking. However, it is good to revisit these topics, I find the longer I am Catholic the more difficult it is for me to comprehend any of the Protestant positions, so it's good to go back and hear where these folks are coming from, so we don't become too disconnected and unable to have meaningful discussions. Trent always seems to have the ability to speak with kindness but clarity and conviction and I appreciate that.

[@secessionblog3189]

Well said, my experience with the ecclesial paradigm was similar. Let's keep praying for our separated brethren that they one day find the fullness of Truth and the joy herein!

[@Stronghold511]

“Reading the Bible was the very thing that started my journey out of Protestantism, to my mind it pointed beyond itself” So we’ll put. I experienced the exact same thing when I left. There’s such a lack of bigger picture when talking to evangelicals it’s hard to dialogue with them.

[@johnsayre2038]

@@Stronghold511 some, sure. I've met some that are sharp tacks and excel in the theological virtues to be sure, and some that think of the paradosis going from Jesus, to Paul, then straight to Luther and Billy Graham. A mixed bag like any faith community. We must exercise the "Apostolate of the ear" a phrase I read in a Pope Francis interview. We all are no doubt guilty of only listening to bide our time before jumping in w/ our apologetic sound byte. That is a temptation to resist. Speak the truth boldly, but we must also listen with the same patience we would want to be afforded, and I think folks like Trent, J. Akin, Suan S. do a good job at that.

[@TimSpangler-rd6vs]

@@johnsayre2038 THE Faith was ONCE delivered...and didnt need to be developed over many centuries...

[@johnsayre2038]

@@TimSpangler-rd6vs well, not according to Jesus' promise in John 16 for the Holy Spirit to "guide you into all truth". And yes indeed, Catholics also have the epistle of Jude which you cited, in our Bibles. I read it many times as a young Protestant, we could walk the "Roman Road" together, talk about all manner of doctrines that are well-intended no doubt, but man-made 16th century innovations. Anyhow, I admit I quoted John, but I do think the "proof-texting" approach is destined to fail to convince most Catholics w/ any grounding in church history, the Fathers and a bit of philosophy and the various approaches to textual criticism, just for what it's worth. I'd recommend this brief article in addition to having a read through the Catholic Catechism, Ott's "Fundamentals", Nichols' "The Shape of Catholic Theology", and Newman's "Essay...Development". Perhaps you have read all these books, I don't know. They won't convince somebody against their will, but at least you will know what you are fighting against, versus a caricature that you may have been told is the Catholic Church. All the best and God bless. jimmyakin.com/2020/07/jude-3-and-sola-scriptura-the-faith-once-for-all-delivered.html

[@xbaker_x]

Lord, I pray for those who don't have yet the courage like Trent to say "The catholic church that Jesus Christ established" in front of non catholics! Amen!

[@EucharisticFeces]

I pray that the yukarist taste less like feces.

[@My10thAccount]

I’m genuinely so tired of this weakness that has infected the Church seemingly from top to bottom. It’s one thing if your average lay person doesn’t have this kind of rock solid commitment, it’s not necessarily their place to be iron bastions of the faith. They just need to believe it and live it, knowing it isn’t a necessity for the laity. However people who run personal Catholic education services for the public and the Church Authority itself absolutely should. The latter are obliged to that by their oaths at ordination and the latter clearly assume a similar kind of oath if not the same one. I’m always concerned when I profess the fact that The Catholic Church is the Church established by Christ, because all it takes now for a Protestant to completely reject church authority is to point vaguely towards Vatican II which in its vagueness allowed for a completely nonsensical interpretation of Catholicism to take root in the institution of the Church. Even the Church won’t back up those who fervently profess the faith anymore, which is half of their damned job. It’s unbelievably irritating that we have to subject ourselves to the muddy trenches of heretical dogma, because our own Church lowered the bar to the point where anybody who vaguely professes Christ is a Christian. Either Catholicism is true or it isn’t, there is no halfway. Ave Christus Rex ✝️🇻🇦

[@EucharisticFeces]

@@My10thAccount The holy Eucharist is the reconciliation and is dog poop.

[@gto2111]

A few times, Kelly does not answer the questions; he just says random stuff.

[@gto2111]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r Kelly does the same things in debates with other Protestants.

[@michaels7325]

Can you timestamp those spots for reference please

[@gto2111]

@@michaels7325Sure, is there anything else I can help you with?

[@lindahernandez8693]

He deflects, as usual.

[@michele-33]

"Because it doesn't line up" is Kelly's favorite response.. He couldn't explain the meaning when Trent asked..

[@libertasinveritas3198]

"I want to know what Jesus taught" - he taught that whatever is bound on earth and loosened on earth by his established Church will be bound and loosened in heaven. Developing tradition is - obviously - included. "The gates of hell shall not prevail against it (the church)."

[@johnbrowne2170]

Catholics have many beliefs, especially Mary, not found in the Bible. That's what causes division.

[@EHMD11111]

@@johnbrowne2170 What is a Bible? What is the criteria for what a Bible is and from where does this criteria come?

[@johnbrowne2170]

@@EHMD11111 I can't help you if you don't know where the Old and New Testaments came from and who inspired them to write the words that God promised would never go away. Catholics problem is that they are taught the traditions of men are equal to the word of God but all that did was produce a giant cult with an awful history of violence, torture, destruction and perversion up to this very day.

[@den8863]

@@johnbrowne2170Much of the Marian dogmas are from the book of revelation, which was added by the bishops of the Catholic Church to the New Testament of the bible. Other books such as the gospels according to Peter or James were not included by similar bishops of the Catholic Church.

[@ajgg1459]

Good stuff Trent, Kelly seems nice and charitable but this just proves how incoherent Sola Scriptura is.

[@thecatechumen]

1:24:21 As a student of Church history, it just baffles me how one could seriously claim some of the late 4th century fathers ("and some even before as well") practiced Sola Scriptura. However, I can see how someone could take the quotations he provided and, without further research, assume they believed in Sola Scriptura.

[@NeilD-q7j]

I found that odd as well, but I think many Protestants believe that. I wonder if James White believes that.

[@billcynic1815]

The typical methodology is to do something like "Cntr+F: 'Scripture'", scan for quotes that give a high place to Scripture, and lift them out. It's how someone could believe St Irenaus taught _sola scripture_ even though _Against Heresies 3:2-3_ directly contradicts this. Or how Anthony Rogers thought that St Jerome taught _sola fide._ Unfortunately for Mr. Rogers, he was quoting psuedo-Jerome, which was actually Pelagius, who didn't exactly teach the Protestant understanding of _sola fide._ But that's what happens when you quote mine.

[@HannahClapham]

@thecatechumen. I suggest you go back and study a bit more. The consensus of scholars is that the early church fathers thought that the truths of Scripture and Tradition were coterminous. And you can see this in how they approach apologetics almost entirely from Scripture. Or you could simply go to Gavin Ortlund’s demonstration of Augustine’s being a defender of Sola Scriptura.

[@NeilD-q7j]

@@HannahClapham The consensus of the scholars is that 2 Peters was not written by Peter but was a forgery. Just sayin' :) Besides, where did you read of the said consensus? Any paper or article that surveys the scholarship? I am assuming you didnt read all the scholars yourself. :)

[@billcynic1815]

@@HannahClapham I would be careful about trusting my scholarship on this issue to Gavin Ortlund. He has a bad habit of quotemining the patristics, and other sources. For example, his quotemine of St John Chrysostom Homily 33 on Acts to prove that St Chrysostom believed _sola scriptura,_ and stops his quotation just three sentences before St John presents the hypothetical question of an inquirer who wonders what group to join when so many say they follow the plain meaning of Scripture yet have such diversity; he responds to follow those authorities in the Church, those who have governed the Church and are in continuity faithfully teaching what those who previously presided over and governed the Church said. And that's not even getting into the context of the homily of a defense of Church Authority, Councils, and Tradition, since it's on the Counsel of Jerusalem. In another video criticizing Purgatory, he cites and uses as an outline Brian Dailey's _The Hope of the Early Church._ He quotes from page 100 and says that Dailey thinks St Ambrose is unclear on if souls undergo purgatorial fire after death or not. However, on page 99, Daily explicitly affirms that St Ambrose believes this, and the quote in context from page 100 is that St Ambrose is unclear what happens to the soul after this post-mortem purgation, which Dailey fleshes out a few pages later. I have also seen response videos of Gavin to critics where he clips them in very disingenuous ways, such as when he clipped Agnus Domini saying that Agnus was accusing him of quotemining in a certain instance, but cuts off Agnus a second before Agnus says that this instance was _not_ an example of quotemining. You can check Agnus Domini's channel for more; he does a good job covering this. I would like to believe these sorts of instances are accidental, careless oversights. But I think Gavin's too smart for that, and spends too much time and effort in his videos. This to say, I suspect you got this notion primarily from Gavin's videos. Be careful trusting him. He hides behind a shield of niceness and accusing critics of misrepresenting him or lack of charity, when he engages in at least some verifiably disingenuous tactics. I chose the ones I did because they are the most obvious I know that he's misrepresenting his sources, but I would not trust his portrayal on what the scholarship or patristics say, even when he's citing sources.

[@euengelion]

I’m glad I watched this. It simply solidifies my faith as a newly baptised Catholic. I pray that Protestants open their heart to the fullness of the Truth. May Christ’s peace be with us all.

[@My10thAccount]

As much as they raise my ire and in my worst moments I express strong opinions against them, I feel the same way in my heart. Pray most of all for those outside the Church. They need prayers more so than anyone who exists safely within The Iron Bastion of the Church.

[@francesanne15]

The humility sets the difference… Trent is just so compassionate and humble… It’s always humbling if you know the truth 🙏🏼 we are Catholics 💪🏼

[@ChaosOmnimon]

I greatly appreciate both of you excellent apologists. I am a newly confirmed Catholic (Sunday of the Most Holy Trinity 2024), though I've been singing with a Catholic church choir for several years before my confirmation. I decided to dive head first into apologetics and learning as much as I could about the Faith. I'm hoping to help the new director of faith formation at the parish I attend with sparking a new/renewed interest in the holy Catholic and apostolic church.

[@christinemcguiness9356]

Thank you for your testimony. God bless you🙏

[@rhwinner]

❤

[@deanhockenberry9268]

A very interesting discussion that I enjoyed because it went into the weeds deep. Many friends and fellow church members over the years used the phrase, “remember to keep the main thing the main thing”. It felt like they were saying they believe in salvation through Jesus so the rest of their beliefs were something I should ignore or not question. That is so surface level to me.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thank you for sharing your insights, Dean! -Vanessa

[@3339ty]

Thanks for all your hard work Trent, I always appreciate it when a new video of yours drops!

[@lisalamb1896]

Trent your question at the end and his answer sealed up this painful conversation. Very thankful I am entering into the Catholic Church. Thankyou Trent Horn!

[@Jerome616]

Trent was cooking at the end there. I love these discussions, keep em coming.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

More to come! Thank you! -Vanessa

[@My10thAccount]

⁠@@TheCounselofTrent Your patience with heresy is much greater than mine, that’s for certain. I was utterly repulsed by the infirmity and weakness this man brought to us today. It disgusts me that we have to lower ourselves to these muddy trenches because we can’t make authoritative statements anymore because our Church doesn’t back us. Now we have to wade through the mire and set Catholic treasures on the same level as the world’s filth, instead of rightfully condemning that which is evil and definitely pointing to that which is good. I suppose it’s a fitting penance to atone for the weakness of our predecessors.

[@BuffetNeverDies]

Props to you for having conversations like this Trent! You always do a great job making our positions look consistent and logical.

[@timboslice980]

SS makes it impossible to remove yourself as an ultimate authority

[@josiahhockenberry9846]

Precisely. Those who deny the authority of The Church make themselves their own Pope.

[@geoffrobinson]

the fatal flaw of your objection is everyone is the last link in the chain in every paradigm, so your point becomes either moot or silly

[@HannahClapham]

@timboslice980. Geoff Robinson is exactly right. MOTHER NATURE makes it impossible to remove ourselves as an ultimate authority. If you foist those decisions onto somebody else, it’s still you doing the foisting. In other words, Catholics are just as guilty. (This might be an argument you all should wish to retire. It goes nowhere.)

[@timboslice980]

@@geoffrobinson No, i think it shows the flaw in yours. The bible says to submit to your elders. If your elders make you believe something contrary to your interpretation of scripture, what do you do? Change your interpretation or change your church? For the catholic, we change our interpretation. We submit to the authority of the church over our own personal interpretations. There is wiggle room on many issues but not on the most important ones. For the protestant, you just go to the next church in your circle or change denominations. Lets look at the Presbyterian church, at some point the elders of that church insanely decided on LGBT inclusion. The presbyterians who couldnt accept their position formed their own denomination and split apart rather than submitting. So which of these two groups was in the right? Was it the liberals who ignored god’s word and introduced a new heresy? Or are the conservatives in the wrong for not obeying scripture when it says to submit to your elders? Of course i believe both groups are in the wrong. The presbys that included LGBT proved they have no real authority when they use it to teverse god’s word. The second group is in the wrong because they won’t submit to their authorities and therefore make themselves the authority. Both groups ignore god’s word and pay the price. The church is the pillar of truth, if you do not listen to the church, be treated as a gentile and tax collector, lean not on your own understanding, and no prophecy of scripture ever came from one’s own interpretation…. Clearly they dont believe in those verses. Christ prayed that we remain one body…. Yet most Protestants think god fully intended for the schisms. I submit to the church and if it ever tried to make me accept something i found to be heretical, i would strive to change my opinion rather than change the church. You think i stay in the church because i agree with it’s interpretations but thats not true. It happens to have a perfect theology but that’s not what keeps me there. It’s the full harmony of how it all works together the theology is just one piece of it. Scientifically verified catholic specific miracles, the genuine love i feel from the parish, the love i feel from catholics world wide, the dedication in it’s charity work, the spirit of reunion that it shows the other christian groups, the rich history and tradition, my own progress against sin that i never achieved as a protestant, and above all. I feel much much closer to christ. Another fact to consider are the many martyrs of the faith who died for christ without ever knowing what sola scriptura even was.

[@NeilD-q7j]

@@geoffrobinson When 1000 people who all claim to have expert Bible knowledge disagree on basic, foundational things, and claim they have equal authority to have the final say - it lends to a moot or a silly system. Thats the fatal flaw. I personally dont agree with the Catholic church on many things, but I submit to her teachings because I believe she has the authority bestowed on her by Christ. I may be wrong, but my system ensures for non-contradictory views. Sola Scriptura is the opposite system. In principle it makes sense - scripture can afterall said to have but one true interpretation - however in practice the said true interpretation is impossible to arrive at with any level of certitude because it heavily depends on personal biased opinions of people molding their interpretations without any ability to self correct. To put it differently, in the Catholic system only the Church is said to have the ultimate guidance of the Spirit to not err. Hence there cannot by definition be equal in authority and contradictory views. In the Protestant system, the ultimate guidance of the Spirit is said to be given to all believers - and yet they arrive at diverse opinions which each of them believe are authoritative because they represent the Biblical views in their mind. The system is flaw because it is deficient and incoherent. All of this goes way beyond the ultimate subjectivism in decision making that all humans suffer from. The fatal flaw IS IN THE system, not the humans operating within the system.

[@bencook6585]

It was checkmate when he brought up the church fathers quotes out of context. Just dodged the questions to get out of it. Surely he knows that these men he quoted, who were largely bishops themselves, didn't hold to sola scriptura

[@dualtags4486]

Protestants treat the fathers like they do scriptures. They quote mine and create their own interpretations.

[@cheryl0327]

What is the fruit of Sola Scriptura? Division, confusion, misinterpretation.

[@jd3jefferson556]

I don't understand how folks that believe in Sola scriptura still believe crazy things like faith alone, or its impossible to lose your salvation. I've read the New Testament, and most of it is pretty straightforward. Faith alone is definitely not in there, and warnings about how to lose your salvation all over the place

[@giovanibenjamin9655]

Sola scriptura is hot 🗑️because of this doctrine it have caused more division than anything in history.30,000+ different denominations. Can’t agree on just about anything

[@giovanibenjamin9655]

Sola scriptura is the #1 doctrine that cause divis*on

[@niccolopaganini1782]

​@@giovanibenjamin9655 please stop, this 30,000 or 40,000 figure has been debunked atleast 30,000 or 40,000 times before.

[@giovanibenjamin9655]

@@niccolopaganini1782 not my fault this happened, I used to be a Protestant myself and used to speak ill things about the Catholic Church then I grew up and realized I was being a hypocrite, I pointed all the fingers of every “ probl*m “ of the church without looking and realizing that Protestantism is full of hypocr*sy, so I’ll speak on 30,000+ denominations thing because it shows that everybody and their mother think they’re their own authority and even make excuses for y they won’t attend church or believe in essentials like the trinity because certain exact words aren’t found in the Bible. The po*son of Protestantism leads to a lot of excuses and all sorts of fallacies, almost dumm*ng ppl down to believe anything. U can be ups*t if u want, but u can not deny it

[@johnmorgan327]

Hello Trent. I'm a non- Catholic long time listener. You are my favorite Catholic apologist. I just wanted to say. I don't know how you were able to suffer through this smorgasbord of babble coming from Kelly. Honestly, most Protestants should not be on KZbin telling anyone anything.

[@MarkelBeverley]

Protestants are wrong all together actually no Protestant should be on YT telling anyone anything.

[@truanashabadapressure6621]

I’ve met some awesome and very thoughtful Protestants on KZbin, Kelly hasn’t been one of them in my interactions with him.

[@johnmorgan327]

@@truanashabadapressure6621 He probably is a nice & thoughtful guy, but he clearly hasn't thought through his views well at all. He needs to learn the 3 hardest words for Protestants to say, " I DON'T KNOW". We're dealing with eternal souls here, and KZbin is not the forum for guesswork and false babble.

[@MarkelBeverley]

No protestant should be telling anyone anything.

[@johnmorgan327]

​@@MarkelBeverley lol

[@rickydettmer2003]

I appreciate Kelly’s spirit of cordiality in this conversation. Sadly though I found this dialogue a bit lacking. I don’t mean to be rude, but it just at times seemed like Kelly would just go back to the same answer or “well when I open the scriptures this is how I see it”. It didn’t seem like he was able to answer Trent’s questions when it came to authority

[@christenh359]

That’s exactly what I noted too.

[@hollygosser3754]

Or "one time a Catholic told me I'm going to hell because I don't believe X doctrine"...mmkay but that doesn't refute the doctrine itself.

[@mythologicalmyth]

Because he would lose an actual PfP debate.

[@milagrosnegron8597]

Wow! Trent is a very patient human being! Either Mr. Powers wasn’t understanding Trent’s questions and more importantly WHY he was asking him those questions specifically or he was just avoiding answering them. Mr. Powers contradicted himself so many times! Trent was so charitable to him.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thank you for this comment! -Vanessa

[@PuzzlesC4M]

He’s confused and thinks Trent is asking him for his theological opinions on the issues. Rather, Trent wanted him to answer what authority he had to interpret those issues in the first place. If two opponents are both using Sola Scriptura to argue opposite positions, their ultimate authority is themselves.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thanks for this analysis! -Vanessa

[@richvestal767]

The straight answer is, no, Sola Scriptura doesn't make sense because Scripture isn't just some general educational textbook but rather a very specifically a high-context document. Meaning that it has to be read within a very specific ethical, philosophical, and cultural framework i.e. the Jewish culture. There is no such thing as interpretation of the Bible through a Biblical Framework because the Bible doesn't provide the Framework only humans can do that. This is exactly the problem of what David Hume called the Naturalistic Fallacy: you cannot derive "ought" from "is." The Bible itself doesn't establish itself as the sole authority or the final authority, people who are outside of the Bible are imposing that ethic onto the Bible outside of it. Which means that attempting to apply a 16th century European ethical and philosophical framework as the interpretative hermeneutical approach to the Bible is ridiculously erroneous and inappropriate and by doing so you're necessarily going to get things wrong because save for some minimal overlap there is no real correspondence between those two frames. There has to be somewhere, some organization, where the original Ethical Framework that was held by the original authors of the manuscripts that make up the Bible is preserved and maintained.

[@ChrisSadowski-pp1np]

The Catholic Church only has an interpretation for about a handful of verses in the whole Bible . All to support false doctrines. John 3:5 infant baptism. That verse simply says that you're going to get the inflow of the spirit and speak in tongues after getting baptized. God leaving us a church to teach us. First. Timothy 3:15. Constantine is what started the Catholic church. Follow all the false encyclicals from Rome 2. Thessalonians 2:15. Peter was the first Pope. Matthew 16:18 which is not true because Peter was the small Stone. John 1:42 whereas Jesus was The Rock. Matthew 7:24, 1st Corinthians 10:4. Confess your sins to a priest. John 20:23, Matthew 16:19, 18:18 which instead is just saying we as Christians can proclaim forgiveness to someone who accepts the good news. 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 to support purgatory which all that is referring to is people in the ministry and their actions. Second Maccabees can't be used to support it because that's not scripture. Luke 1:28 referring to Mary is blessed to support exalting her even though a woman in the Bible tried doing that in Luke 11:27 and was shot down by Jesus. She wasn't born without original sin. Luke 1:47, she didn't remain a virgin Matthew 1: 25, She had additional children. Matthew 12:46-50, Mark 6:1-4, John 7, acts 1:14, Galatians 1:19. And she died like everyone else. Only Enoch Genesis 5 and Elijah second Kings chapter 2 went to heaven without dying.

[@matthewoburke7202]

@@ChrisSadowski-pp1np That is demonstrably false. 1. Read the catechism, or any other authoritative Church document, where they provide literally hundreds if not thousands of uses and citations of scripture. To say the Church has only used it's authority to interpret scripture a few times is simply a myth, and all you have to do to see that it is false is go read what the Church teaches. 2. No, Constantine did not start the Catholic Church. Go read the pre-nicene Fathers who wrote before Constantine was born and guess what you are going to find? Catholic doctrines, such as the real presence in the eucharist, Apostolic succession, baptismal regeneration, etc. Stop getting your information from anti-catholics, and go study the early Church for yourself.

[@SeanusAurelius]

1) The Reformers had access to the Church Fathers and classical texts, so it's not like they were completely culturally isolated from the context of the Bible. Far less so, in fact, than the early medievals and scholastics that preceded them, and an awful lot of Catholic doctrine is from that more culturally ignorant era. 2) The inspired word of God is intrinsically, self evidently ontologically different to something that is not. 3) The Bible does actually establish its own framework to a remarkable degree. You simply can't read it and get e.g. progressive Christianity, or Buddhism, or anarchism, etc. Protestantism remains Western, Nicene, and mutually intelligible with Catholicism. 4) Why would there have to be a specific human organisation rather than a spiritual reality like the body of Christ (i.e. the Protestant invisible church)? Is man doing this alone? It makes all the difference in the world if God is actively guiding the (invisible) church.

[@trismegistus2881]

@@SeanusAurelius1 your assessment of the medieval era is really wrong and out of date. The Latin patristics were read, copied and preserved throughout the Middle Ages, although the Greek Fathers were largely forgotten in the West. The Scholastics were great intellectuals, and the Reformers learned a lot from them.

[@richvestal767]

@@SeanusAurelius 1) And the Pharisees had God in the flesh speaking directly to them and it still didn't do them any favors. Confirmation bias is just a fact of the psychology of human perception. You don't just get to make up a rule that allows you to side-step attempts at falsification or by asserting that your peculiar ideological interpretations are Canonical by pointing to cherry picked texts that **seem* to justify them absent from any other corroboration. Even Scripture says that testimony must be corroborated by three witnesses, not just one. 2) That's nothing but you engaging in circular reasoning. 3) Except that's exactly what people all over the place do all the time. The very fact that Sola Scriptura cannot keep this from happening is de facto evidence against your assertion. 4) I didn't say anything about a mere *human* organization. And the Church is definitely NOT a merely invisible "spiritual" organization, it is the actual Kingdom of God that Christ, the descendant of the Davidic Royal dynasty and the fulfillment of God's promises to the Jews, proclaimed from the beginning of His ministry. Your "interpretation" of what the Church is supposed to be is exactly the sort of example of the 16th century European ethical Framework being erroneously applied to the Bible that I'm talking about. If you tried explaining your ecclesiology to a first century Jewish Christian they'd look at you like you had three heads. If I asked them where they are partaking of the Eucharist they'd know exactly what I'm asking and invite me to follow them.

[@matts-7566]

he doesn't answered which authority we should follow or trust, Protestant will ignore that question and basically 'i studied scripture then i interpret it by myself'. Glad we only have one Pope, true Vicar of Christ on Earth while Protestant basically making themselves as a Pope, plenty of Popes. and spot on with his double standard on Exodus talked by Jesus & Paul but won't take Early Church Fathers testimonies about Assumption of Mary. thankfully is it a dialogue, if this was a debate he already lose it at the early mins.

[@jd3jefferson556]

​@user-rg4ni2hr6rthe Church can't ever change her doctrines or dogmas, where as sola scriptura folks don't follow any ecumenical councils, and any doctrine and dogma can change in protestantism. If the Catholic Church ever changed a doctrine, then that would disprove the faith.

[@jd3jefferson556]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r right and sedevecantists are just another branch of Protestants that reject the authority Christ established on earth. Idk what you're point is. Threw every age, the children of God have resisted the authority of the Church. That's why we have so many schisms, long before Martin Luther was ever born

[@heyman.712]

​@user-rg4ni2hr6r definitely agree. From a Catholic perspective Sedevacantism is incoherent.

[@yoyeo1900]

@@jd3jefferson556 They reformed indulgences. Faithless...

[@jonathanmorris2283]

@@jd3jefferson556that’s the problem with SS. It’s all just your own interpretation of the bible, whereas in the Catholic Church which may I let you know if you don’t already IS the church that was built on the rock. It is the church Jesus founded. So we have our leaders who can only interpret it 1 way to teach us, not you Protestants who interpret it 100000000x differently to your pastor. That’s why you Protestants have about 10k churches, not one of you agree with your pastor, so you go to bible college, study to become a pastor so that you can go and start a new church 🤣 sounds like a bunch of jokers to me

[@harley6659]

This month starting off with a banger

[@FeroxMinisterium]

Thank you Trent for this discussion! This video has STRENGTHENED my Catholic faith!

[@brianelis9249]

Thanks for providing quality, respectful, and non-polemically charged content. I think it goes a long way in highlighting some central issues for those questioning where their faith should rest.

[@shannonglasford9175]

You can't define "line up with scripture" by using the phrase.

[@secessionblog3189]

Glad I'm not the only one bothered by this 😂

[@tedbrilliant]

@@secessionblog3189❤

[@ritav89]

Dear Kelly Powers, I really enjoyed this! You are so calm, respectful and down-right sweet! I am a revert to Catholicism (reluctantly) from Calvary Chapel! May I hold hope that in your talks with God and in true humility, that you (and I) are asking HIM, where we are wrong and where we lean on our own understanding, KNOWING He will guide and answer us. God bless your daily journey to Truth Himself!

[@ritav89]

And the authority of Truth Himself could never be confined to a front and back cover of the Good book!

[@nathangraham2189]

This was a frustrating dialogue. At around an hour and a half in, Trent asked him what he would say about the universality of belief in baptismal regeneration from the first century forward, and he straight up ignored this and absurdly, blithely claimed there was “lots” of different opinions in Church history on this. There was not, it’s a bedrock fact of history that this was a universal belief from AD 33 forward, and no Christian writer anywhere within orthodox belief says otherwise. If you just make up your own history when real history is against you it’s hard to have any productive dialogue.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thanks for noting this! -Vanessa

[@nathangraham2189]

@@TheCounselofTrent Definitely! As a Catholic convert who read my way into the Church, I’m always very irked when Protestants move from not just misreading the Bible, but to pulling out of context quotes from Early Church Fathers and misreading them too. Ortlund does this a LOT, and it’s disheartening to see others do it. Even Zwingli was at least intellectually honest enough to make the breathtakingly bold claim that “When it comes to baptismal regeneration I can only say that all the doctors and the fathers are in error”! Pax Christi.

[@Ladya12345]

Another great conversation Trent! You demonstrate excellent knowledge and also impeccable charity in these conversations! I know we are all really thankful to learn from you in both regards!

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thank you so much for this positive feedback! -Vanessa

[@ellenandrews9486]

I didn't understand where Kelly was going when he started the discussion about "How would you define the gospel if we only had Paul's letters?" That whole hypothetical seemed like a rabbit trail to me. Can someone explain why this question was part of the SS discussion? Thank you.

[@tonyl3762]

He quoted Irenaeus who says all Christians must agree with the Church of Rome. How could Irenaeus be affirming sola Scriptura then? "...by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere." (Against Heresies, 3, 3, 2-3) "It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to the perfect apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men...." (Against Heresies 3, 3, 1) “Where, therefore, the gifts of the Lord have been placed, there it behooves us to learn the truth, [namely,] from those who possess that succession of the Church which is from the apostles and among whom exists that which is sound and blameless in conduct, as well as that which is unadulterated and incorrupt in speech. For these also preserve this faith of ours in one God who created all things; and they increase that love [which we have] for the Son of God, who accomplished such marvellous dispensations for our sake: and they expound the Scriptures to us without danger, neither blaspheming God, nor dishonouring the patriarchs, nor despising the prophets.” (Against Heresies, 4, 26, 5; Ch. 26 is entitled “THE TRUE EXPOSITION OF THE SCRIPTURES IS TO BE FOUND IN THE CHURCH ALONE“)

[@lifematterspodcast]

The Protestant degradation of sexual morality is tragic.

[@duocred1535]

What did they degradate?

[@lifematterspodcast]

@@duocred1535 that the marital act is between a husband and wife must be unitive and procreative.

[@duocred1535]

@@lifematterspodcast ¿what if they already have sons and just want to do it for fun?

[@duocred1535]

@@lifematterspodcast teologicaly Ortodox Protestang don't accept gay marriege

[@lifematterspodcast]

@@duocred1535 the act must always be unitive and procreative. You can do some research into the Theology of the Body & what the Catholic Church teaches if you have more questions. I am specifically referencing how the Protestant in this video is not against a various number of sins listed. Homosexual relationships & actions cannot be anything other than intrinsically evil, but outside of this issue many Protestants support other grave actions even between married couples

[@calledtorome]

This man waffles (with all due respect). He was running away from answering all the questions. The question of authority he just ignored altogether. All he gave was his opinion on what he thinks scripture says. So are we just supposed to trust him?

[@fotisvon9943]

just another protestant pope

[@egggmann2000]

Sola scriptura feels like having a constitution without a Supreme Court.

[@donhaddix3770]

Catholic believe they speak for God. the have been proven wrong so many times.

[@bridgefin]

@@donhaddix3770 Proven wrong? Name once.

[@donhaddix3770]

@@bridgefin Mary had sex

[@Truthmatters-]

Except that the Sola Scripture is both the Constitution and Supreme Court at the same time. We should never compare God’s Word to worldy law and institutions!

[@bridgefin]

@@Truthmatters- If SS were the Supreme Court then issues would be resolved and there would be one church and not one church and 40,000, or whatever the number, of denominations. The founding fathers in the United States were wise enough to realize that the Constitution by itself would bring chaos and the supreme court was needed to settle issues of interpretation. Either those men were smarter than God or else God took care of that by establishing one church and providing it both truth and authority. All the rest are rebels to his divine plan.

[@benjaminshirley]

I find it highly ironic, this apologists' show is called "Berean" Perspective. Paul is praising them for accepting the 'new" message of the Gospel. The other Jewish communities in Thessalonica rejected Paul, based on the same line of reasoning found in Sola Scriptura. Both examined the scripture (3 weeks in Thessalonica!). The Thessalonian Jews decided his message contradicted the Torah. While the "noble-minded" Bereans accepted the "new" message from Paul, because they were open-minded to the new revelations. They weren't noble, because they searched the scriptures. Both groups did! Protestants, in their eagerness to support Sola Scriptura miss this point. I'd say this reading is very "perspicuous" to the average reader. 😉

[@felipeneves9571]

Very good point.

[@geoffrobinson]

The paradigm in Scripture is new revelation is verified by previous revelation (Scripture since oral cannot be completely trusted). New Testament tells us there isn’t any more new revelation coming.

[@jdotoz]

​@@geoffrobinsonIt does?

[@EmberBright2077]

​@@geoffrobinson Why can an orally transmitted Word of God not be trusted?

[@LIlFro-]

Yoo good point

[@christinemcguiness9356]

Great dialogue. God bless you both🙏

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thank you! -Vanessa

[@BrewMeister27]

Trent: "Protestants using Sola Scriptura hold a variety of views on this subject. How can we determine who's right?" Kelly: "Here's my position on that issue. It's supported by Scripture." 🤦 Why do Protestants struggle so much to discuss broader concepts?

[@Qohelethful]

The answer is that we can’t know with 100% certainty and pretending that we can know is incredibly arrogant.

[@d.h.5407]

@@QohelethfulBy God’s grace, we have Christ’s Church to guide His people in the Truth.

[@Qohelethful]

@@d.h.5407 in the generic sense yes. But the church makes up a lot of crap. I have faith that it’s not salvation contingent crap but there’s a lot of purely human ideas wrapped up in rationalization in the church. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being Catholic but the extras oh boy.

[@BrewMeister27]

@@Qohelethful Extras like the New Testament canon of Scripture? The Catholic Church came up with that.

[@Qohelethful]

@@BrewMeister27 the Catholic Church did, whatever remains after 2 major schisms and a ton of minor ones isn’t the Catholic Church of 382.

[@zekdom]

Time-stamps 50:00, 52:57, 54:55 - Mikvah 50:50, 51:22 - more on baptism 53:17 - Acts 19 and John’s baptism 54:42 - in the name of 53:50 - the Didache

[@alissarehmert2502]

As a student in English Literature, I find people often have the issue of thinking their interpretation of a text is "clearly" correct. It doesn't matter if their interpretation doesn't adhere to the historical context, the coherency of the author's other works, or, oftentimes, even the words of the author themselves. While it is great if these things align with their interpretation, it is not necessary. The same thing can be said about many Protestants, though the interpretation of scripture is infinitely more important than that of literature. I say this as an ex-Protestant herself who now looks back at my previous beliefs and can SO clearly see how I was guilty of "leaning on my own understanding" of scripture. I trusted in my interpretation of scripture above all else. I would say, "Well, I don't see that in scripture" (there is that pesky "I" -- always getting in the way). If someone, especially a Pastor, taught something contradictory, I would feel like it was my prerogative to move to a new church -- one that taught the "truth of scripture" (aka one that agreed with my interpretation). It is maddening now that I see it. I pray Kelly and all other Protestants see it one day, too.

[@Stronghold511]

Dialogue with Evangelicals tends to go how this one went. They’re so confident their interpretation is not only correct, but the only logical conclusion. They memorize verses they think supports their claim without taking the larger picture into consideration (church history, church fathers, the entirety of scripture). They end up just preach to you to “share the gospel” with someone who they think isn’t saved. It’s infuriating and why I left to become Catholic. Confidence, conviction, and memorization of scripture verses cannot make up for a lack of coherence.

[@PantalonRouge]

Facts. Evangelicals seem to think that knowing lots of Scripture by heart and randomly quoting it makes you a better Christian, even though, when you look at them, they don’t live by those Words.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thank you for sharing ! -Vanessa

[@B_Thornsb5974]

But you are assuming the RCC has the right interpretation. Everyone in some way think they have the right interpretations.

[@onlylove556]

@@TheCounselofTrent Lord bless u Trent. U have helped me out so much in my life, I can't even put it into words. But u have been such a blessing in my life. So thank u so much. I pray that the Lord keeps blessing u, & your family. Lord bless u brother 💯

[@pdxnikki1]

Life isn't just words on a page. The sacred requires sacraments not just Scripture.

[@shanahendricks9831]

Every time a protestant tries to argue against Catholicism we should ask the question, okay say you right...what do I do now? You leading me away from one thing, so who and what are you leading me to? What does that look like?

[@Qohelethful]

It looks like a good faith best effort arrived at with humility. It’s what Catholics are doing now, minus the humility, but they just don’t realize it.

[@menghic531]

I want to put my head through a wall every time a protestant tries to argue for Sola Scriptura. Here is the million dollar question: where were these pre-Reformation Cgristians prior to the 16th century. Please, name them. What church did they follow, worship in, etc?! It's always done vague reference to non- Catholic Christians.

[@JWellsUp]

@@Qohelethfulhow could you judge someone isn’t being humble? I would you know?

[@shanahendricks9831]

@@Qohelethful explain how they don't realize it? How are you making this judgment? That's the thing about being Catholic our teachings speak for itself, we don't need people to advocate for anything. If you wanna be Catholic you follow the teaching, Christ is the head and we are his body, the moment I see a follow Catholic doing something I don't like I can't blame the church or leave because I would be judging a part of a body and then breaking my part away

[@Qohelethful]

@@JWellsUp Protestants acknowledge that we could be wrong about any number of things, we know that our understanding is limited and we try to do our best but the RCC has the arrogance of certainty with no greater actual guarantee of being right on every detail than Protestants do.

[@BereanPerspectiveApologetics]

Thanks Trent for joining me live on my channel for the good conversation and appreciate our interaction in various topics. I hope we can have more of these discussions and that both camps can examine these things more thoroughly in the Scriptures. Kelly Acts 17:10-11

[@gto2111]

I studied the scriptures. Now I'm convinced that Sola Scriptura contradicts the Bible. You may disagree, but if I genuinely believe it contradicts the Bible, should I reject it?

[@onlylove556]

​​@@gto2111Amen 🙏🏼 that's the 1st Domino to fall for you brother. Just keep studying history. Bc if you're honest with yourself, & go in depth with the church fathers. Then you're going to see that protestantism is unbiblical to. Bc its the church that is the pillar & ground of all truth = 1 Timothy 3:15. Bc Jesus promised he's going to teach the church 4more outside of scripture, & his church will be guided to all truth through the Holy Spirit = John 16:12-13. That's why we follow the oral Christian traditions, & written word 2gether = 2 Thessalonians 2:15. Lord bless u 🙏🏼💯

[@tonyl3762]

Could the Bereans appeal to Scripture to contradict Paul? The Bereans were noble not because they consulted Scripture but because they didn't stir up violence against Paul and his coworkers like the Jews of Thessalonica.

[@tonyl3762]

Did you read the complete primary source writings of the Apostolic Fathers? If so, how could they not seem very Catholic?

[@andrewscotteames4718]

@@gto2111I agree, I think sola scriptura is incompatible with the biblical witness from places like Acts 15, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, John 11:51, John 20:30, 2 John 1:12, Matthew 16:19, Matthew 18:18, Deuteronomy 17:8-12, on and on I could go. It is clear that scripture is an infallible authority, but the fact that ins the sole infallible authority or that all belief must be derived from scripture seems to directly contradict what is actually written.

[@JJ-zr6fu]

Despite what they say solo scriptura is what they believe and they switch to sola when they hammered on the inconsistency

[@NeilD-q7j]

Most, not all. Some like orthodox Anglican confessions actually care what their tradition teaches. Most Protestants however end up with the Bible and me under a tree mantra.

[@billmartin3561]

The fact that there are so many protestant denominations that disagree with each other on important doctrines is proof that sola scriptura is false. The fact that James 2 explicitly says that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone proves that sola fide is false.

[@ZenZen-ot4jy]

I've always been thinking about asking people who believe in sola scriptura: do you have an obligation to attend service every Sunday etc. But I've always been refraining from asking because I haven't heard any Catholic apologist ask the question and press on it that much, so i felt it may take me down a road where I may not eventually point out what i intended to point out. As you did, i was really happy to hear that. Your questions were really engaging and it gave me a lot to think about

[@DarkHorseCrusader]

It must be nice being able to decide what is and what isn't a "salvation issue." Every Protestant becomes his own pope.

[@NeilD-q7j]

This seems to be the implication of the Protestant argument: The Bible is conspicuous, and tells us clearly and simply what are salvation issues and what arent. Humans just cant seem to agree what those are.

[@B_Thornsb5974]

We are each responsible for ourselves. I hardly see how just letting someone decide for you so you don't have to critically evaluate is any more reliable.

[@MikePena-z3b]

As a Catholic who was raised by a Catholic mother and Baptist Father, I enjoy more dialogue like this. Lack of emotional and more discussion is needed!

[@secessionblog3189]

Thanks for directly asking the barrier-contraception-within-marriage question, Trent (and doing it charitably too) It may not make you popular with many Protestants, but confronting this question and the Protestant reversals in the 1930s was a big part of my conversion to Christ's one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. Misuse of the marital act is so damaging to souls, even (perhaps especially) between spouses who love each other very much. To my Protestant brothers and sisters: Even if you don't have any interest in conversion, please listen to the wisdom of 400 years of Protestant teaching and 2000 years of Catholic teaching and strive to express marital love as Christ intended it. You won't regret it!

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thank you for this comment! -Vanessa

[@JezuesChavez]

"Church Authority" - I've always wondered if I was walking down the streets of Rome Mid first century and I heard Paul preaching things like "The law is a curse and can't bring righteousness" - As a Jew, why would I be compelled to reject my scriptures and my prophets like "The law of the LORD is perfect, refreshing the soul. The statutes of the LORD are trustworthy, making wise the simple." or Moses " And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us." - From a Jewish perspective, what Authority was given to Paul that would cause them to reject their commands?

[@justsomeguy9192-hx7jv]

Paul argued from the Old Testament which in numerous places foreshadows repentance for the forgiveness of sins (David offered no burnt offerings for his sin disobeying the Law..only a contrite heart). He also wasn't as harsh as "The law is a curse" all the time. Also, it's the work of the Holy Spirit to convince people of the Gospel's truth. Romans 7 covers this: 6 "But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code." 12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

[@JezuesChavez]

@@justsomeguy9192-hx7jv “it’s the work of the Holy Spirit to convince” is it? We see in exodus 19:9 how God spoke with Moses “I am going to come to you in a dense cloud, so that the people will hear me speaking with you and will always put their trust in you.” Again, I’m a Roman Jew, god spoke with Moses audibly so we can ALWAYS trust Moses. Why trust Paul who says we are released from the law when Moses, warned explicitly that one day there would be a test “The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him.”

[@Michael-bk5nz]

I found the claim that the Church Fathers practiced sola scriptura rather lame when you consider that they always won the argument with heretics by appealing to the authority of the Church when appealing to the scripture didn’t work (which it never did), in particular claiming Cyril, the guy who coined the phrase “Outside the Church no Salvation” as a sola scriptural guy just seems nuts

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Very interesting point, Michael! -Vanessa

[@paulhallett1452]

Great win, Trent. This guy is all over KZbin - his “Gospel” answer is a walking Catholic answer.

[@forehead949]

A Protestant quote mining St Iranaus against heresies is rich…

[@PantalonRouge]

LOL good point.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

It was interesting! -Vanessa

[@ShowaGojira92]

Great video as always Trent! Great example of how to dialogue with a protestant on Sola Scriptura, a doctrine which makes less and less sense to me the more I study scripture and Church history.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thank you very much! -Vanessa

[@Live-and-Move]

As to why we can believe in the assumption of Mary. There are two people in the Bible that were taken bodily into heaven after serving God in a unique way. Enoch who served God uniquely and fully through his life and was taken up by God. Elijah the greatest prophet of God throughout the Bible who also served God uniquely and fully throughout his life. They are given as examples of two people who served God perfectly adhering to the word of God in everything they did. Mary likewise served God fully throughout her life and also and in the most unique way of anyone from scripture. She carried and raised the very Word of God into this world. How can we not believe that she to would be taken bodily into heaven at the end of her life as a reward for her full life of service to God, and yet believe Enoch and Elijah did?

[@Michael-bk5nz]

There is a lot of Biblical support for Mariology, Kelly’s complaint seems to be that it isn’t explicitly stated, which is not a serious objection

[@Live-and-Move]

@@Michael-bk5nz I agree, but I thought I would offer clear Biblical evidence for the assumption specifically

[@ChrisSadowski-pp1np]

Mary died like everyone else. No evidence to say that she didn't.

[@partydean17]

Uniqueness? That's a strange thing to hinge on since obvious differences can be found between all servants. Maybe importance or when they oversee the changing of israel or something like that.

[@Live-and-Move]

@@partydean17 not uniqueness how they each served was unique and fully devoted to the service called. Each also were given direct requests for service by God. God chose them to serve unique purposes. Also if you pour through the Bible you will find the only other people called in such a way were also found not worthy by God for such a great reward for various different reasons. David killed lots of people and sinned against God and was punished, Moses rejected Gods request 3 times and angered God while leading the Israelites thus was not allowed to cross the Jordan. You see where I'm going with this? There were only three people in the Bible who served God fully without ever causing offenses to God.

[@jondegregorio1306]

I cannot unsee the cycle of answering the question of, "how do we interpret said scripture" by citing more scripture that does not fulfill the meaning of said scripture. At some point, meaning has to be extricated from the text. A derivative of the original mathematical function, so to speak. The case for sola scriptura fails in proof by the fact that innumerable denominations arrive at vastly different conclusions by using the same argument that they are just relying on scripture.

[@Godfrey118]

Multiple times Kelly isn't following the logic or reasoning behind a lot of Trents arguments

[@angelalewis3645]

Yep. That bothered me. I felt that they were never truly on the same page. And Trent kept asking for precise definitions, and Kelly kept skirting around giving them. I personally love precise definitions.

[@clarkkent5442]

Mr Horn did a phenomenal job

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thank you for your comment! -Vanessa

[@kevinrhatigan5656]

Could you do more apologetics against Eastern Orthodox please? I feel like sola scriptura has been refuted ad nauseum, and EO poses a more serious threat to catholics.

[@pdxnikki1]

Reason & Theology is the channel for you. Michael Lofton has written a book & done many vids on it

[@Iffmeister]

Erick Ybarra"s stuff or watch Dwong on the filioque

[@kevinrhatigan5656]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r It's not a numbers game. It's more to do with the fact that many EO apologists like ubi petrus argue that they have kept the faith of the first millennium and Rome has fallen away. People like Kyle and Jay Dyer were catholics who fell for that line of argumentation as have many other catholics- so the threat is quite real.

[@Cklert]

From my experience, Orthobros typically rely on polemics and bad history to form their arguments. Most Catholics who convert to Orthodoxy were those who already had major issues with V2 and liturgical abuses that they look toward the East for a return to tradition and therefore end up believing the myths the Orthodox use.

[@jd3jefferson556]

​@@pdxnikki1answering Orthodoxy by Lofton is one of the best books ever on that subject.

[@lesjonpool]

Great discussion, I appreciate it. Mr. Powers, your gentleness, humility, and thoughtfulness are inspiring. You truly seem to be seeking truth. I am a Catholic and have a couple of questions for both of you. I recognize these may not be answered, perhaps someone else can weigh in: 1. The Berean premise seems to be faulty to me because there was no scriptural New Testament at the times that scripture would be mentioned in the New Testament. Therefore, they are referring to the Old Testament. Most of your discourse was on NT scripture. Is it generally accepted that statements about scripture in the New Testament automatically include the New Testament? 2a. When the Church Fathers are referring to testing their concepts against scripture, they are doing this under the context of there being one unified universal (catholic, albeit not necesarily named as such yet) church in existence. Harmful heresies seemed to have been quickly dealt with and contained. So, when the Fathers speak of studying scripture, I do not get the sense that they are necessarily speaking to the laity. Printed Bibles were not as abundant. They are primarily speaking to other theologians with the assumption that they are all on the same team. 2b. The writings of the Church Fathers have a completely different meaning centuries after the Schism and Protestant Reformations. If, at the time, theology had become a do-it-yourself activity like today, and each person had the ability to be the head of their own theology, they would be far more careful with their language. These days, one must walk on eggshells to get their point across. Back then, not so much. We should read the Church Fathers with the understanding of their church and audience at that time, which was far more unified.

[@christianstephens7213]

As a fan of yours and a new Catholic convert I would say to answer his question of what would you believe if all you had were Paul’s letters to go off of for Salvation what would you believe ? You should have answered the question and then flipped it and asked if all you had was the gospel of Matthew how do you think the Gospel would be? Because Our Lord equates works of Charity to a means of salvation in the book of Mathew .

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Interesting choice in addressing this situation! Thank you for sharing! -Vanessa

[@yoyeo1900]

Where in Matthew does it say salvation is a reward for charity?

[@stephengriffin4612]

Hi Trent, Very interesting discussion. These types of programs are very useful for mutual understanding. I am going to have to listen again. Two things I didn't pick up on: Is Kelly the type of Protestant who says if it is or not in the Bible then one can or do not do it. For instance, dancing is something that caused problems with certain groups. I'm not a lawyer but I believe the Napoleonic Code says that unless it is not approved by a law then it would be unlawful. (Don't quote me on this). I guess Common Law would hold that unless it is specifically denied then it's OK to do it. Regarding Baptism and its redemptive powers, I think that early Christians waited until late in life because they believed that once you were baptized then all their sins were forgiven.

[@pendletondrew]

Kelly: "Mariology cannot be found in Scripture!" Me, being convinced of Mariology because of Scripture: 😳😂😂😂 It was a nice discussion, but every time Trent pressed Kelly to answer the question of authority he just gave his own personal Biblical case for his viewpoint on a subject. I'm not sure that Kelly fully understands the objection. "Well, if there's at least a little something in the Bible," according toooo....you? There is a biblical basis for every Catholic doctrine and dogma, so there is no room for Protestants to accuse the Catholic Church, or anyone for that matter, of being wrong. Kelly thinks what he believes is what the Bible teaches objectively. So does everyone else who disagrees with him. Making a biblical case doesn't solve the issue of authority, no matter how many times you try.

[@LIlFro-]

Good point

[@NeilD-q7j]

Fair point.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

haha thank you for sharing! -Vanessa

[@anjpadilla003]

🤔...wellllll lets see...The Ark of the Covenant, the new Ark that contains the living word of God, Elizabeth "How is it that the Mother of my Lord..."...I dont know maybe us Catholics didnt get enough bible readings @ Mass 🤔🤷‍♂️🙏🏽

[@NeilD-q7j]

@@anjpadilla003 Catholics generally are Biblically uneducated. This is an accepted fact that many Catholic voices have seconded. The readings at the mass are no substitute for devotional readings which the Church strongly endorses but which many Catholics dont pay heed to. I would say, one of the reasons why some Catholics leave the church is that they get stumped by Protestant arguments from the Bible. Many or most of these arguments would not work on Biblically educated Catholics, but play havoc with the faith of Catholics who are Biblically ignorant. This is one of the problems within the church.

[@kurida7]

I saw just recently a testimony of a Jew convert to Catholicism. He said a lot of great points why he chose to finally go to the fullest Church of God. There was one that stuck to me. He said that it shouldn't be called reformation. It should be called rebellion -- because reformation means to improve something in the same institution.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Wow thank you for sharing this! -Vanessa

[@justsomeguy9192-hx7jv]

So you were ok with the selling of indulgences, simony, and the rejection of Luther’s theses without discussion or even a thought of repentance?

[@kurida7]

​@@justsomeguy9192-hx7jv bruh, all I heard from you was blah blah blah.

[@kurida7]

​@@TheCounselofTrent yeah I saw on The Cordial Catholic channel, Ken Kopelson was the one being interviewed. I'll try to post the link with a time stamp.

[@Cklert]

​@justsomeguy9192-hx7jv This is revisionist history. Johann Eck, a prelate, invited Luther to debate in Leipzig about his theses. It was there that Luther plainly admitted to heresy. The other issues you've mentioned were addressed and corrected at the Council of Trent.

[@mikelopez8564]

I’m around 23 mins and Kelly is referencing the Bereans “who searched the scriptures” when Paul was teaching them. News for you Kelly, all they were searching was the Old Testament. They would never have given up circumcision for baptism or gathering on Sunday if they were “bible alone” believers. The OT was very clear about circumcision and Sabbath. So don’t think you are like the Bereans because the NT “sola scripture” believers were the Judaizers, the circumcision party. The Bereans accepted the Church’s interpretations given them by Paul, not by their own interpretation. I reserve the right to comment again at the end. 😊

[@garyr.8116]

@mikelopez8564 - Excellent observation!

[@mythologicalmyth]

Yep.

[@Him-t6b]

Welcome home Trent 🫲🏿

[@Valued_Member_of_the_Community]

This dude is slippery! He was up against the wall several times and weaseled out via word salad. Fortunately for him, this was a dialogue, not a debate, thus Trent did not feel the need to clamp down on these "slitherings" as hard.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thanks for your analysis haha! -Vanessa

[@eduardoacuna9408]

Full disclosure, I am Catholic. Loved this soft debate with a fellow Protestant apologetic. Trent shows good well and kindness in the discussion, so did the other person. Hope one day our fellow Protestants, our brothers in Christ, will reunite to our Lord’s Holy Church, if not in my lifetime, somewhere within the next century. Think that Trent does get holy points upstairs for showing our faith in a very competent matter 🙏🙏🙏

[@audreymarsh5090]

I found the discussion on the Assumption interesting. Even though, Trent was arguing from the non-dogmatic Orthodox position, it seemed like Mr Kelly wasn’t able to stick to the original point of the “permissive” part of Sola Scriptura, and only able to stick to arguing against the Catholic position of the dogma…. After that, his position kind of seemed like a whole load of waffle.

[@NeilD-q7j]

Kelly did grant that Marian doctrines are not the problem for him but dogmatic teachings on Mary.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thanks for sharing your insights on that part! -Vanessa

[@TheThreatenedSwan]

Even ignoring how it would be possible for semantics could be communicated through words on a page alone like some protestants retreat to, how do protestants explain the shift in authority from the the pre-new testament church where men preached authority without those books to the supposedly sola scriptura post new testament church? Plus the transfer in authority would have to be done on the authority of the Church

[@vanessagarcia7515]

I have never seen these expressions on Trent- he was so enjoying the other guy contradicting himself and making no sense. Trent I’ve learned so much from you. It’s made me a stronger Catholic . I left - dipped into Protestantism and ran back home to the one true church of Christ .

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thank you, Vanessa, for your insights and comment! We appreciate you! -Vanessa (cool name by the way!)

[@catholicguy1073]

Good discussion

[@ChachiTelevision1979]

Kelly Powers has serious 1991 vibes, and I say that as a total compliment.

[@AudChaldean]

Great job as always Trent 🙏

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thanks for listening! -Vanessa

[@HoMegasTaxiarches]

Of course references to the Assumption of Mary are present in scripture. The woman clothed with the sun in Revelation 12 and the protoevangelion in Genesis 3, 15 where the woman and her seed strike the head of the serpent are Mary and her son Jesus. Psalm 45 describes the queen entering her palace which refers to Mary entering heaven. It ends with a reference to the Magnificat in Luke: “I will make your name renowned through all generations; thus nations shall praise you forever.”

[@j.h.9376]

"Well that's hard to say..." hmm🤔 wouldnt it be nice to have aome body to clarify it for us. Sorry but this Kelly guy is just wandering around not getting to any useful point. He is proving his own position wrong and why its wrong.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Thanks for the comment! -Vanessa

[@johnmorgan327]

Yessir, the truth is tough

[@EdwardBray-i1w]

My dude is a lovely guy, but he's REALLY having difficulty seeing the obvious. His view makes every individual their OWN final interpretive authority and will lead to varied denominations... like Trent has repeatedly pointed out. He makes declarations of what "The Bible" teaches, yet I don't agree with him. What makes him the utmost authority vs. Pastor Joe and his Oneness Pentecostalism?

[@iraqiimmigrant2908]

Too many denominations too many nut jobs all saying what the Bible supposedly says. Protestantism is a total mess.

[@aajaifenn]

Augustine taught the perseverance of the saints. All true children in Gods sight will not fall away

[@ShadyJay27]

Kelly appealing to ancient Jewish culture (tradition) in his hypothetical is gold.

[@teravega]

For the position about apostasy, there's one thing that no one talks about and that is professing apostasy. If professing faith doesn't really show you are saved, then the reverse is true. Someone might say they no longer believed but perhaps they very wounded by the church and have forgotten the grace of God to which later down their life they could come back after reconciliation. I've heard testimonies of happening. Even when they decided to join another religious group. I for one came from a church up bringing and left the church after reconciling existential questions that I had no answers to, and came up with my own conclusions that God never wanted me. Even though I saw and experienced a lot of grace in my life, it was only until 15 years later I realized I was wrong and deep down I've always desired God but I made him out of an enemy due to a lie. In the end, he never left me, I left him. It's similar to a spouse saying something they didn't actually believe and hurting the other person. It's after reconciliation, which can range from days to years. So I dont think in the perspective of apostasy, it's dealt with the same nuance. How is this useful to know? Because you should follow what Paul did in his letter to the Corinthians. To give those up to Satan in the hopes of being saved and even though you believed they were never saved, in the end it is God who weighs the heart. Their salvation was never for you to judge anyways.

[@jdotoz]

If sola scriptura is true, Scripture must do at least two things: 1) Clearly affirm sola scriptura, and 2) Clearly define the contents of Scripture. If either is lacking, sola scriptura can't work.

[@jdotoz]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r If only the OT books and Gospels (which came after some of Paul's letters) were Scripture, why did Paul need to write so much? 2 is required because if Scripture is the only infallible source, you need to infallibly know its boundaries or else you may falsely regard a writing as infallible or mistakenly disregard God's word. What's the difference between a doctrine and a principle? Either way, it's asserting the same thing to be true.

[@jdotoz]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r I still don't know the difference in your mind between doctrine and principle. The Canon is necessary for sola scriptura because if Scripture is the sole source, you better know what books are Scripture. Otherwise we can let anything in - maybe Scripture is still being written through councils, popes, or the reformers. Or we can exclude inconvenient and difficult documents, like James. I'm actually having a discussion with someone somewhere else right now who thinks that James is irreconcilable with Paul. Maybe James isn't actually Scripture.

[@jdotoz]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r That explains nothing. I understand they are different words. What is the practical difference?

[@jdotoz]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r Cool it; you're using ambiguous language with no explanation. If it's a "principle," then sola scriptura is automatically defeated since whoever defined it must also be infallibly able to do so.

[@Joker22593]

An axiom which states "only these writings are infallibly true" is unworkable in any universal system, let alone theology. Writings are imperfect representations of complex thoughts. The language, vocabulary, or dictionary of a writing can be lost. Only a living body can properly pass on and preserve teachings in their fullness, because only living bodies can form ideas and express them in different ways until they become clear.

[@josephgoemans6948]

Oh this is painful 😅😅 probably shaved some time off purgatory for Trent 😂

[@tonyl3762]

How could he have "looked at" the Apostolic Fathers and not become Catholic or Orthodox? Read them completely?

[@NeilD-q7j]

The same way we read Paul and dont come to the conclusion of Sola Fide. :) Interpretation.

[@tonyl3762]

@@NeilD-q7j Sure, but there are some very Catholic quotes in their writings. Pretty hard to "interpret" away many of those, though I've seen it tried.

[@iraqiimmigrant2908]

Quote mining.

[@teaguemobile]

Love Trent. And I know if you want to catch flies you don’t use vinegar, but man, sometimes Mr. Horne is just tooo patient and nice 😊. There were so many opening to pin Kelly down using scriptural references, such as on topics of Church’s authority, Marian dogma, baptism, but Powers owned the mic like 70% of the time. Many of Power’s layups could have been easily rejected but Trent took it easy on him. I hope in their next meeting Trent takes those way openings and slams him a few times….with love of course.

[@vinciblegaming6817]

I really dislike his perspective on what the gospel is. I’ve seen in a couple commenters the claim Peter and Paul teach a different gospel and Kelly seems to be a proponent of such an idea. I think the clearest actual exposition of the gospel message is what you get in Acts 2. Everything else in the NT is explaining and representing it to gentile audiences. There’s just a rigidity to this perspective that doesn’t appear to exist between Peter and Paul.

[@vinciblegaming6817]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r I’m happy to hear that. I have only listened to this interview so I have no reason to doubt someone with more experience interacting with him.

[@Maximusinthehouse]

Honest Question Trent, why would Jesus not tell about "Mary's Assumption", we know He spoke to Paul in book of Acts etc so its not an argument of silence it is more about IF Jesus prioritized that He would have mentioned it...it never happened

[@CatsRRRBetterThanDogs]

Good to see this is up here. Saw this live on Berean Perspective channel. Very good discussion and respectful. Protestants and Roman Catholics can learn from these gentlemen on debates and beliefs. Trent did good job of asking various questions and Kelly did good job of answering from the Bible. Great discussion on why the Scriptures are the final authority ie Sola Scriptura for what a person believes or should not believe. Look forward to seeing more of them interacting with each other.

[@ComiCross]

If you don’t mind me asking, are you Protestant or Catholic?

[@albertd.6179]

The whole debate is about personal authority versus the Church's authority. Personal authority rests on what I think the scripture says and means; the final arbiter is myself. The Church's authority rests on the consensus view of what the Church understood and taught from scripture in the light of tradition right from the beginning; the final arbiter is the collective wisdom of the Church.

[@bansheebrethren797]

Bro ain’t answering the questions

[@cplmagnum]

52:45 Kelly says “What we don’t have, that they had, (dramatic pause)is they had culture. Right? They had culture….” Is he saying that Tradition is important to understanding Scripture? As a Catholic I must respond; Oh yes we do!

[@TheJackjack]

Trent horn is way too nice I would have called him a liar to his face

[@TheJackjack]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r because he's a liar he uses dishonest tactics he avoids questions with rambling and nonsense it doesn't matter what answer Trent gives him he will always try to sneak in Mary or some other doctrine that has nothing to do with the answer

[@TheJackjack]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r this guy puts Catholics in the same category with Mormons and Jehovah witnesses even though Jehovah witness and Mormonism came out of protestantism there's about a thousand different Protestant churches that believe and preaching heresies even heresies he would consider heresies

[@NeilD-q7j]

@@TheJackjack His background is Calvary chapel, so I guess that explains his stance.

[@TheJackjack]

@@NeilD-q7j so he's a Protestant

[@TheJackjack]

@user-rg4ni2hr6r every time Trent ask him a question he started talking about nonsense and try to bring up Mary and other doctrines to avoid answering questions

[@MrJohnmartin2009]

SS makes Jesus institution of the church at Pentecost a miraculous fiction. Apparently the Spirit guided one, holy, Catholic and apostolic church was incompetent at understanding the scriptures even with the Spirit's power and truth.

[@sugami82]

No, next question 😂

[@peebeeeu2501]

23:50 I think this is the problem with Sola scriptura - like look if you're a calvinist you have to believe in predestination as an essential doctrine. Yet it all ends up on the person alone. The person is the interpreter of scripture, that's the problem

[@Repented661]

Let him finish Trent quit interrupting