Protestant Pastor Finds The Catholic Church To Be Correct

[@eileen1820]

Amazing! Love this testimonial!

[@ContendingEarnestly]

I see Keith didn't even attempt to prove his conversion through scripture as you asked. I've had some infrequent conversations with Keith and while he seems genuine and sincere i can't believe he really studied both sides before swimming the tiber. He didn't defend his position from scripture because catholics simply can't. Its not there. You have to be presupposed to catholicism in order to see it in the bible. "Feed my sheep" is no more a proof text for the papacy than "Jesus wept" is a proof text for Kleenex. Just my two cents. Thanks

[@kevincrandall2751]

Keith doesn’t need to prove his conversion through Scripture. Scripture is only a part of divine revelation. Sacred Tradition is the other part. 2nd Thessalonians 2:15 “So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.” Sacred tradition was the only thing the Catholic Church had to go by from the beginning until the council of Rome in 382 determined which of the many writings were Divinely inspired. They rejected the Gospel of Thomas, the Shepherd of Hermès, the did-ache, amongst others. The 27 books in the New Testament were decided upon by the Catholic Church. Where in the Bible does it say that anything has to be proved from the Bible? Where in the Bible does it say which books are supposed to be in the Bible? Fortunately Catholics don’t subscribe to sola scriptura. We have Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium. These are what the Apostles established as the deposit of faith from the beginning. Jesus didn’t establish a book, He established a Church with the 12 men He chose to be His apostles. The early Church was built on word of mouth through Tradition and the Septuagint until the Catholic Church set the canon of Scripture in 382.

[@ContendingEarnestly]

@@kevincrandall2751 *Keith doesn’t need to prove his conversion through Scripture.* Are you his keeper? He was asked right out of the gate if he wanted to share something from scripture or a conversation that pointed to the rcc. He didn't go to scripture at all. We know why. *Sacred tradition was the only thing the Catholic Church had to go by from the beginning until the council of Rome in 382 determined which of the many writings were Divinely inspired.* Thats about as a-historical as you can get. First, there is no such thing as (S)acred (T)radition, its a crutch you all use when you don't have an answer from scripture; "its Tradition..." I've been asking for years for one catholic to show me an exhaustive list of your sacred tradition. I'm still waiting. Catholics have no idea what the extent of it is. Secondly, rome 382 wasn't an ecumenical council. It was a local council and not binding on the church. Jerome was at that council. If there was a 'determined' canon there then why did he not 12 years later name your apocrypha by name; wisdom, sirach....and say they 'are not in the canon'? Either hes going against a determined canon or it was never binding in the first place. The fact is, it was trent over 1000 years later that made the first dogmatic declaration of the canon, not rome 382. Lastly, there were plenty of n.t. scripture, epistles, gospels....around for the first 400 years of the church. What did Origen or Tertullian and all the other ecfs use to write what they did? It wasn't word of mouth. Between Origen and Tertullian they both cited the n.t. over 20,000 times between the two. How did they do that without the text of scripture? Irenaeus had the gospels he said were handed down from the apostles. Tertullian claimed to have Pauls letters. There wasn't a bound volume until the mid 4th century but that is bedside the point. They had scripture! Open a book. *Where in the Bible does it say that anything has to be proved from the Bible? Where in the Bible does it say which books are supposed to be in the Bible?* Straw man and straw man. The guy doing the interview asked for something from the bible. Re-direct your inquiry to him. *Fortunately Catholics don’t subscribe to sola scriptura.* You should. Catholics don't because they can't find their distinct doctrines and dogmas in it. I'm sure you'd all be champions of ss if the papacy were in the bible or penance, marian dogmas, a sacerdotal priesthood....

[@davidjanbaz7728]

@@kevincrandall2751 2 Thessaionians 2:15 traditions are Paul's word of mouth or his letters: so why do not believe Paul's traditions in Titus 3:4- 8 or Romans 9:9-13 the sinners prayer. U accept church traditions but not the True traditions of THE Apostle Paul .

[@davidjanbaz7728]

Correction Romans 10: 9-13. No church baptism ritual mentioned!

[@johnyang1420]

Where does bible say it must be in bible?

[@malcolmkirk3343]

Still doesn't solve for theodicy. If God IS love and ALL LOVING, the why does he fail so badly at designing people in the womb? Why are there kids born with mental and physical deficiencies; birth defects, etc, etc. Why does He make hermaphrodites? Why are their children eating out of garbage dumps, instead of God intervening to make sure they are well cared for?....And don't blame it on people, because God can easily move even sinners according to His will, if He chooses to do so); so on, and so forth.

[@kevincrandall2751]

I guess you will have to ask Him when you see Him face to face the moment you die.

[@johnyang1420]

Jesus started Catholic church though. I joined….what will you do?

[@davidjanbaz7728]

In this clip he never says the Roman Catholic church is correct! U R being dishonest with is a sin even in Catholicism.

[@johnyang1420]

The Catholic church correct though. Why? Jesus started Catholic church. Protestant churches started by men and conflict.

[@PracticalTheism]

Literally have no idea what him saying that statement has to do with anything?