Catholic not in name only. Proudly married. Tightly wound around his kid's fingers. I need a nap.
California, USA
Joined July 2011
- Tweets26.8K
- Following835
- Followers579
- Likes20.1K
John Becknell retweeted
Scott Hahn is measurably and demonstrably more intelligent than you and says the complete opposite.
He was an actual Protestant Theologian, from a reputable institution, not some “pay for a certificate” Bible college.
I think I’ll stick with him over you.
“I do not know how to say it, but I fell completely in love with Our Lord present in the Eucharist! His presence in the Blessed Sacrament was powerful and personal for me. Sitting at the back of the church, I began to kneel and pray with the others, who became like brothers and sisters to me. I was not an orphan! I had found my family, and that family was the family of God.”
- Former Protestant Scholar and Theologian, Scott Hahn.
Now a devout Catholic theologian and apologist.
What authority are you restoring if you too accept the authority of the Catholic Church for the Bible?
Here's a summary:
The Catholic Church discerned the Bible the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also accepts as authoritative.
The Trinity was taught from the beginning of the Apostolic era. See Athanasius, Pope Julius, Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, etc., we have their writings from the first and early second centuries.
There is no early Church Father, taught by the Apostles themselves, that held to the theology of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I have most of their writings and have read much of them. Name an early Church Father who believed what you do. There must be some if it is the original, orthodox Christian message. Who believed it?
Your Church preaches a restoration of Christ's Church was necessary, meaning Christ's original Church was not sustainable and therefore Christ was not sufficient to sustain it Himself the first time.
There is no evidence for the Book of Mormon, it's history, language, or archeology anywhere in the world.
And there is no evidence the early Church was "Mormon". Please show us any evidence to the contrary.
Your only claim is to a testimony (Alma 10:4) at the end of the day. And when the rubber meets the road, it's a blind faith claim for something you have no other evidence for.
Would you accept those terms for any other religion? For Islam? JWs? Then why for Mormonism if it's really true? 2/ – at California, USA
Faith without "action" or works is still faith.
That's why James says that you are justified by works and not by faith alone. James 2:24
And faith without works according to James doesn't justify.
That's why it's dead.
But you tell me. Is faith without action still faith? And does faith without works justify?
John Becknell retweeted
Ana posts response to exposed con man @BibleInContext1 after yesterday’s evidence drop by @GuerillaLawyer 🔥
Allie needs a life-saving bone marrow transplant. Her family is facing incredible challenges to make this happen. Please consider donating or sharing her story. Every bit helps. Thank you. gofundme.com/f/help-allie-ge…
I recognize the source. It's Lorraine Bettner. You know he had no idea what Catholicism believed and his work isn't used by any serious Protestant apologists today because they know it's also full of blatant errors? 2/
John Becknell retweeted
"A single act of humility is worth more than the proud exhibition of any virtue."
- St. Frances Xavier Cabrini
Then show us where the Bible itself says what books the Bible is supposed to contain. If it doesn't explictly tell you which books are Biblical, then you are implicitly relying on an unwritten tradition for that information. Again, whose tradition, if the Bible preceded the Reformation by over a thousand years? – at California, USA
The result is you don't believe in Sola Scriptura either, do you? You implicitly presume an unwritten tradition that informs you of the content of Scripture,from hundreds of books purported to be Scripture in the first centuries of the Christian era. The Church discerned the inspired content and had made it so ubiquitous over the centuries that you forget that an unwritten tradition of the Canon is still necessary, and that's because the Bible alone does not explicitly reveal which books are supposed to be in the Bible. You accept an unwritten tradition, just like Catholics do.
Is that tradition from men or from God? If it's from men, then the Bible is nothing. It's just another fallible text like every other book is. But if the Canonical tradition is from God, then you have asserted a divine revelation outside of Scripture, which denies Sola Scriptura and well, welcome to the Church.
But those are your only reasonable options as far as I can tell.
Which is it? From men or God? – at California, USA
Tragic news has struck a young family in our community. Kaitlyn and her kids need our help after losing their husband and father. Please consider donating or sharing to support them during this difficult time. gofund.me/db91b7d3 – at California, USA
John Becknell retweeted
Thanks for reading. If you got something from this thread:
Retweet and follow me @catholicpat
2 Tim 1:16–18 (ESV): May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chains, but when he arrived in Rome he searched for me earnestly and found me—may the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that day! 3/