Could protestants today properly defend their faith against a educated catholic.?

Question

By that I mean is there a person who is protestant who could adequatly defend their faith in a true discussion based on biblical and historical documents from the church fathers.

From what I have seen on this site most protestants do know some verses (out of context) and most likely do have a love for Jesus and their friends in church but because it becomes insular its almost like a cult so they cant question it (Evangelical for 20 years!!!)

Having learned about the catholic faith I think I could answer a few questions but I have much to learn, however church history stands out that the first christians (while not called catholic) followed exactly the same doctrine as catholics do.

In fact, Peter, Paul, John would feel quite comfortable in the modern day mass but would probobly be making a whip out of cords to deal with the marketplace that modern day evangelicals have become .

What do you think, I would like to hear from catholics and protestants who are seeking truth.

Answer 1

BrotherMicheal said:
I do not believe any of the apostles would feel comfortable sitting through a continual bloodless re-sacrificing of Christ, which is what the mass is.

I reply:
Here is an excerpt from Justin Martyr, the first true Crhistian Apologist (AD 150) which he explained the Eucharist this way:
"God speaks by the mouth of Malachi, one of the twelve [minor prophets], as I said before, about the sacrifices at that time presented by you: ‘I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord, and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands; for from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same, my name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering, for my name is great among the Gentiles . . . [Mal. 1:10–11]. He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us [Christians] who in every place offer sacrifices to him, that is, the bread of the Eucharist and also the cup of the Eucharist" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 41 [A.D. 155]).

Or even before we find what the Eucharist is believed to be from a disciple of John the Apostle. He teaches concerning those who don't partake of the Eucharist believing differantly from him and John: "They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110).

History shows the nature of the True Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.

God Bless
Robin

Answer 2

Just by observing Protestants answers, no, they could not, have you noticed how little knowledge of the Bible they have.

Not bragging, but believe I could defend my faith against a educated catholic, along with all of my Brother & Sisters, because we happen to be Jehovah's Witnesses & each year there are more Catholics that become Witnesses than from any other religion.

Surely you are not saying that you could defend your faith based on biblical and historical documents from the church fathers. Your own literature or books state that there is no: Purgatory, no trinity, that God's name is Jehovah, the church burned people on a stake because they disagreed with the church or printed another translation of the Bible, etc, etc,.

Even the Popes cousin is a Jehovah's Witnesses.

Answer 3

Very few Protestants have knowledge of Church history. They seem to think it all started with the Reformation and before that time their history is a little foggy....perhaps there was a "Protestant Remnant" that survived from time of the Apostles??? Hmmm.......

Protestants are trained to defend their faith simply by spouting certain Bible verses which are learned and memorized from a very young age. Sadly, there are large parts of the Bible they NEVER study or read and many of these parts are critical to Catholic (Christian) doctrine.

Answer 4

You mean, on this site, or in general? "Debate" here is rather limited given the format. But in almost any other venue, a Protestant vs. Catholic debate where all else is equal (education, experience, etc.) usually ends in a draw at best.

James White may have hoped for a draw after debating Fr. Mitch Pacwa and Robert Sungenis, among others, but he's been out of his depth every time (particularly with Fr. Mitch, who hardly "fears" White). I find it interesting that White's sister converted to Catholicism even as he was busily writing books denouncing it.

Answer 5

Dr. James White? Yikes! I've listened to him debate and he is a jackhammer. There are certain predictable verses he goes back to again and again and he hammers them despite what is shown to be true in the totality of Scripture AND Tradition AND the writings of the Church fathers.

Many Protestant apologists routinely claim that the Apostles would be shocked to see what Catholics are teaching and yet they seem to totally miss the fact that all the Church Fathers wrote as Catholic, taught as Catholics, believed as Catholics and worshipped as Catholics.

Add to that the specific admonition of Christ and the Apostles to hold fast to these traditions and you have a rock solid claim for Apostolic, Catholic teaching.

Protestantism is a newcomer to the religious scene....just a bunch of recycled heresies.

Answer 6

I think there are many Protestants who could defend their beliefs using Scripture, but that doesn't mean their beliefs are correct. Anyone (including the Devil) can use Scripture for their purposes simply by taking it out of context.

As for Church history, most Protestants are gravely lacking in knowledge of that area. In fact, I have many ex-Protestant friends who got seriously interested in Church history and ended up becoming either Orthodox or Catholic. It really opened their eyes to the true Church beyond the words of the Bible.

"To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant."
-- John Henry Cardinal Newman

Answer 7

Judging by some of the comments above, you would be highly unlikely to find a well educated protestant. They are, in fact, just another devils' tool to hammer at the true faith.

Answer 8

Now if your talking about a normal discussion between catholic and Protestant way, then I'm down for the count.

Answer 9

I think that you are sadly mistaken. These apostles would see things they wrote about being violated, such as the priesthood (not Biblical), praying to anyone other than God (not Biblical), confessing sin to and receiving forgiveness from anyone other than God (not Biblical), doing penance (again, not Biblical). Do you see a pattern here?

I have read the New Testament many times over and I could easily point out many violations of scripture which the R.C. church is guilty of. And, within context, maybe even with some Greek translation.

How would a Catholic defend their faith against an educated protestant? Not as well, I am afraid.

Answer 10

I am a reformed, Calvinist, Protestant, I was catholic for 18 years, so I think I pretty much understand both sides. I have heard debates between Protestants and Catholics, and, frankly, my Protestant brothers hold up quite well. I would direct you to a web sight:

http://aomin.org/

This is Dr. James R. White's sight. He debates not only catholics, but also Mormons and Muslims. He is a scholar and very intelligent, and feared by catholic apologists.

Now, to your other points, most of us try to be contextualists, we do not pick out verses out of context to bolster our positions, we are able to show passage after passage that show that our positions are Biblical and consistent with Christian doctrine.

Frankly, the early Church and Church fathers would be appalled at what Catholicism has taught throughout the ages. Mariology, indulgances, tradition being on the same level as Scripture, praying to the dead, idolatry, purgatory, and especially the mass. None of these are from Scripture, and none were taught by the apostles or the early Church.
I do not believe any of the apostles would feel comfortable sitting through a continual bloodless re-sacrificing of Christ, which is what the mass is.
I do agree that some of evangelicalism has gone off the deep end. I am not into the purpose driven, seeker sensitive, best life now thing. I do not believe the Church should be using worldly marketing techniques to bring people in. I think we need another reformation, to bring us back in line with Scripture.