Refutation of Dave Armstrong’s “150 reasons why I’m Catholic”

Matthew Cserhati

Excerpt from “Refuting Rome”

Introduction

In the following, I will analyze a 150 point tract by Dave Armstrong, Roman Catholic apologeticist. This tract has been cited widely on the web, therefore it would be worthwhile to refute it point by point. It is important to deal with these Roman Catholic talking points as more and more such Roman Catholic apologeticists have arisen who may lead people astray with their faulty logic and erroneous exegesis. A number of the points that are presented here have been covered in earlier chapters. However, it is good to see all of these points all at once so that the reader can acquire detailed know-how in refuting Roman Catholic rhetoric.

In general, what we can see here is that the great majority of Armstrong’s points have to deal with why he is not Protestant. This is very telling, because Roman Catholics criticize Protestants in that they lack any substance because they only attack Roman Catholicism. As we can see here, the exact opposite is true. Furthermore, it is quite apparent that Armstrong directs his main attack against liberals, Pentacostals, and Arminian Protestants, groups, which do not form the core of Protestantism, which are the Reformed churches. Therefore, we can dispense with a large number of his criticism from the very start. Furthermore, many of the verses that Armstrong uses do not even apply to the issue that he is dealing with, but are rather his own interpretation of those verses. Besides this, Armstrong glosses over many of the errors, heresies, and sins of the Roman Catholic Church.

Refutation

1. Best One-Sentence Summary: I am convinced that the Catholic Church conforms much more closely to all of the biblical data, offers the only coherent view of the history of Christianity (i.e., Christian, apostolic Tradition), and possesses the most profound and sublime Christian morality, spirituality, social ethic, and philosophy.

As we have seen in previous chapters, Roman Catholicism is at odds with many parts of Scripture, and have even incorporated non-canonical books into the Scriptura (the Apocrypha). The reason Rome needs oral tradition is so that she can sneak in her own extra-Biblical teachings. Furthermore, the early church theologians in many places contradict Roman Catholic doctrine. The popes are the antithesis of Christian morality, spirituality, and ethic.

2. Alternate: I am a Catholic because I sincerely believe, by virtue of much cumulative evidence, that Catholicism is true, and that the Catholic Church is the visible Church divinely-established by our Lord Jesus, against which the gates of hell cannot and will not prevail (Mt 16:18), thereby possessing an authority to which I feel bound in Christian duty to submit.

As we have seen in a previous chapter, dozens of Bible verses contradict this. The church was not founded upon a single man or His successors, Jesus Christ Himself is the cornerstone of the church (Acts 4:12; Ephesians 2:20; 1Peter 2:4-8).

3. 2nd Alternate: I left Protestantism because it was seriously deficient in its interpretation of the Bible (e.g., "faith alone" and many other "Catholic" doctrines - see evidences below), inconsistently selective in its

espousal of various Catholic Traditions (e.g., the Canon of the Bible), inadequate in its ecclesiology, lacking a sensible view of Christian history (e.g., "Scripture alone"), compromised morally (e.g., contraception, divorce), and unbiblically schismatic, anarchical, and relativistic. I don't therefore believe that Protestantism is all bad (not by a long shot), but these are some of the major deficiencies I eventually saw as fatal to the "theory" of Protestantism, over against Catholicism. All Catholics must regard baptized, Nicene, Chalcedonian Protestants as Christians.

The word Protestant or Protestantism occurs 162 times in Dave Armstrong’s writing, meaning that he became Roman Catholic not because of anything positive. He also further overlooks that Roman Catholicism contradicts the Bible, and is just as “schismatic” as Protestantism (maintaining ecumenical relations with Islam and Buddhism), which is more unified because of the teachings of the five Solas.

4. Catholicism isn’t formally divided and sectarian (Jn 17:20-23; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 1:10-13).

There are Old Catholics, Sedevacantists, charismatics, Jesuits, liberals, conservatives, and also cafeteria Catholics, who pick and choose any kind of teaching they well please. Conservative Roman Catholics are at the point that they cannot tolerate liberal Jesuits, who vigorously attack the papacy, and deny other tenets of key Roman Catholic doctrine. How can there be unity in the Roman Catholic Church if the present pope, a Jesuits denies such things?

5. Catholic unity makes Christianity and Jesus more believable to the world (Jn 17:23).

Unity is not within a visible church, but rather Jesus Christ creates unity in saving and guiding His people. Unity cannot be imposed externally. On the contrary, many people are leaving the Roman Catholic Church because of the numerous sex scandals which have been rocking the church for centuries since the Dark Ages. Tens of thousands of people have left the church in Ireland because of this, for example. Armstrong incorrectly interprets John 17, in that people will believe in Christ if they see how Christians love one another. The Roman Catholic Church is not mentioned here by name.

6. Catholicism, because of its unified, complete, fully supernatural Christian vision, mitigates against secularization and humanism.

The Roman Catholic Church has been accused of secularism by the Orthodox Church. It itself is also humanistic since it elevates man’s opinion (oral tradition) to the level of God’s revelation (the Scriptures). Since the Roman Catholic Church is a false church, it is part of the world, therefore it is secular.

7. Catholicism avoids an unbiblical individualism which undermines Christian community (e.g., 1 Cor 12:25-26).

Yet at the same time, the Roman Catholic Church is broken into different factions. Cafeteria Catholics, who make up the majority of Catholics, since they individually pick and choose what they want to believe.

8. Catholicism avoids theological relativism, by means of dogmatic certainty and the centrality of the papacy.

Many Roman Catholics are trapped in fear as to whether their church leaders really have figured out all dogmas correctly. Papal infallibility has been invoked only two or three times during the history of the church, and even the Roman Catholic Church is not sure as to how many times the pope has spoken in such a way. Central to the Christian faith is the person of Jesus Christ, not the pope, who is antichrist.

9. Catholicism avoids ecclesiological anarchism - one cannot merely jump to another denomination when some disciplinary measure or censure is called for.

This is very interesting. I myself simply walked out of the Roman Catholic Church and never underwent any kind of discipline whatsoever. Many millions of other people have also done so.

However, even still, Rome demands the subjection of one’s will and conscience to her. This keeps people in spiritual slavery (Revelation 18:13).

10. Catholicism formally (although, sadly, not always in practice) prevents the theological relativism which leads to the uncertainties within the Protestant system among laypeople.

If, as in point 8, the papacy is central to the Roman Catholic religion, then this means that the Roman Catholic Church is built on a man, and not Jesus Christ. Therefore, it is humanistic. If it is humanistic, then it is also relativistic, because man changes, but God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Throughout history, popes and councils have contradicted each other, and there have even been multiple popes at one time each contending for the papacy, which only started in later centuries after the early church.

11. Catholicism rejects the "State Church", which has led to governments dominating Christianity rather than vice-versa.

Yet it was the papal bull, “Unam sanctam” written in 1302 by pope Boniface VIII, which promulgated the “two swords” theory, which meant that the pope had temporal authority as well as spiritual authority. This is why pope Gregory VII humiliated Emperor Henry IV, and this is why popes put whole nations under interdict, preventing the taking of the sacraments, and also deposing rulers.

12. Protestant State Churches greatly influenced the rise of nationalism, which mitigated against universal equality and Christian universalism (i.e., Catholicism).

Nationalism is a good antidote to universal power. Remember, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This way Protestantism safeguards against the New World Order. The Roman Catholic Church on the other hand, is an Illuminati organization, infiltrated by Freemasons.

13. Unified Catholic Christendom (before the 16th century) had not been plagued by the tragic religious wars which in turn led to the "Enlightenment," in which men rejected the hypocrisy of inter-Christian warfare and decided to become indifferent to religion rather than letting it guide their lives.

But at the same time the Inquisition killed many millions of people in Europe, and Roman Catholicism has been involved in the slave trade and also initiated the bloody Crusades against countries in the Middle East, although they were partially justified.

14. Catholicism retains the elements of mystery, supernatural, and the sacred in Christianity, thus opposing itself to secularization, where the sphere of the religious in life becomes greatly limited.

Roman Catholicism is inundated with superstition and is also occult, what with prayers to the dead and the idolatrous worship of the Mass.

15. Protestant individualism led to the privatization of Christianity, whereby it is little respected in societal and political life, leaving the "public square" barren of Christian influence.

Some Protestant denominations are guilty of this, such as some Baptists, however, other denominations, such as the Lutheran and Presbyterian denominations advocate for influence in political and societal life. For example, all of George Washington’s colonels, except one was a Presbyterian. The American Revolution is considered to be heavily influenced by Presbyterianism.

16. The secular false dichotomy of "church vs. world" has led committed orthodox Christians, by and large, to withdraw from politics, leaving a void filled by pagans, cynics, unscrupulous, and power-hungry. Catholicism offers a framework in which to approach the state and civic responsibility.

The church is in the world, but not of the world. The Bible clearly states that the believer has three enemies: the flesh, the world, and the devil (Ephesians 2:1-3). Also, the following verse states that the world is the enemy of the

believer, and the temporary domain of satan: “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.” (1John 2:16)

17. Protestantism leans too much on mere traditions of men (every denomination stems from one Founder's vision. As soon as two or more of these contradict each other, error is necessarily present).

Yet it is the Roman Catholic Church, which states that its tradition is on equal footing with Scripture. On the other hand, it is Protestantism which says that the sole highest authority is God’s Word, the Scripture. This despite the fact that many people may err in their interpretation of it. We have to depend on the Holy Spirit, Who will guide us unto all truth (John 16:13).

18. Protestant churches (esp. evangelicals), are far too often guilty of putting their pastors on too high of a pedestal. In effect, every pastor becomes a "pope," to varying degrees (some are "super-popes"). Because of this, evangelical congregations often experience a severe crisis and/or split up when a pastor leaves, thus proving that their philosophy is overly man-centered, rather than God-centered.

This observation indeed might be true, but not for Presbyterian-style churches (which are also evangelical). This system is a lot more optimal, in that input from multiple elders helps bring about a fair and balanced decision. Naturally, the head of the church is Jesus Christ (Ephesians 5:23), and not a man, such as the pope. Ruling the Roman Catholic Church, a body of more than one billion people is that much more difficult, and is even impossible to regulate by one single man.

19. Protestantism, due to lack of real authority and dogmatic structure, is tragically prone to accommodation to the spirit of the age, and moral faddism.

Protestant authority and dogma is drawn from the Scripture as the sole highest authority, since it is useful and sufficient for that (2Tim. 3:16-17). A classic example of how the Roman Catholic Church accommodates the spirit of the age is that it itself is actually a product of mixing Christianity with ancient Babylonian religion. Dogmas such as the papacy, Marian dogma, Purgatory, praying to the dead are all extra-Biblical doctrines and surprisingly be found in other religions and cultures (such as how praying to the dead was present in the ancient Roman religion, and ancestor worship is common to Eastern religions). Another vivid example is how 99% of Roman Catholics accept evolution theory, although this idea arose only in the middle of the nineteenth century.

20. Catholicism retains apostolic succession, necessary to know what is true Christian apostolic Tradition. It was the criterion of Christian truth used by the early Christians.

Apostolic succession is not mentioned in the Bible. The Orthodox and Anglican churches also claim apostolic tradition, so this cannot be a distinguishing mark of which one is the true church. The Christian church was built on a rock, not many rocks.

21. Many Protestants take a dim view towards Christian history in general, esp. the years from 313 (Constantine's conversion) to 1517 (Luther's arrival). This ignorance and hostility to Catholic Tradition leads to theological relativism, anti-Catholicism, and a constant, unnecessary process of "reinventing the wheel."

On the contrary, this is the time period of certain pre-Reformation Christian groups, such as the Albigenses, Waldenses, Lollards, and Hussites. It was the council of Trent when the Roman Catholic Church formally declared that it was leaving the Christian fold. On the other hand, this was truly a period of darkness (hence the Dark Ages), when popes fought and murdered each other (popes succeeding each other very quickly), exhumed each other’s bodies and put them on display in mock trials, had concubines, one pope having 64 children, illiteracy was rampant. This was a period of extreme ignorance, superstition and idolatry.

22. Protestantism from its inception was anti-Catholic, and remains so to this day (esp. evangelicalism). This is obviously wrong and unbiblical if Catholicism is indeed Christian (if it isn't, then - logically - neither is Protestantism, which inherited the bulk of its theology from Catholicism). The Catholic Church, on the other hand, is not anti-Protestant.

Protestantism is only anti-Catholic in the sense that when it defines its own doctrines, it does so in a manner that it compares them to Roman Catholic doctrines, since those were the ruling dogmas at that time. The Remonstrants and the Arminians for example defined their own doctrine in opposition to Calvinist doctrines. However, Protestantism defines its dogmas and its understanding of the Gospel from the Bible.

23. The Catholic Church accepts the authority of the great Ecumenical Councils (see, e.g., Acts 15) which defined and developed Christian doctrine (much of which Protestantism also accepts).

These councils are Ecumenical, or Catholic councils. In a sense, Protestants are also “Catholics” in that they belong to the universal church, the body of Christ, the Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church separated from the Catholic Church after Trent.

24. Most Protestants do not have bishops, a Christian office which is biblical (1 Tim 3:1-2) and which has existed from the earliest Christian history and Tradition.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the term bishop. The word bishop (ἐπίσκοπος) also means elder; these words can be used interchangeably with each other. For example, in Titus 1:5-8, we read that the qualities of a bishop are the same as that of an elder (e.g. blameless). However, the Roman Catholic positions of abbots, monks, friars, archbishops, cardinals, and the pope are not to be found in Scripture but are the results of foreign influences outside of Christianity.

25. Protestantism has no way of settling doctrinal issues definitively. At best, the individual Protestant can only take a head count of how many Protestant scholars, commentators, etc. take such-and-such a view on Doctrine X, Y, or Z. There is no unified Protestant Tradition.

We can know for sure that the Holy Scriptures, which are the sole highest authority, authored by God serve as the source of truth. The truth is in the Scriptures and not in anyone’s head, be he Protestant or Roman Catholic. We must also fully rely on the Holy Spirit that He is capable of leading His children to full knowledge of the truth, and not a body of fallible and sinful men.

26. Protestantism arose in 1517, and is a "Johnny-come-lately" in the history of Christianity. Therefore it cannot possibly be the "restoration" of "pure", "primitive" Christianity, since this is ruled out by the fact of its absurdly late appearance. Christianity must have historic continuity or it is not Christianity. Protestantism is necessarily a "parasite" of Catholicism, historically and doctrinally speaking.

Protestants believe that they are a continuation of the “church in the wilderness” (Acts 7:38), in other words, the invisible church, the body of Christ, the universal church, the saints, the Catholic Church, or the Adamite church. Since the New Testament is the fulfillment of the Old Testament faith, the Christian faith occupies a continuum from the Old Testament times forward to the New Testament, from Adam to the saints of the last days. Thus the Church is around 6,000 years old (from Adam at Creation). Compared to this, the Roman Catholic Church is a Johnny-come-lately, which formally was established not in the New Testament, but only in the centuries after the early church (around the early seventh century) with false doctrines slowly seeping in and perverting the true church. Rome finally broke away formally after her council of Trent.

27. The Protestant notion of the "invisible church" is also novel in the history of Christianity and foreign to the Bible (Mt 5:14; Mt 16:18), therefore untrue.

The invisible church is none other than the body of Christ, or the body of believers throughout all time, from Adam until the last day. It is also the same as the church which was wandering in the wilderness (Acts 7:38), which preceded the church in the New Testament. Rome focuses much too much on the institutional church and doesn’t deal too much what goes on in someone’s heart. It is obvious that not everybody who sits in a church service is a true believer. Even someone who “believes” like Simon the magician (Acts 8:9-24) might not be part of the true church.

28. When Protestant theologians speak of the teaching of early Christianity (e.g., when refuting "cults"), they say "the Church taught . . ." (as it was then unified), but when they refer to the present they instinctively and

inconsistently refrain from such terminology, since universal teaching authority now clearly resides only in the Catholic Church.

This does not contradict Sola Scriptura, which teaches that the sole highest authority is the Scripture. Even though we compare the teachings of heretical movements to what the early church believed, we are not elevating the early church’s opinion to the level of God’s Word. The early church to a large degree contradicts Roman teaching.

29. The Protestant principle of private judgment has created a milieu (esp. in Protestant America) in which (invariably) man-centered "cults" such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism, and Christian Science arise. The very notion that one can "start" a new, or "the true" Church is Protestant to the core.

Every person has the right to interpret Scripture, but also the responsibility to do so correctly. One cannot start cults just on a whim. Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and Christian Science have nothing to do with Protestantism. Roman Catholicism also suffers from its own load of “cafeteria Catholics” who pick and choose doctrine according to their own tastes.

30. The lack of a definitive teaching authority in Protestant (as with the Catholic magisterium) makes many individual Protestants think that they have a direct line to God, notwithstanding all of Christian Tradition and the history of biblical exegesis (a "Bible, Holy Spirit and me" mentality). Such people are generally under-educated theologically, unteachable, lack humility, and have no business making presumed "infallible" statements about the nature of Christianity.

Many Roman Catholics are also nominal, and also under-educated theologically, and also are unteachable and also lack humility. The definitive teaching authority in Protestantism is God’s Word, obviously, as we have seen previously numerous times. Each person through earnest prayer and serious study of the Word can be in contact with God through the Holy Spirit. However, the big issue here is separating one’s own thoughts and biases from what God is telling us in the Word.

31. Evangelicalism's "techniques" of evangelism are often contrived and manipulative, certainly not directly derived from the text of the Bible. Some even resemble brainwashing to a degree.

Some evangelical methods indeed may be manipulative, but are characteristic more of Arminians and charismatics. The same thing could also be said about the Roman Catholic Church where one has to submit his will and intellect to the church and just take it by faith that the church’s teachers have gotten everything right.

32. The gospel preached by many evangelical Protestant evangelists and pastors is a truncated and abridged, individualistic and ear-tickling gospel, in effect merely "fire insurance" rather than the biblical gospel as proclaimed by the Apostles.

This might be true of the Arminian Gospel, but the Calvinist Gospel takes sanctification seriously. Just because someone claims to be a Christian because “they made a choice” doesn’t necessarily mean that they are saved and truly believers, because salvation is not of him who wills or runs (Romans 9:16). On the other hand, the Roman gospel is truly lacking because it portrays a god who is too weak to preserve his children in order so they persevere (Romans 8:32-29; Luke 15:3-6).

33. Evangelicalism often separates profound, life-transforming repentance and radical discipleship from its gospel message. The Lutheran Bonhoeffer called this "cheap grace."

This might be true in many cases, but as in the response to point #32, the Calvinist Gospel is much more robust.

34. The absence of the idea of submission to spiritual authority in Protestantism has leaked over into the civic arena, where the ideas of personal "freedom," "rights," and "choice" now dominate to such an extent that civic duty, communitarianism, and discipline are tragically neglected, to the detriment of a healthy society.

This might be true about many free Christian or charismatic denominations, but for example in Reformed and Presbyterian churches we take the injunction in Hebrews 13:17 seriously, to submit to elders. Excommunication is

also practiced in these churches. However, submitting to the church rulers should not be taken to the extreme that Rome does where an individual must submit their intellect and will to the church rulers. Church rulers and elders cannot act and decree with impunity in Christ’s name. Ephesians 5:21 also tells us that we must be “Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.”

35. Catholicism retains the sense of the sacred, the sublime, the holy, and the beautiful in spirituality. The ideas of altar, and "sacred space" are preserved. Many Protestant churches are no more than "meeting halls" or "gymnasiums" or "barn"-type structures. Most Protestants' homes are more esthetically striking than their churches. Likewise, Protestants are often "addicted to mediocrity" in their appreciation of art, music, architecture, drama, the imagination, etc.

This is false; Protestants have a very rich sense of the sacred, sublime, and holy in their spirituality. Mere physical things are not the point of spirituality, but rather spiritually experiencing God and following His will. Protestant churches are kept simplistic for a reason, because luxurious golden, gem-studded crucifixes, colorful vestments, and stained glass windows, and other such grandiose and lavish things are not found in Scripture. Jesus Christ had only a single garment, and lived among the poor, contrary to the pomp of the papacy. Furthermore, Protestantism correctly asserts that everything is holy, not just what is in the church. Everything is holy, because God owns everything. That is the definition of holiness. Roman Catholicism incorrectly separates the holy from the profane, the church leadership from the laity. Protestantism has produced some of the greatest and inspiring hymns and songs in the world, including “A Mighty Fortress is Our God” by Martin Luther, “How can it be that I should gain” by Charles Wesley, and “Amazing Grace” by John Bunyan.

36. Protestantism has largely neglected the place of liturgy in worship (with notable exceptions such as Anglicanism and Lutheranism). This is the way Christians had always worshiped down through the centuries, and thus can't be so lightly dismissed.

Presbyterianism is also an exception. The liturgy also has an important part in this denomination as well as the above mentioned denominations. However, focusing too much on the liturgy and not on God and spiritual growth are pitfalls of Roman Catholicism.

37. Protestantism tends to oppose matter and spirit, favoring the latter, and is somewhat Gnostic or Docetic in this regard.

No, quite the opposite is the case. Roman Catholicism tends to overemphasize the deity of Christ and rather forgets that Jesus Christ was also a man, therefore it is docetic. Roman Catholicism is gnostic in the sense that it claims that only a small section of the church (its priesthood) should have access to the Word of God, and rather discourages the laity from reading the Scriptures for themselves.

38. Catholicism upholds the "incarnational principle," wherein Jesus became flesh and thus raised flesh and matter to new spiritual heights.

Protestants also believe that Jesus became flesh, and that after His Ascension He shall “come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Fleshly and material things are not bad in and of themselves, but rather became corrupt after the Fall into sin. Because Rome thinks otherwise again demonstrates that it is gnostic.

39. Protestantism greatly limits or disbelieves in sacramentalism, which is simply the extension of the incarnational principle and the belief that matter can convey grace. Some sects (e.g., Baptists, many Pentecostals) reject all sacraments.

This is greatly untrue. It is also incorrect to say that Baptists reject all sacraments, because they affirm the sacrament of baptism. On the other hand, Protestants assess the sacraments in a Biblical manner, not multiplying the number of sacraments unnecessarily; more is not necessarily better. The Roman Catholic Church multiplies the number of sacraments from baptism to last rites so as to gain more control over people all throughout their lives.

40. Protestants' excessive mistrust of the flesh ("carnality") often leads to (in evangelicalism or fundamentalism) an absurd legalism (no dancing, drinking, card-playing, rock music, etc.).

This might be true of some Protestant denominations, but only because these groups are making laws outside of the Scripture, just like how the Pharisees did. Since they break the principle of Sola Scriptura, thus they fall into legalism.

41. Many Protestants tend to separate life into categories of "spiritual" and "carnal," as if God is not Lord of all of life. It forgets that all non-sinful endeavors are ultimately spiritual.

This is simply unheard of, especially since Reformed theology stresses the sovereignty of God even in the first act of faith in the believer. True Protestant Christianity is about a constant walk with Christ, reading the Bible daily, and praying personal prayer as opposed to rote prayer of Roman Catholicism which is something that the pagans do (Matthew 6:7). It is more like Rome to separate the world into the profane and the holy, for example as seen in the laity and the priesthood.

42. Protestantism has removed the Eucharist from the center and focus of Christian worship services. Some Protestants observe it only monthly, or even quarterly. This is against the Tradition of the early Church.

Celebrating the Eucharist may lead to making it more profane after constant repetition. Rome never ever celebrates the Eucharist, because her Mass is a false Eucharist, sheer idolatry and a mockery of the sacrifice of Christ.

43. Most Protestants regard the Eucharist symbolically, which is contrary to universal Christian Tradition up to 1517, and the Bible (Mt 26:26-28; Jn 6:47-63; 1 Cor 10:14-22; 1 Cor 11:23-30), which hold to the Real Presence (another instance of the antipathy to matter).

The Eucharist is a symbol, since Jesus commanded us to perform it in remembrance of Him. Furthermore, in Mark 14:25 we read that the wine actually never transubstantiates into the blood of Christ. Jesus Christ will come again not in the form of a piece of bread, but at His second coming (Acts 1:11); in the meanwhile, Jesus left the Holy Spirit here on earth in His place (John 14:16).

44. Protestantism has virtually ceased to regard marriage as a sacrament, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mt 19:4-5; 1 Cor 7:14; 1 Cor 7:39; Eph 5:25-33).

This is foolishness. Protestants believe in marriage and that the wife and the husband sanctify each other, but they never make it a sacrament, which is defined as an ordinance of Christ, which is sealed with a symbol (e.g. water in baptism, bread in the Lord’s Supper). On the other hand, Roman Catholic annulments make it possible for her members to break up marriages even when there are children born into a marriage. It also allows for a Roman Catholic to simply leave a non-Roman Catholic spouse and marry another Roman Catholic, which is divorce.

45. Protestantism has abolished the priesthood (Mt 18:18) and the sacrament of ordination, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Acts 6:6; Acts 14:22; 1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6).

Protestants not only believe in the priesthood but extend it to all believers (1Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10). Rome however continues the Old Testament priesthood by continuing to offer sacrifices, when the Old Testament priesthood had been abolished (John 19:30).

46. Catholicism retains the Pauline notion of the spiritual practicality of a celibate clergy (e.g., Mt 19:12, 1 Cor 7:8, 1 Cor 7:27, 1 Cor 7:32-33).

The big problem with celibacy is that when a man becomes a Roman Catholic priest, he takes a vow of being single for the rest of his life. The church cannot force this onto everybody who wants to become a priest, because, as Matthew 19:12 says “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” Not all Roman Catholic priests are capable of remaining chaste, as all sorts of pedophile scandals all over the world abundantly show. Furthermore, as God commands in Genesis 1:22, man must be fruitful and multiply. This is a general rule for all people. Church rulers are

ordered to have wives in order to give a good example to the church (Titus 1:6; 2Tim. 3:2). Priestly celibacy is not universal in the Roman church, nor is it eternally binding. Peter himself had a wife.

47. Protestantism has largely rejected the sacrament of confirmation (Acts 8:18, Heb 6:2-4), contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible.

This is false; confirmation was never a sacrament. Acts 8 and Hebrews 6 only talk about laying on of hands onto new ministers of the Gospel.

48. Many Protestants have denied infant baptism, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Acts 2:38-39; Acts 16:15; Acts 16:33; Acts 18:8; 1 Cor 1:16; Col 2:11-12). Protestantism is divided into five major camps on the question of baptism.

This is true, but some Protestant churches affirm infant baptism (Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Anglicans). Some Roman Catholic teachers are wrong in saying that infant baptism is exorcism.

49. The great majority of Protestants deny baptismal regeneration, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5; Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 6:11; Titus 3:5).

Baptism does not save. The thief on the right side of Christ believed and was saved, but was not baptized. 1Peter 3:21 sums this up quite well: “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ”.

50. Protestants have rejected the sacrament of anointing of the sick (Extreme Unction / "Last Rites"), contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mk 6:13; 1 Cor 12:9, 1 Cor 12:30; Jas 5:14-15).

“Last rites” was never a sacrament. In Mark 6 we read only about some disciples who anointed and healed sick people, but these were not necessarily before their death. 1Corinthians speaks about healing as a gift, which is given only to some.

51. Protestantism denies the indissolubility of sacramental marriage and allows divorce, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Gen 2:24; Mal 2:14-16; Mt 5:32; Mat 19:6, Mat 19:9; Mk 10:11-12; Lk 16:18; Rom 7:2-3; 1 Cor 7:10-14; 1 Cor 7:39).

Jesus teaches that marriage can be dissolved in the case of fornication (marital infidelity): “But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.” Here it is important not to try to be holier than the Scripture or more knowledgeable than God. This stems from Rome’s disregard of Sola Scriptura. This is also supported by Paul in 1Cor. 7:15-16. Rome has a peculiar view of marriage in that Roman Catholics believe that a marriage is only valid until it is consummated by sexual relations. Because of this, they believe that both the Holy Spirit and Joseph are the two spouses of Mary. It is anti-biblical to claim that Mary was “double dating”.

52. Protestantism doesn't believe procreation to be the primary purpose and benefit of marriage (it isn't part of the vows, as in Catholic matrimony), contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Gen 1:28; Gen 28:3, Ps 107:38; Ps 127:3-5).

This is the error of Onanism. According to 1 Corinthians 7:4–5, “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.” This implies that sexuality was given to human beings not only for procreation but also for pleasure.

53. Protestantism sanctions contraception, in defiance of universal Christian Tradition (Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant) up until 1930 - when the Anglicans first allowed it - and the Bible (Gen 38:8-10; Gen 41:52; Ex 23:25-26; Lev 26:9; Deut 7:14; Ruth 4:13; Lk 1:24-25). Now, only Catholicism retains the ancient Tradition against the "anti-child" mentality.

Contraceptives are not inherently “anti-child”, since a child is not conceived through their usage. Parents can have any number of children that they want, disregarding contraceptives.

54. Protestantism (mostly its liberal wing) has accepted abortion as a moral option, contrary to universal Christian Tradition until recently (sometime after 1930), and the Bible (e.g., Ex 20:13; Job 31:15; Ps 139:13-16; Isa 44:2; Isa 49:5; Jer 1:5; Jer 2:34; Lk 1:15; Lk 1:41; Rom 13:9-10).

Indeed, it is liberal Protestantism that accepts abortion, which is contrary to the Bible. The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research: Researchers S.K. Henshaw & K. Kost used a different measurement of abortion data: the “abortion index”, and according to this measure, Roman Catholics are 1.5 more likely than Protestants to procure an abortion.

55. Protestantism (largely liberal denominations) allow women pastors (and even bishops, as in Anglicanism), contrary to Christian Tradition (inc. traditional Protestant theology) and the Bible (Mt 10:1-4; 1 Tim 2:11-15; 1 Tim 3:1-12; Titus 1:6).

This is true of the liberal denominations, but then again, the liberal Protestant denominations are not even Protestant because they deny the virgin birth, the resurrection, and the atonement. Rome also denies the proper sexual roles of its priesthood when it foists celibacy on some of its priests.

56. Protestantism is, more and more, formally and officially compromising with currently fashionable radical feminism, which denies the roles of men and women, as taught in the Bible (Gen 2:18-23; 1 Cor 11:3-10) and maintained by Christian Tradition (differentiation of roles, but not of equality).

This is more true only of the liberal wing of the Protestant churches and not evangelical Protestantism.

57. Protestantism is also currently denying, with increasing frequency, the headship of the husband in marriage, which is based upon the headship of the Father over the Son (while equal in essence) in the Trinity, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (1 Cor 11:3; Eph 5:22-33; Col 3:18-19; 1 Pet 3:1-2). This too, is based on a relationship of equality (1 Cor 11:11-12; Gal 3:28; Eph 5:21).

This also is more true of the liberal churches and not evangelical Protestantism. Rome errs in denying some of its priests the chance to even become the head of a family.

58. Liberal Protestantism (most notably Anglicanism) has even ordained practicing homosexuals as pastors and blessed their "marriages," or taught that homosexuality is merely an involuntary, "alternate" lifestyle, contrary to formerly universal Christian Tradition, as the Bible clearly teaches (Gen 19:4-25; Rom 1:18-27; 1 Cor 6:9). Catholicism stands firm on traditional morality.

Again, this is also true of the liberal denominations. At the same time, roughly half of Roman Catholic priests are homosexual.

59. Liberal Protestantism, and evangelicalism increasingly, have accepted "higher critical" methods of biblical interpretation which lead to the destruction of the traditional Christian reverence for the Bible, and demote it to the status of largely a human, fallible document, to the detriment of its divine, infallible essence.

Yet this is precisely the result of denying Sola Scriptura. Rome does something similar when it elevates human tradition to the level of the Scriptures. In a sense the Roman Catholic Church is also liberal, according to its epistemology and also is reaping the bad fruits thereof with half its forcedly celibate priesthood being homosexual.

60. Many liberal Protestants have thrown out many cardinal doctrines of Christianity, such as the Incarnation, Virgin Birth, the Bodily Resurrection of Christ, the Trinity, Original Sin, hell, the existence of the devil, miracles, etc.

This is the sixth accusation of Protestants based on the apostate liberal churches. There are worlds of difference between the two, and the Roman Catholic Church itself is liberal. And, I might add that the majority of Roman

Catholics themselves also deny original sin because of their concomitant belief in evolution, whereas many evangelical Protestants believe in it.

61. The founders of Protestantism denied, and Calvinists today deny, the reality of human free will (Luther's favorite book was his Bondage of the Will). This is both contrary to the constant premise of the Bible, Christian Tradition, and common sense.

Yet this is exactly what Jesus says in John 15:16: “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain”. Also, Romans 9:16 says “So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.” We deny free will because there is ample evidence to show that man is the enemy of God, the son of satan and does not want to follow God at all. Therefore if Roman Catholics who oppose these Scriptures say that predestination is contrary to their antiscriptural “common sense”, this means that predestination is the truth.

62. Classical Protestantism had a deficient view of the Fall of Man, thinking that the result was "total depravity." According to Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and Calvinists, man could only do evil of his own volition, and had no free will to do good. He now has a "sin nature." Catholicism believes that, in a mysterious way, man cooperates with the grace which always precedes all good actions. In Catholicism, man's nature still retains some good, although he has a propensity to sin ("concupiscence").

Then how can it be that the Bible says “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.” (John 8:44) If men are the sons of the devil, who does not want them to convert, then how can they convert? Man is born in sin, into death, which is a result of the Fall into sin. Romans 3:10-11 says “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.” Concupiscence is a man-made invention not found in the Bible.

63. Classical Protestantism, and Calvinism today, make God the author of evil. He supposedly wills that men do evil and violate His precepts without having any free will to do so. This is blasphemous, and turns God into a demon.

This is not true because God is the ultimate good. Roman Catholics also believe that since God created everything, then God must be the author of all evil. But they deny this. Man has responsibility for his own actions (Phill. 2:12-13; Exodus chapters 7-9).

64. Accordingly (man having no free will), God, in classical Protestant and Calvinist thought, predestines men to hell, although they had no choice or say in the matter all along!

This is wrong. Phillipians 2:12-13 says “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” This means that there is a command to work out our salvation, meaning that man is responsible for his deeds. Yet, at the same time, as verse 13 says, the reason that we can do this is because somehow, mysteriously God is doing this work in us. Jude 1:4 states that there are certain people who have been condemned to damnation: “For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.” This is what God revealed to us in the Bible, therefore it this settles the matter.

65. Classical Protestantism and Calvinism, teach falsely that Jesus died only for the elect (i.e., those who will make it to heaven).

If Jesus died for every single person, then that means that every single person, including Mao, Stalin, Hitler, and pope Alexander VI will be in Heaven. God’s holiness does not allow this. Jesus’ work on the cross is finished, meaning that He died for a finite number of people, and this number does not change in time after the cross. In other words, our deeds in the present have no effect on for whom Jesus died on the cross. Jesus actually died, not hypothetically. Jesus not just made salvation possible for people to accept, He died fully and completely on the cross. Universal election, as some Roman Catholics even teach is a heresy and denial of the Gospel. Furthermore,

this is the way Jesus prays in the garden of Gethsemane for His elect: “I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.” (John 17:9).

66. Classical Protestantism (esp. Luther), and Calvinism, due to their false view of the Fall, deny the efficacy and capacity of human reason to know God to some extent (both sides agree that revelation and grace are also necessary), and oppose it to God and faith, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mk 12:28; Lk 10:27; Jn 20:24-29; Acts 1:3; Acts 17:2, Acts 17:17, Acts 17:22-34; Acts 19:8). The best Protestant apologists today simply hearken back to the Catholic heritage of St. Aquinas, St. Augustine, and many other great thinkers.

Note: this is the sixth time that Armstrong refers to “classical Protestantism” as opposed to liberal Protestantism. Man in his fallen state has had all of his faculties affected by sin (mind, will, intellect, etc., even his body). We do not deny that God can be known in a general way in nature or that God’s law is written on our hearts (our conscience), but we need God to open our mind to the truth (Luke 24:45).

67. Pentecostal or charismatic Protestantism places much too high an emphasis on spiritual experience, not balancing it properly with reason, the Bible, and Tradition (including the authority of the Church to pronounce on the validity of "private revelations").

Roman Catholics themselves fall into mysticism, which can be the gateway to the occult. Some Roman Catholics also have an unhealthy tendency to dwell on demons and the occult. Loyola himself had visions, including that of a serpent before he started out on his “spiritual” journey.

68. Other Protestants (e.g., many Baptists) deny that spiritual gifts such as healing are present in the current age (supposedly they ceased with the apostles).

This is true. For example, tongues shall cease, as it says in 1Corinthians 13:8: “Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.” This is part of the New Testament, which was written for us to believe, therefore we should expect tongues to cease sometime after the first letter to the Corinthians was written. Also, many conservative Roman Catholics deny speaking in tongues and the charismatic movement.

69. Protestantism has contradictory views of church government, or ecclesiology (episcopal, Presbyterian, congregational, or no collective authority at all), thus making discipline, unity and order impossible. Some sects even claim to have "apostles" or "prophets" among them, with all the accompanying abuses of authority resulting therefrom.

As I have described in this book, the papacy is in fundamental contradiction to the Bible, furthermore we have also seen its abuses all throughout church history; power corrupts, but absolute (papal) power corrupts absolutely. The word never ever occurs anywhere in the Bible. Thus, we can be certain that at least one form of Protestant church government is correct.

70. Protestantism (esp. evangelicalism) has an undue fascination for the "end of the world," which has led to unbiblical date-setting (Mt 24:30-44; Mt 25:13; Lk 12:39-40) and much human tragedy among those who are taken in by such false prophecies.

This tendency is characteristic more of the charismatic movement. Protestants know very well that we do not know neither the day nor the hour when Jesus will come back. That is why it is important to preach linearly through the Bible and not get bogged down in certain topics. In contrast, the Roman Catholic Church has a thoroughly anti-Biblical eschatology, and this is detrimental to the laity since what you think about the end times influences how you live your life. False prophecies are characteristic more of churches like the Seventh Day Adventists or Jehova’s Witnesses, which deny Sola Scriptura.

71. Evangelicalism's over-emphasis on the "imminent end" of the age has often led to a certain "pie-in-the sky" mentality, to the detriment of social, political, ethical, and economic sensibilities here on earth.

Interestingly enough, it was Luther who said that if he knew that the Lord would return tomorrow, he would plant a tree. We do not know when the end of the age will be, therefore we must continue working and be faithful to God’s Word.

72. Protestant thought has the defining characteristic of being "dichotomous," i.e., it separates ideas into more or less exclusive and mutually-hostile camps, when in fact many of the dichotomies are simply complementary rather than contradictory. Protestantism is "either-or," whereas Catholicism takes a "both-and" approach. Examples follow:

73. Protestantism pits the Word (the Bible, preaching) against sacraments.

74. Protestantism sets up inner devotion and piety against the Liturgy.

75. Protestantism opposes spontaneous worship to form prayers.

76. Protestantism separates the Bible from the Church.

77. Protestantism creates the false dichotomy of Bible vs. Tradition.

78. Protestantism pits Tradition against the Holy Spirit.

79. Protestantism considers Church authority and individual liberty and conscience contradictory.

Protestants do no such thing with the Bible, since we read about the sacraments in the Bible and perform them accordingly. In mainstream churches Protestants adhere to the liturgy, but it is of tantamount importance that we do not let it have precedence over Scripture and inner devotion. Jesus Himself said: “But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.” (Matthew 6:7). Point #75 is a gross error, since if Protestantism prefers inner devotion, spontaneous worship flows directly from it. Roman Catholics are guilty of formal prayers such as praying the rosary, which is repetitious and pagan. Protestantism does not separate the Bible from the church, because we know that members of the church wrote the Bible, and that the Bible was intended for the church. The church does not interpret it, rather the Holy Spirit. Only the Holy Spirit can interpret the Bible correctly, being the Spirit of God, therefore we must be focused on how the Holy Spirit illuminates our minds. As Protestants, we do not reject tradition outright, but if we see that a certain tradition is in opposition to the Scripture, then we must reject it according to the principle of Sola Scriptura. We do not pit tradition against the Holy Spirit, but because we believe that the Holy Spirit is working in many people in the church, they should arrive at the same conclusions by reading the Bible. The church has authority, but only a relative authority. The church does not have authority unless it is in accordance with the Bible. Men cannot bind the conscience of other men, only if what they say is in accordance with the Bible. Thus, church authority and individual liberty are left intact. In contrast, the Roman Catholic Church demands that the laity subject their will and intellect to mother church. Furthermore, Rome does not allow herself to be reformed once a teaching has been set down as infallible, even if it is contradictory to Scripture, which is intolerable.

We can collapse the above eight points into one. Along with that, we could also do away with the six points dealing with the liberal churches.

80. Protestantism (esp. Luther) sets up the Old Testament against the New Testament, even though Jesus did not do so (Mt 5:17-19; Mk 7:8-11; Lk 24:27; Lk 24:44; Jn 5:45-47).

This is simply wrong. The Protestant principle of Tota Scriptura (all of the Bible is inspired of God; see 2Tim. 3:16-17) stems directly from Sola Scriptura. If the Scriptures are the sole highest authority, then since this is true for every single verse of the Bible, this means that the whole Bible in its entirety is the sole highest authority, therefore the Old and New Testament cannot be pitted against each other. True, modern dispensationalists do this (thereby breaking Sola Scriptura), but not classical Protestantism.

81. On equally unbiblical grounds, Protestantism opposes law to grace.

This might be true of antinomian Protestants, but not true of Calvinists. Since the law has not been done away with, we still must be found keeping the Ten Commandments. We keep the law not to earn salvation, but because we are a new creation and want to please God by doing His will.

82. Protestantism creates a false dichotomy between symbolism and sacramental reality (e.g., baptism, Eucharist).

This is because we have to. On the other hand, Roman Catholics are reading things into the sacraments, which are simply not there. For example, some Roman Catholic theologians claim that baptism is also an exorcism. If the bread truly becomes the body of Christ, then logically this would mean that humans would become demigods, since molecules of the wafer become part of our bodies through digestion and cellular incorporation. This would also mean that animals would become demigods if they ate crumbs from the bread. The Mass also grossly denigrates the body of Christ, since we would exude parts of the bread through urinary excretion.

83. Protestantism separates the Individual from Christian community (1 Cor 12:14-27).

This could be true of certain evangelical free churches or charismatic groups, but not of mainstream churches, especially those who look at the church as the body of Christ, which is God’s people, or the invisible church. An individual cannot exist outside the community of the church just like a single cell cannot survive outside the human body.

84. Protestantism pits the veneration of saints against the worship of God. Catholic theology doesn't permit worship of saints in the same fashion as that directed towards God. Saints are revered and honored, not adored, as only God the Creator can be.

This is false because the Hebrew word ת means both to serve and to honor, both of which are forms of (avot) אבworship.

85. The anti-historical outlook of many Protestants leads to individuals thinking that the Holy Spirit is speaking to them, but has not, in effect, spoken to the multitudes of Christians for 1500 years before Protestantism began!

This is incorrect since Protestants believe that the Holy Spirit has kept alive a remnant of believers all throughout church history, as opposed to the larger mass of the Roman Catholic church: “Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.” (Romans 11:5)

86. Flaws in original Protestant thought have led to even worse errors in reaction. E.g., extrinsic justification, devised to assure the predominance of grace, came to prohibit any outward sign of its presence ("faith vs. works," "sola fide"). Calvinism, with its cruel God, turned men off to such an extent that they became Unitarians (as in New England). Many founders of cults of recent origin started out Calvinist (Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, The Way International, etc.).

We could also say that many Calvinists started out as Roman Catholics, but saw the light. The God of Calvinism is not a cruel God, especially since He does everything to save and preserve His elect. The rest of humanity deserves damnation by default for their sins, since death is the wages of sin (Romans 6:23). The Reformers never pitted faith versus works. They did say that we are saved by faith alone, but also by a faith, which does not stand alone. Since we are new creations, we have been born again to do good works: “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” (Ephesians 2:10). Also, according to 2Peter 1:5: “And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;”

87. Evangelicalism is unbiblically obsessed (in typically American fashion) with celebrities (TV Evangelists).

This is an interesting statement especially since many evangelicals live outside of the United States, and is characteristic more of the charismatic movement. Also, the pope himself is adored as a celebrity himself by many Roman Catholics the world over. Some Roman Catholics even attribute supernatural powers of healing to past popes.

88. Evangelicalism is infatuated with the false idea that great numbers in a congregation (or rapid growth) are a sign of God's presence in a special way, and His unique blessing. They forget that Mormonism is also growing by leaps and bounds. God calls us to faithfulness rather than to "success," obedience, not flattering statistics.

Roman Catholicism is also infatuated by the impression that great numbers mean success, as they keep track of how many Roman Catholics there are in different countries, even though these numbers are greatly inflated by the cafeteria Catholics. For example, they are thrilled at the increase in their numbers in the United States, despite the bevy of sexual scandals within the church in this country, which also turns a lot of people away from the church. On the other hand, Protestants stress evangelism of people one on one.

89. Evangelicalism often emphasizes numerical growth rather than individual spiritual growth.

This is false, but continuing on this note, Roman Catholicism is so unconcerned about what the laity believes, it’s just important that they belong to the church and to the pope. Otherwise, the Jesuit order would have long been dissolved (like it was in the latter half of the eighteenth century).

90. Evangelicalism is presently obsessed with self-fulfillment, self-help, and oftentimes, outright selfishness, rather than the traditional Christian stress on suffering, sacrifice, and service.

This is false, and also can be said about many Roman Catholics. I personally was abused at a Franciscan high school where the priests were supposed to be following a vow of poverty. My brother was also so mistreated he wanted to commit suicide. The Roman Catholic Church is the single richest secular organization in the world, so much so that it cannot even keep track of how much money it has. If the Roman Catholic Church cared even a little, then they would empty all of the great Roman Catholic cathedrals of their gold, silver, ornaments and whatnot (much of it having been stolen throughout history) and give them all to the poor.

91. Evangelicalism has a truncated and insufficient view of the place of suffering in the Christian life. Instead, "health-and-wealth" and "name-it-and-claim-it" movements within Pentecostal Protestantism are flourishing, which have a view of possessions not in harmony with the Bible and Christian Tradition.

Again, these things are characteristic of the charismatic/Pentecostal movement, which denies Sola Scriptura, and not of mainstream Protestantism.

92. Evangelicalism has, by and large, adopted a worldview which is, in many ways, more capitalist than Christian. Wealth and personal gain is sought more than godliness, and is seen as a proof of God's favor, as in Puritan, and secularized American thought, over against the Bible and Christian teaching.

This person does not know the Puritans very well; Puritans were very godly people and took great care in spiritual development. This can be attested to in the kinds of prayers that they wrote, their Bible commentaries, and their biographies.

In contrast, the Roman Catholic Church has to a large extent adopted a Socialist worldview, which is unbiblical, and has been disproved by the catastrophe that is Marxism/Communism as attested to in Eastern Europe, China, Africa and South America, which destroyed more than 100 million people.

93. Evangelicalism is increasingly tolerating far-left political outlooks not in accord with Christian views, esp. at its seminaries and colleges.

94. Evangelicalism is increasingly tolerating theological heterodoxy and liberalism, to such an extent that many evangelical leaders are alarmed, and predict a further decay of orthodox standards.

In response to points 93 and 94: The present pope is doing the very same thing when he tolerates homosexuals and pedophiles (who have been tolerated in the Roman Catholic priesthood for centuries), as well as the teaching of evolution and Socialism (see liberation theology). Also, about one in ten Roman Catholics are charismatic, hence giving rise to the charismatic Catholic movement.

95. "Positive confession" movements in Pentecostal evangelicalism have adopted views of God (in effect) as a "cosmic bellhop," subject to man's frivolous whims and desires of the moment, thus denying God's absolute sovereignty and prerogative to turn down any of man's improper prayer requests (Jas 4:3; 1 Jn 5:14).

It is amusing that the author refers to God’s absolute sovereignty, but at the same time rejects predestination. This point as well as many previous points are true mainly of the charismatic/Pentecostal movement.

96. The above sects usually teach that anyone can be healed who has enough "faith," contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (e.g., Job, St. Paul's "thorn in the flesh," usu. considered a disease by most Protestant commentators).

If we have faith we might be healed, although this is not guaranteed. There is meaning in suffering. Suffering might come upon as a wakeup call to tell us that we might be doing displeasing to God, and therefore reaping the ill consequences. Death visits everyone. Suffering and pain will only fade away at the second coming of Christ (Revelation 21:4)

97. Evangelicalism, by its own self-critiques, is badly infected with pragmatism, the false philosophical view that "whatever works is true, or right." The gospel, esp. on TV, is sold in the same way that McDonalds hawks hamburgers. Technology, mass-market and public relations techniques have largely replaced personal pastoral care and social concern for the downtrodden, irreligious, and unchurched masses.

This may be true of modern evangelical free churches, the liberal and Pentecostal churches, just as Rome is also a pragmatic church, producing millions of cafeteria Catholics who pick and choose whatever they want to believe.

98. Sin, in evangelicalism, is increasingly seen as a psychological failure or a lack of self-esteem, rather than the willful revolt against God that it is.

This view is true mainly of liberals or the charismatic movement. Also at the same time, Rome does not understand that sin is a state that humans are born into, not just sinful deeds. Sinful deeds are only a manifestation of sinful nature of human beings. Furthermore, Roman Catholicism underestimates the nature and strength of sin, that we are not just wounded by sin, but are dead in sin (Genesis 2:17). Therefore, Rome separates sins into merely venial sins and deadly sins. All sin merits death, yet there is no sin which cannot be forgiven. Rome also believes that the host in the Mass is a “medicine” which helps against future sins.

99. Protestantism, in all essential elements, merely borrows wholesale from Catholic Tradition, or distorts the same. All doctrines upon which Catholics and Protestants agree, are clearly Catholic in origin (Trinity, Virgin Birth, Resurrection, 2nd Coming, Canon of the Bible, heaven, hell, etc.). Those where Protestantism differs are usually distortions of Catholic forerunners. E.g., Quakerism is a variant of Catholic Quietism. Calvinism is an over-obsession with the Catholic idea of the sovereignty of God, but taken to lengths beyond what Catholicism ever taught (denial of free will, total depravity, double predestination, etc.). Protestant dichotomies such as faith vs. works, come from nominalism, which was itself a corrupt form of Scholasticism, never dogmatically sanctioned by the Catholic Church. Whatever life or truth is present in each Protestant idea, always is derived from Catholicism, which is the fulfillment of the deepest and best aspirations within Protestantism.

The above-mentioned doctrines are thankfully not inventions of Roman Catholic tradition, but stem from the Bible. For example, the Trinity, heaven, hell, and the virgin birth canon can be found in the Old Testament (sometimes as part of prophecies of the Messiah), long before the Roman Catholic Church even came into existence. On the other hand, there are many Romanist teachings which clearly are unbiblical: the worship of Mary, the papacy, the Apocrypha, salvation by works, or Purgatory.

100. One of Protestantism's foundational principles is sola Scriptura, which is neither a biblical (see below), historical (nonexistent until the 16th century), nor logical (it's self-defeating) idea:

This is false, Sola Scriptura has been established by several dozen Bible verses as explained in this book (see chapter on Sola Scriptura).

101. The Bible doesn't contain the whole of Jesus' teaching, or Christianity, as many Protestants believe (Mk 4:33; Mk 6:34; Lk 24:15-16; Lk 24:25-27; Jn 16:12; Jn 20:30; Jn 21:25; Acts 1:2-3).

Funny, but Roman Catholics themselves are incapable of citing a single sentence from Jesus’ teachings outside the Bible.

102. Sola Scriptura is an abuse of the Bible, since it is a use of the Bible contrary to its explicit and implicit testimony about itself and Tradition. An objective reading of the Bible leads one to Tradition and the Catholic Church, rather than the opposite. The Bible is, in fact, undeniably a Christian Tradition itself!

One must think very hard to understand how this might be, since the Old Testament cannot be Roman Catholic tradition, since the Old Testament came much, much earlier than the church of Rome. The sentence itself is clearly illogical, since of the Bible leads to the Roman Catholic Church, then how can the church have defined it a priori?

103. The NT was neither written nor received as the Bible at first, but only gradually so (i.e., early Christianity couldn't have believed in sola Scriptura like current Protestants, unless it referred to the OT alone).

The teaching of Sola Scriptura is a principle, and thus independent of the definition of the canon. The principle of Sola Scriptura can be set up whatever part of the Bible we have at hand. We apply the principle of Sola Scriptura to the Bible, whatever the canon may be.

104. Tradition is not a bad word in the Bible. Gk. paradosis refers to something handed on from one to another (good or bad). Good (Christian) Tradition is spoken of in 1 Cor 11:2; 2 Thess 2:15, 2 Thess 3:6, and Col 2:8. In the latter it is contrasted with traditions of men.

This exactly is the problem, since Rome’s traditions are man-made: transubstantiation, the papacy, Purgatory, etc…

105. Christian Tradition, according to the Bible, can be oral as well as written (2 Thess 2:15; 2 Tim 1:13-14; 2 Tim 2:2). St. Paul makes no qualitative distinction between the two forms.

Funny that Roman Catholics allude to oral tradition, but are incapable of citing tradition. Neither the Scriptures nor oral tradition is of importance to them.

106. The phrases "word of God" or "word of the Lord" in Acts and the epistles almost always refer to oral preaching, not to the Bible itself. Much of the Bible was originally oral (e.g., Jesus' entire teaching- He wrote nothing -St. Peter's sermon at Pentecost, etc.).

Yet Jesus Christ is the Word, the Λογος. As it says in John 20:31: “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” The spoken word is quickly forgotten, that is why we have the written word, God knows human nature very well.

107. Contrary to many Protestant claims, Jesus didn't condemn all tradition any more than St. Paul did. E.g., Mt 15:3,6; Mk 7:8-9, Mk 7:13, where He condemns corrupt Pharisaical tradition only. He says "your tradition."

That is because the Pharisees added their own traditions to the Word of God, which was never ever spoken or commanded by God, but was brought in externally. The situation is the same with Roman tradition. The Bible elsewhere commands us not add in such a way to the Word of God (Deut. 4:2; Proverbs 30:6; 1Cor. 4:6; Rev. 22:18-19).

108. Gk. paradidomi, or "delivering" Christian, apostolic Tradition occurs in Lk 1:1-2; Rom 6:17; 1 Cor 11:23; 1 Cor 15:3; 2 Pet 2:21; Jude 3. Paralambano, or "receiving" Christian Tradition occurs in 1 Cor 15:1-2; Gal 1:9,12; 1 Thess 2:13.

Again we can but say that there is both good tradition and bad tradition. We can tell the difference between the two based on the sole highest standard, the Bible.

109. The concepts of "Tradition," "gospel," "word of God," "doctrine," and "the Faith" are essentially synonymous, and all are predominantly oral. E.g., in the Thessalonian epistles alone St. Paul uses 3 of these interchangeably (2 Thess 2:15; 2 Thess 3:6; 1 Thess 2:9,13 (cf. Gal 1:9; Acts 8:14). If Tradition is a dirty word, then so is "gospel" and "word of God"!

We can reiterate here what was said in response to point #108.

110. St. Paul, in 1 Tim 3:15, puts the Church above Bible as the grounds for truth, as in Catholicism.

This is true inasmuch as the Church is faithful to God’s word. Thus it is not the church but rather God’s Word – God Himself who is the standard for truth. The Church can never be the grounds of truth as the author suggest; this is sheer blasphemy. In Revelation 2:5 we read that “Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.” The truth is in the Church, but the Church does not own the truth as Rome would have us believe. The truth is independent of denominational boundaries as we can see how God can remove the truth from a denomination, which has become unfaithful as he removes their candlestick, their light.

111. Protestantism's chief "proof text" for sola Scriptura, 2 Tim 3:16, fails, since it says that the Bible is profitable, but not sufficient for learning and righteousness. Catholicism agrees it is great for these purposes, but not exclusively so, as in Protestantism. Secondly, when St. Paul speaks of "Scripture" here, the NT didn't yet exist (not definitively for over 300 more years), thus he is referring to the OT only. This would mean that NT wasn't necessary for the rule of faith, if sola Scriptura were true, and if it were supposedly alluded to in this verse!

But it is interesting that tradition is never spoken of as profitable for learning and righteousness. Had it been God would certainly have revealed it to us so that we as God’s children could be properly equipped. Rome’s polemic here is at best an argument from silence. Furthermore, the author again mechanically confuses the principle of Sola Scriptura with the definition of the canon.

112. The above 11 factors being true, Catholicism maintains that all its Tradition is consistent with the Bible, even where the Bible is mute or merely implicit on a subject. For Catholicism, every doctrine need not be found primarily in the Bible, for this is Protestantism's principle of sola Scriptura. On the other hand, most Catholic theologians claim that all Catholic doctrines can be found in some fashion in the Bible, in kernel form, or by (usu. extensive) inference.

Roman Catholicism thus has an extra burden to prove that every sentence in its undefined tradition (remember Roman Catholics are incapable of citing oral tradition) doesn’t contradict the Scriptures. God’s wisdom is infinite, therefore it indeed is a very bold claim to make that men’s tradition doesn’t contradict what we know for sure to be God’s Word, the Bible.

113. As thoughtful evangelical scholars have pointed out, an unthinking sola Scriptura position can turn into "bibliolatry," almost a worship of the Bible rather than God who is its Author. This mentality is similar to the Muslim view of Revelation, where no human elements whatsoever were involved. Sola Scriptura, rightly understood from a more sophisticated Protestant perspective, means that the Bible is the final authority in Christianity, not the record of all God has said and done, as many evangelicals believe.

Protestants may be guilty of Bibliolatry inasmuch as Rome is truly guilty of ecclesiolatry to the extreme, wherein Rome believes that the church has the deposit of the truth, that its traditions match the Bible, that the pope is infallible when he speaks on faith and morals, or when Rome sets herself up as the grounds for truth, or that all other churches are as Christian as much as they are Roman Catholic. “God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar” (Romans 3:4). The author gets the definition of Sola Scriptura wrong here in that it is the sole final authority (hence the Sola in Sola Scriptura).

114. Christianity is unavoidably and intrinsically historical. All the events of Jesus' life (Incarnation, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Ascension, etc.) were historical, as was the preaching of the apostles. Tradition,

therefore, of some sort, is unavoidable, contrary to numerous shortsighted Protestant claims that sola Scriptura annihilates Tradition. This is true both for matters great (ecclesiology, trinitarianism, justification) and small (church budgets, type of worship music, lengths of sermons, etc.). Every denial of a particular tradition involves a bias (hidden or open) towards one's own alternate tradition (E.g., if all Church authority is spurned, even individualistic autonomy is a "tradition," which ought to be defended as a Christian view in some fashion).

This is false, because even though Protestants may reject traditions, they must also be consistent in being able to reject their own traditions, based on the sole highest authority, the Scripture. Every man has the right to interpret Scripture, but the responsibility to do so correctly.

115. Sola Scriptura literally couldn't have been true, practically speaking, for most Christians throughout history, since the movable-type printing press only appeared in the mid-15th century. Preaching and oral Tradition, along with things like devotional practices, Christian holidays, church architecture and other sacred art, were the primary carriers of the gospel for 1400 years. For all these centuries, sola Scriptura would have been regarded as an absurd abstraction and impossibility.

God preserves His written Word all throughout the ages. It is the love of the Word that the Waldenses in Switzerland and missionaries in the nineteenth century were capable of memorizing whole chapters of the Scripture. The author could have thought that if people could have hypothetically kept oral tradition alive throughout the ages, then they could also have kept the memory of the written Word alive as well.

116. Protestantism claims that the Catholic Church has "added to the Bible." The Catholic Church replies that it has merely drawn out the implications of the Bible (development of doctrine), and followed the understanding of the early Church, and that Protestants have "subtracted" from the Bible by ignoring large portions of it which suggest Catholic positions. Each side thinks the other is "unbiblical," but in different ways.

The Roman Catholic Church indeed has added to the Bible by adding the Apocrypha to it, which is full of historical, doctrinal, and even mathematical errors as described in the chapter in this book about the Apocrypha. The 73 books of the Roman canon were accepted only at the council of Trident in the middle of the sixteenth century.

117. Sola Scriptura is Protestantism's "Achilles' Heel." Merely invoking sola Scriptura is no solution to the problem of authority and certainty as long as multiple interpretations exist. If the Bible were so clear that all Protestants agreed simply by reading it with a willingness to accept and follow its teaching, this would be one thing, but since this isn't the case by a long shot (the multiplicity of denominations), sola Scriptura is a pipe-dream at best. About all that all Protestants agree on is that Catholicism is wrong! Of all Protestant ideas, the "clarity" or perspicuity of the Bible is surely one of the most absurd and the most demonstrably false by the historical record.

Correct, even though multiple interpretations exist, we must find the one which is in the Bible. Otherwise, we make up a tradition which contradicts the Bible, and which then must be rejected based on Sola Scriptura. The reason our modern minds might not understand the Bible is because we read it, honor it and thus understand it so little. Laziness in reading God’s Word is no excuse for handing it off to a group of priests who would then lock it up away from the laity and thus likely misinterpret it.

118. Put another way, having a Bible does not render one's private judgment infallible. Interpretation is just as inevitable as tradition. The Catholic Church therefore, is absolutely necessary in order to speak authoritatively and to prevent confusion, error, and division.

Absolutely not, because the Bible and private interpretation are two very separate things. The Bible supports private judgement in that it exhorts the believer to examine all things (1Thess. 5:21). One’s private interpretation is binding only inasmuch as it has found the true meaning of Scripture. The bald faced statement that “The Catholic Church therefore, is absolutely necessary in order to speak authoritatively and to prevent confusion, error, and division.” begs the question as to where it got its authority, having been the fountain of error for 1,400 years.

119. Catholicism doesn't regard the Bible as obscure, mysterious, and inaccessible, but it is vigilant to protect it from all arbitrary and aberrant exegesis (2 Pet 1:20, 3:16). The best Protestant traditions seek to do the same, but are inadequate and ineffectual since they are divided.

The Roman Catholic interpretation itself of any verse (e.g. Matthew 16:16-18) is just another opinion out there. Rome claims that since the Bible is obscure and mysterious only its priesthood can interpret it correctly. Even though nowadays they allow the Bible to be read by its laity, their Bible version are full of commentaries by their theologians and priests.

120. Protestantism has a huge problem with the Canon of the NT. The process of determining the exact books which constitute the NT lasted until 397 A.D., when the Council of Carthage spoke with finality, certainly proof that the Bible is not "self-authenticating," as Protestantism believes. Some sincere, devout, and learned Christians doubted the canonicity of some books which are now in the Bible, and others considered books as Scripture which were not at length included in the Canon. St. Athanasius in 367 was the first to list all 27 books in the NT as Scripture.

If the Bible is not self-authenticating, then this means that God is powerless to transmit His Revelation to His people. It means that God Almighty is incapable of having His voice heard by His people. This is clearly preposterous. God doesn’t depend on mortal, fallible humans in discovering His authorship.

121. The Council of Carthage, in deciding the Canon of the entire Bible in 397, included the so-called "Apocryphal" books, which Protestants kicked out of the Bible (i.e., a late tradition). Prior to the 16th century Christians considered these books Scripture, and they weren't even separated from the others, as they are today in the Protestant Bibles which include them. Protestantism accepts the authority of this Council for the NT, but not the OT, just as it arbitrarily and selectively accepts or denies other conciliar decrees, according to their accord with existing Protestant "dogmas" and biases.

This is not true, cardinal Cajetan in Luther’s day claimed that the Apocrypha are good for reading, but are not to be used to base doctrine upon. Furthermore, as has been shown here in detail, the Apocrypha have factual errors (e.g. Tobith couldn’t have died when he was 99 and 102 years old), otherwise contain doctrine which support Protestantism, such as predestination. This would surely be unpalatable for Romanists. Protestantism holds that though the Bible is infallible, the selection of the canon is not.

122. Contrary to Protestant anti-Catholic myth, the Catholic Church has always revered the Bible, and hasn't suppressed it (it protested some Protestant translations, but Protestants have often done the same regarding Catholic versions). This is proven by the laborious care of monks in protecting and copying manuscripts, and the constant translations into vernacular tongues (as opposed to the falsehoods about only Latin Bibles), among other plentiful and indisputable historical evidences. The Bible is a Catholic book, and no matter how much Protestants study it and proclaim it as peculiarly their own, they must acknowledge their undeniable debt to the Catholic Church for having decided the Canon, and for preserving the Bible intact for 1400 years. How could the Catholic Church be "against the Bible," as anti-Catholics say, yet at the same time preserve and revere the Bible profoundly for so many years? The very thought is so absurd as to be self-refuting. If Catholicism is indeed as heinous as anti-Catholics would have us believe, Protestantism ought to put together its own Bible, instead of using the one delivered to them by the Catholic Church, as it obviously could not be trusted!

The Roman church has withheld the Bible from the laity stating that it is dangerous for the laity to read it. Pre-Reformation Christians also revered the Bible to the point that they memorized large parts of it. With the Reformation, many people turned Protestant precisely because they saw that it contradicted Romanist traditions. With the Reformation, the Bible was printed and circulated to a much greater extent than during the years of Roman Catholicism. Rome added to the Bible by adding the Apocrypha, disdaining the Biblical injunction not to do so (Rev. 22:18-19).

123. Protestantism denies the Sacrifice of the Mass, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Gen 14:18; Ps 110:4; Isa 66:18,21; Mal 1:11; Heb 7:24-25; Heb 13:10; Rev 5:1-10/cf. Rev 8:3; Rev 13:8). Catholicism, it must be emphasized, doesn't believe that Jesus is sacrificed over and over at each Mass; rather, each Mass is a representation of the one Sacrifice at Calvary on the Cross, which transcends space and time, as in Rev 13:8.

The Mass is an occult, blasphemous abomination, and a mockery of the sacrifice of Christ. Jesus commanded His disciples to perform the breaking of bread in remembrance of Him (Luke 22:19). If Jesus is truly present, then why do believers have to remember Him? Rome also withholds the cup, despite Jesus’ clear command to drink from it (Matthew 26:27). According to Mark 14:25 believers must drink of the fruit of the vine, right after transubstantiation should have occurred. Jesus will come back after all time (Acts 1:10-11), and not each time Mass is celebrated. If Jesus is truly present in the host, then Romanism is polytheism. If Roman Catholics ingest the host, then this means that they become demigods, if the material of the host gets built into their body. Furthermore, then they would be excreting Jesus into the toilet once the host passes through their digestive tract. Thus, since the host is not the body and blood of Christ, then Roman Catholics are bowing down before nothing more than a piece of bread. This is idolatry.

124. Protestantism disbelieves, by and large, in the development of doctrine, contrary to Christian Tradition and many implicit biblical indications. Whenever the Bible refers to the increasing knowledge and maturity of Christians individually and (particularly) collectively, an idea similar to development is present. Further, many doctrines develop in the Bible before our eyes ("progressive revelation"). Examples: the afterlife, the Trinity, acceptance of Gentiles. And doctrines which Protestantism accepts whole and entire from Catholicism, such as the Trinity and the Canon of the Bible, developed in history, in the first three centuries of Christianity. It is foolish to try and deny this. The Church is the "Body" of Christ, and is a living organism, which grows and develops like all living bodies. It is not a statue, simply to be cleaned and polished over time, as many Protestants seem to think.

The value of the words of Jesus are infinite. As such, even if development of doctrine were true, and even if we did know the extra-Biblical words of Jesus, development would have to halt sometime in the future. Rome espouses development of doctrine in order to introduce new teachings not found either in the Bible, nor in the teaching of the early Christian church. The Trinity can be found in the Old Testament, in the very first three words of Scripture (

ים אלה א בר ית ראש - ב� In beginning created [third person singular] Gods), and the Old Testament canon was certainly not decided by the Roman church. The Body of Christ is certainly a living organism, but the deposit of truth (something that even Rome holds to) is not. We should not add nor subtract to the Word of God.

125. Protestantism separates justification from sanctification, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (e.g., Mt 5:20; Mat 7:20-24; Rom 2:7-13; 1 Cor 6:11; 1 Pet 1:2).

On the other hand, Romanism does not deal with the new birth (John 3:7; 1Peter 2:23) and spiritual regeneration, without which one cannot see God. We cannot please God with our good deeds, since we must do them by default (Esther 4:13-14; Luke 17:10); our deeds are as filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). We cannot sanctify ourselves, since we are spiritually dead, outside of a relationship with God. That is why justification is separate from sanctification.

126. Protestantism pits faith against works (sola fide), which is a rejection of Christian Tradition and the explicit teaching of the Bible (Mt 25:31-46; Lk 18:18-25; Jn 6:27-29; Gal 5:6; Eph 2:8-10; Phil 2:12-13; Phil 3:10-14; 1 Thess 1:3; 2 Thess 1:11; Heb 5:9; Jas 1:21-27; Jas 2:14-16). These passages also indicate that salvation is a process, not an instantaneous event, as in Protestantism.

Protestantism states that salvation is by a faith alone which does not stand alone, but is complete with good works. Good works stem from our being regenerate, but are not necessary for salvation. Good deeds are only a sign of being regenerate. Regeneration, or the new birth, however, is itself an instantaneous event.

127. Protestantism rejects the Christian Tradition and biblical teaching of merit, or differential reward for our good deeds done in faith (Mt 16:27; Rom 2:6; 1 Cor 3:8-9; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 22:12).

As stated before, men are useless servants in that they are bound to do good works by default and deserve no reward for it. This is what the parable of the worthless servant tells us (Luke 17:10). God made man in His image, and commands us all to be holy, yet we are not holy. In Revelation 4:10-11 on Judgement Day we see that the saints cast their crowns back before the throne of God: “The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying, Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.”

128. Protestantism's teaching of extrinsic, imputed, forensic, or external justification contradicts the Christian Tradition and biblical doctrine of infused, actual, internal, transformational justification (which inc. sanctification): Ps 51:2-10; Ps 103:12; Jn 1:29; Rom 5:19; 2 Cor 5:17; Heb 1:3; 1 Jn 1:7-9.

This is not true. In the parable of Jesus of the wedding feast in Matthew 22:1-14 we read about the man who did not have on a wedding garment, and who was cast into the outer darkness (hell). This means that something external to man confers righteousness to him. This parable is consistent in the Old Testament with Zechariah 3:1-7 where satan resists Joshua the high priest. Joshua was wearing filthy garments, representing his sins, but was then given clean garments after his iniquity had passed from him. This symbolizes extrinsic justification, since Joshua and believers are covered by external righteousness. According to Proverbs 12:16, a prudent man covers shame, and love covers many sins (1Peter 4:8). Also, the imagery in Genesis 3:21 of the skin of a slain animal covering Adam and Eve shows that a foreign element covers our shame and our sins. This can only be done by foreign righteousness, which is not our own.

129. Many Protestants (esp. Presbyterians, Calvinists and Baptists) believe in eternal security, or, perseverance of the saints (the belief that one can't lose his "salvation," supposedly obtained at one point in time). This is contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible: 1 Cor 9:27; Gal 4:9; Gal 5:1,4; Col 1:22-3; 1 Tim 1:19-20; 1 Tim 4:1; 1 Tim 5:15; Heb 3:12-14; Heb 6:4-6; Heb 10:26,29,39; Heb 12:14-15; 2 Pet 2:15, 2 Pet 2:20-21; Rev 2:4-5.

As we have seen previously, salvation is an external work of Jesus Christ, our Savior. As such, salvation cannot be lost. God may seemingly at times warn His children to work out their salvation and to avoid falling away, but it is because He loves us so much that He will do anything to keep us from doing so. God preserves us, therefore we will persevere. If God loved us so much so that He died for us, then how could He watch His children fall into the flames of Hell forever? In Luke 15:4-6 we read of the parable of the lost sheep. The sheep would get lost by itself, but in verse 4 we read that the pastor goes out of his way for the sake of a single sheep to bring it back, holding it fast on his shoulders, rejoicing.

130. Contrary to Protestant myth and anti-Catholicism, the Catholic Church doesn't teach that one is saved by works apart from preceding and enabling grace, but that faith and works are inseparable, as in James 1 and 2. This heresy of which Catholicism is often charged, was in fact condemned by the Catholic Church at the Second Council of Orange in 529 A.D. It is known as Pelagianism, the view that man could save himself by his own natural efforts, without the necessary supernatural grace from God. A more moderate view, Semi-Pelagianism, was likewise condemned. To continue to accuse the Catholic Church of this heresy is a sign of both prejudice and manifest ignorance of the history of theology, as well as the clear Catholic teaching of the Council of Trent (1545-63), available for all to see. Yet the myth is strangely prevalent.

The Roman Catholic Gospel is false in that it still demands that man must add good works to his salvation in some way or another. In this way Rome is really semi-Pelagian, whether they acknowledge this or not. This is ultimately due to the fact that according to Rome, works go together with faith; justification and sanctification are concomitant. If Rome believes that a Christian can lose his or her salvation, it is only because of some sin that he or she has committed. This is incorrect, that whom God predestinates, them will God also glorify (Romans 8:30). This is a bijective relationship, meaning that nobody who is predestined will be lost.

131. Protestantism has virtually eliminated the practice of confession to a priest (or at least a pastor), contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mt 16:19; Mt 18:18; Jn 20:23).

Christians are told to confess their sins to God and to one another, not to priests: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1John 1:9) and “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed.” (James 5:16) The above mentioned passages refer to proclaiming forgiveness of sins. A person’s sins are forgiven, inasmuch as they have properly repented. This is because only God has the judicial authority to forgive people of their sins (Matthew 9:2-6).

132. Protestantism disbelieves in penance, or temporal punishment for (forgiven) sin, over against Christian Tradition and the Bible (e.g., Num 14:19-23; 2 Sam 12:13-14; 1 Cor 11:27-32; Heb 12:6-8).

This is because Jesus has born the punishment once and for all for all of our sins, and therefore we do not need to suffer for it any more (John 19:30). God would be unjust to punish the same sin twice.

133. Protestantism has little concept of the Tradition and biblical doctrine of mortifying the flesh, or, suffering with Christ: Mt 10:38; 16:24: Rom 8:13,17; 1 Cor 12:24-6; Phil 3:10; 1 Pet 4:1,13.

None of these verses mention that suffering actually merits salvation for sinners. Only Christ can do that, because men cannot save themselves. It is true that Christians will suffer hardships, and in this we shall suffer just as the Master suffered, because we are like Him. But we must stress that our sufferings have no merit, because that would add to Christ’s sole work on the cross. To say that somehow our suffering is mystically one and the same with that of Christ’s is reading into the Scripture.

134. Likewise, Protestantism has lost the Tradition and biblical doctrine of vicarious atonement, or redemptive suffering with Christ, of Christians for the sake of each other: Ex 32:30-32; Num 16:43-8; 25:6-13; 2 Cor 4:10; Col 1:24; 2 Tim 4:6.

The verses coming from the Old Testament verses speak of the Mosaic law where offerings had to brought forth for different kinds of sins. This however, does not mean that these sacrifices has any legal atoning value in the eyes of God. Here Moses and the high priests were only a foreshadow of Jesus Christ, Who is the true priest, Whose one and only sacrifice was able to bring atonement and forgiveness to all those who trust in Him alone.

2Cor. 4:8-9 say the following: “We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed”. This means that just like Jesus, His followers shall be troubled, persecuted, cast out, because a servant is no different than his master (John 15:20).

Col. 1:24 says the following: “Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church” If we follow the logic, then Paul is saying that he, and he alone, will finish up what remains of Christ’s sufferings, leaving no amount of suffering for anyone else to bear. Jesus said quite plainly about His sacrifice on the cross, that “It is finished” (John 19:30). We suffer with Christ, but this must mean some other type of suffering.

1Tim. 4:5-6 say this: “But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry. For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.” Here, Paul is giving Timothy instructions as to how to carry on the work in the church after he is gone. Paul is going to be offered up. Christians offer themselves up for Christ, and offerings may mean different things; but this verse does not say explicitly that Paul is making a sacrifice for the sin of others. Jesus sacrificed Himself for us, therefore in gratitude we sacrifice ourselves to Him as well in spreading His glory across the world.

135. Protestantism has rejected the Tradition and biblical doctrine of purgatory, as a consequence of its false view of justification and penance, despite sufficient evidence in Scripture: Is 4:4; 6:5-7; Micah 7:8-9; Mal 3:1-4; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45; Mt 5:25-6; 12:32; Lk 16:19-31 (cf. Eph 4:8-10; 1 Pet 3:19-20); 1 Cor 3:11-15; 2 Cor 5:10; Rev 21:27.

Purgatory doesn’t exist. This is proven by the description of Lazarus and the rich man in Luke 16:19-31. Lazarus, the poor beggar dies and goes to Abraham’s bosom, but after the rich man also dies, he goes to hell. He wishes that Lazarus would come and give him a drop of water to ease his suffering, but cannot do so because there is a gulf between them. This means that there are only two compartments in the afterlife. According to Matthew 25:33 God

will divide the sheep and the goats to his right and left hand, respectively. There is no third way, which would be Purgatory. Purgatory denies the Biblical doctrines of salvation by Christ alone, grace alone, and faith alone. Man does not have to suffer for the sins that Jesus already suffered for; this would be injustice.

136. Protestantism has rejected (largely due to misconceptions and misunderstanding) the Catholic developed doctrine of indulgences, which is, simply, the remission of the temporal punishment for sin (i.e., penance), by the Church (on the grounds of Mt 16:19; 18:18, and Jn 20:23). This is no different than what St. Paul did, concerning an errant brother at the Church of Corinth. He first imposed a penance on him (1 Cor 5:3-5), then remitted part of it (an indulgence: 2 Cor 2:6-11). Just because abuses occurred prior to the Protestant Revolt (admitted and rectified by the Catholic Church), is no reason to toss out yet another biblical doctrine. It is typical of Protestantism to burn down a house rather than to cleanse it, to "throw the baby out with the bath water."

The passage from 1Cor. 5:3-5 talks about handing over someone to satan for the destruction of the flesh. How can the author equate this to penance? The passage from 2Cor. 2:6-11 only says that Paul forgives that specific person in the person of Christ, because Christ had already forgiven him. Here again the question is, is Jesus’ blood enough to forgive all sins. Yes, it is. This is something that the Roman Catholic Church loses sight of.

137. Protestantism has thrown out prayers for the dead, in opposition to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45; 1 Cor 15:29; 2 Tim 1:16-18; also verses having to do with purgatory, since these prayers are for the saints there).

138. Protestantism rejects, on inadequate grounds, the intercession of the saints for us after death, and the correspondent invocation of the saints for their effectual prayers (Jas 5:16). Christian Tradition and the Bible, on the other hand, have upheld this practice: Dead saints are aware of earthly affairs (Mt 22:30 w/ Lk 15:10 and 1 Cor 15:29; Heb 12:1), appear on earth to interact with men (1 Sam 28:12-15; Mt 17:1-3, 27:50-53; Rev 11:3), and therefore can intercede for us, and likewise be petitioned for their prayers, just as are Christians on earth (2 Maccabees 15:14; Rev 5:8; 6:9-10).

Praying for the dead is a pagan ritual which found itself into the church in the early centuries of the church. It is also found in Buddhism, Shintoism and in the ancient Roman religion. According to Ecclesiastes 2:16 the memory of the dead is forgotten here on earth. Thus, there is no interaction between men and the dead. God is more than enough to aid His children here on earth. Seeking to help the dead whose fate is sealed at death (since salvation is not by works but by faith) is due to lack of faith, and is something, which God hates. In 1Samuel 28:7-20 we read about how Saul sought help by night from a woman who dealt with familiar spirits at En-dor. She conjured up the soul of Samuel who told Saul that he would be defeated by the Philistines in the upcoming battle.

139. Some Protestants disbelieve in Guardian Angels, despite Christian Tradition and the Bible (Ps 34:7; 91:11; Mt 18:10; Acts 12:15; Heb 1:14).

Psalm 34:7 speaks of the angel of the Lord, which is Jesus. Similarly, Acts 12:15 speaks about the angel of Peter, not a specific angel, which had always been one. The other verses speak about the function of angels protecting humans on earth, but not about specific guardian angels for each individual. If someone did indeed have a special guardian angel, this again would lead him away from looking to God alone for help.

140. Most Protestants deny that angels can intercede for us, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Rev 1:4; 5:8; 8:3-4).

These verses describe only how angels could possibly be tools in God’s hands. But angels are not themselves the source of grace or salvation. It is conspicuous that these verses do not mention the angels actually praying for believers.

141. Protestantism rejects Mary's Immaculate Conception, despite developed Christian Tradition and indications in the Bible: Gen 3:15; Lk 1:28 ("full of grace" Catholics interpret, on linguistic grounds, to mean

"without sin"); Mary as a type of the Ark of the Covenant (Lk 1:35 w/ Ex 40:34-8; Lk 1:44 w/ 2 Sam 6:14-16; Lk 1:43 w/ 2 Sam 6:9: God's Presence requires extraordinary holiness).

Just as we have seen earlier, Mary was not a perpetual virgin. Mary was also affected by original sin, otherwise she would be something other than a normal human being, perhaps a quasi-deity that the church of Rome makes her out to be, being omnipresent and capable of hearing prayers. The above listed verses do not say explicitly that Mary was sinless and the implications that she says so are very subjective. Furthermore, the immaculate conception was never taught universally by the early theologians.

142. Protestantism rejects Mary's Assumption, despite developed Christian Tradition and biblical indications: If Mary was indeed sinless, she would not have to undergo bodily decay at death (Ps 16:10; Gen 3:19). Similar occurrences in the Bible make the Assumption not implausible or "unbiblical" per se (Enoch: Gen 5:24 w/ Heb 11:5; Elijah: 2 Ki 2:11; Paul: 2 Cor 12:2-4; the Protestant doctrine of the "Rapture": 1 Thess 4:15-17; risen saints: Mt 27:52-3).

The author must be really grasping at straws, because Genesis 3:19 doesn’t mention Mary (how could it, since it is about Eve after creation in the Old Testament). Psalm 16:10 describes the Holy One of God. Without providing a name this could be anybody. However, since the Old Testament prophecies the coming of Jesus the Messiah, this verse most likely refers to Jesus Christ, not Mary. Mary is a mere mortal woman, who is also a sinner, and all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:10-12).

143. Many (most?) Protestants deny Mary's perpetual virginity, despite Christian Tradition (inc. the unanimous agreement of the Protestant founders (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, etc.), some Protestant support, and several biblical evidences, too involved to briefly summarize.

As we have seen, Rome holds to the perpetual virginity of Mary only to support her being the “spouse” of the Holy Spirit. This has actually led some Romanist theologians to a false construct of the Trinity, which includes Mary. In Old Testament times it was a blessing to have children, and it was looked upon as a curse to be barren. In Genesis 30:1 we read about how Rachel, one of Jacob’s wives was envious of Leah who bore him four children: “And when Rachel saw that she bare Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister; and said unto Jacob, Give me children, or else I die.” In 1Samuel 1:2-7 we read about Hannah who was grieved because she had no children. Indeed, in Genesis 1:22 we read about God’s command to be fruitful and multiply. The glorification of perpetual virginity is a gnostic idea foreign to the Bible. Indeed as we have covered in this book, Mary had other children besides Jesus.

144. Protestantism denies Mary's Spiritual Motherhood of Christians, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Jn 19:26-7: "Behold thy mother"; Rev 12:1,5,17: Christians described as "her seed.") Catholics believe that Mary is incomparably more alive and holy than we are, hence, her prayers for us are of great effect (Jas 5:16; Rev 5:8; 6:9-10). But she is our sister with regard to our position of creatures vis-à-vis the Creator, God. Mary never operates apart from the necessary graces from her Son, and always glorifies Him, not herself, as Catholic theology stresses.

Mary is no more the mother of all Christians than is any woman. Mary was a believer who was instrumental only in giving birth to Jesus Christ. Just because Jesus tells the apostle John that Mary is his mother doesn’t mean that we can generalize that to all believers. Mary is not even mentioned by name in any of the remaining verses.

145. Protestantism rejects the papacy, despite profound Christian Tradition, and the strong evidence in the Bible of Peter's preeminence and commission by Jesus as the Rock of His Church. No one denies he was some type of leader among the apostles. The papacy as we now know it is derived from this primacy: Mt 16:18-19; Lk 22:31-2; Jn 21:15-17 are the most direct "papal" passages. Peter's name appears first in all lists of apostles; even an angel implies he is their leader (Mk 16:7), and he is accepted by the world as such (Acts 2:37-8,41). He works the first miracle of the Church age (Acts 3:6-8), utters the first anathema (Acts 5:2-11), raises the dead (Acts 9:40), first receives the Gentiles (Acts 10:9-48), and his name is mentioned more often than all the other disciples put together (191 times). Much more similar evidence can be found.

As we have seen in this book dozens of Bible verses contradict the papacy. There were several bishops in the early centuries who called themselves papa, or pope. Say whatever Rome wants about the order of names and other meaningless bits of trivia about Peter’s name, nowhere does the Bible mention apostolic succession, which is necessary for the papacy. The word for rock in Greek is petros, whereas the word for bolder is petra, which is feminine, and which is also the word which is used in Matthew 16:18. Though Jesus was speaking in Aramaic, the Greek translation of the Aramaic word reflects the gender of this word. In 1Peter 2:4-8 the apostle Peter describes in his first letter to the believers that believers are lively little stones, built up on the chief corner stone, which is Jesus. Here Peter speaks unequivocally, as opposed to Matthew 16:16-18, which might not be too easy to understand.

146. The Church of Rome and the popes were central to the governance and theological direction and orthodoxy of the Christian Church from the beginning. This is undeniable. All of the historical groups now regarded as heretical by Protestants and Catholics alike were originally judged as such by popes and/or Ecumenical Councils presided over and ratified by popes.

The teaching of papal infallibility was opposed by many Roman Catholic theologians and bishops in 1870. The papacy is one of the most inefficient ways of governing a church of over a billion members, even during the Middle Ages. In contrast, the Protestant/Presbyterian system is more efficient where each church governs itself locally by the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

147. Protestantism, in its desperation to eke out some type of historical continuity apart from the Catholic Church, sometimes attempts to claim a lineage from medieval sects such as the Waldenses, Cathari, and Albigensians (and sometimes earlier groups such as the Montanists or Donatists). However, this endeavor is doomed to failure when one studies closely what these sects believed. They either retain much Catholic teaching anathema to Protestants or hold heretical notions antithetical to Christianity altogether (Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox), or both, making this Protestant theory quite dubious at best.

Not all of these small groups might have been Christian, but some certainly were, as attested to by major historians. Such were the Waldenses and the Albigenses. It is easy for Rome to level charges of heresy against these groups, especially since they slaughtered and killed some of these groups wholesale and destroyed almost all of their literature. However, the Waldenses have been well documented to be orthodox Christians. During the Reformation they met with members of the main Reformers and found that their theology matched up to a large degree. In fact, the Roman church has connections to several heretical groups, such as the gnostics (Mariology, the inconspicuousness of the Bible) as well as the ultramontanists (the idea that the Holy Spirit is tied to an individual, the pope) and Marcionites (false Old Testament canon, God is different in the Old and New Testaments). The Bible mentions that only a remnant will make up true believers. Isaiah 10 speaks about a remnant of the Jewish people who shall return from Babylon to worship God. Matthew 7:13-14 speaks about the narrow gate: “Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” Only few walk the narrow way that leads to Heaven, as opposed to large masses of society during the Middle Ages which adhered to Roman Catholicism.

148. Catholic has the most sophisticated and thoughtful Christian socio-economic and political philosophy, a mixture of "progressive" and "conservative" elements distinct from the common-place political rhetoric and Machiavellianism which typically dominate the political arena. Catholicism has the best view of church in relation to the state and culture as well.

Progressive also means liberal, which means worldly. The Roman Catholic Church espouses a form of Socialism; its liberal branch, the Jesuits espouse an extreme form of theistic evolutionism, and some even go so far as to deny the importance of the afterlife. They also teach liberation theology, which is a form of Marxism. The Roman Catholic concept of the church is a blasphemy, since it elevates its own ecclesia to the center of social life, and makes the church the sole highest arbiter of all truth (Sola Ecclesia), taking over these roles from God and the Bible. Rome’s two sword theory states that the church should rule over the state. In contrast, Protestantism freed men’s consciences from being subjugated to a single state church and formed the principle of separation of church and state. Calvinist principles laid the foundation for the style of government at the beginning of the United States.

149. Catholicism has the best Christian philosophy and worldview, worked out through centuries of reflection and experience. As in its theological reflection and development, the Catholic Church is ineffably wise and profound, to an extent truly amazing, and indicative of a sure divine stamp. I used to marvel, just before I converted, at how the Catholic Church could be so right about so many things. I was accustomed to thinking, as a good evangelical, that the truth was always a potpourri of ideas from many Protestant denominations and Catholicism and Orthodoxy (selected by me), and that none "had it all together." But, alas, the Catholic Church does, after all!

Roman Catholicism was heavily influenced by pagan ideas in the early centuries of the New Testament church, and by the council of Trent had departed from Christian doctrine, to the point that it puts an anathema on Christ Who commands His people to both eat the bread and drink the wine. The Roman Catholic Church has also produced the Inquisition and the Crusades, has burned the Bible, put in on the index of forbidden books, and has unleashed an avalanche of sexual pedophiles and homosexual priests on innocent children and lay people. It has also added to the Bible and changed its words. The popes were the some of the most immoral people on the face of the earth, especially during the Dark Ages where popes bought and sold the papacy and murdered each other, the one after the other. The Roman Church also practices idolatry and occultism and blasphemes and denigrates Jesus Christ in the Mass. Surely, as according to cardinal Newman, the Roman church is either the domain of Christ or the antichrist. The true church would be pure, but the church of the antichrist, the “vicar of Christ” usurps Jesus Christ. This is the church of Rome.

150. Last but by no means least, Catholicism has the most sublime spirituality and devotional spirit, manifested in a thousand different ways, from the monastic ideal, to the heroic celibacy of the clergy and religious, the Catholic hospitals, the sheer holiness of a Thomas a Kempis or a St. Ignatius and their great devotional books, countless saints - both canonized and as yet unknown and unsung, Mother Teresa, Pope John Paul II, Pope John XXIII, the early martyrs, St. Francis of Assisi, the events at Lourdes and Fatima, the dazzling intellect of John Henry Cardinal Newman, the wisdom and insight of Archbishop Fulton Sheen, St. John of the Cross, the sanctified wit of a Chesterton or a Muggeridge, elderly women doing the Stations of the Cross or the Rosary, Holy Hour, Benediction, kneeling - the list goes on and on. This devotional spirit is unmatched in its scope and deepness, despite many fine counterparts in Protestant and Orthodox spirituality.

The monastic lifestyle is displeasing to God because never does He command us to withdraw from the world, in defiance of His command to make disciples of all nations. Believers are in the world but yet not of the world. We are salt and thus we must come into contact with non-believers to evangelize them. Celibacy is sometimes a cop out by Roman Catholic priests who wish to avoid the world. Celibacy is also a direct contradiction to God’s command for pastors to marry (1Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:5-6). Methodism and other denominations also have set up hospitals and universities (the Puritans founded Harvard, for example), so Rome is not alone in this. St. Ignatius was a blasphemer, and also possibly possessed, and also instigated one of the greatest campaigns of fear and hatred against Protestantism, known as the counter-Reformation. The godless, evil oath that Jesuits recite can be found in the appendix of this book. Mother Teresa has been shown newly to have been spiritually empty and dry, St Francis of Assisi also manifested the stigmata, which could be demonic in origin. The people mentioned here may indeed have had good intentions, but worship not prescribed in Scripture is detestable to God. “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” (Proverbs 14:12)