Questions they can't answer.

  • Thread starter Thread starter sadie2723
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello gang!

Check this out. As I mentioned in my original post, I sent this list of questions out to a Catholic hate group. Well, that is being a bit strong. Let’s call them a Catholic conversion group. In any event, I got a reply from them.

I am not going to post the reply here, as it is WAY too long. But, I will point out a few items. First, they did not answer a single question that I asked. Rather, their response was all about how the Pope was evil, and how I did not believe in the Bible as I had asked the questions that I did. They went one to give a bunch of examples, out of context of course, about how the Catholic church tries to prevent people from reading the Bible.

Naturally, I responded. First, I told the author that I found it interesting that she had failed to respond to even one of my questions. I then went on to point out that she should be thanking the Catholic faith for her even having a Bible to read, as we were the good people that preserved the writing for 1500 years until the reformation.

To this moment, she has failed to respond. So much for Kelly J Condron at Biblebelievers.net

Score one for the good guys!

Brad
 
40.png
Kevan:
Brad, when you pop a loaded question on someone in writing, even if he’s not a quick debater, he has time to see through it and dismiss it.

Instead of a written form such as email, you should memorize this list and use it to befuddle your Protestant friends in person. It won’t change them, of course, but flummoxing them should make you feel better; which, if I understand your OP, is the goal anyway.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t seem like the productive thing to do, sir. A little compassion and prayer would bear more fruit in the end.
 
Agrazing Mace:
Doesn’t seem like the productive thing to do, sir. A little compassion and prayer would bear more fruit in the end.
Click to expand...
I pray for them every day myself. But, I thought that an organization that has made its living bashing the Catholic Church should have to defend its position with scripture. And, as you can see from a couple of posts ago, they have been unable to do so.

My goal in this is to get them to think outside of themselves a bit. This is what leads to investigation and study, and as we have seen a thousand times, investigation and study lead to truth…and Rome.

Brad
 
40.png
jimmy:
These are actually quite clear questions. [snip] NOne of them is loaded, they are straight forward.
Click to expand...
A straightforward question may yet be loaded.

A loaded question is like loaded dice: there’s something in there besides what you see. In logic it is called a complex question. Two (or more) things are being asked, but only one is shown to the listener.

“Have you stopped beating your wife?” is a clear, straightforward question, but it contains a hidden question: do you beat your wife? The listener might reply “I have not stopped beating her, but I never began to beat her.”

A question like “Where in the New Testament does it say ***?” might be answered “Nowhere, but I never said that it did.” A complex question accomplishes no more than "Where in the Bible is the word “Trinity, huh? Huh?” The correct answer is “Nowhere,” but that tells you nothing about whether the doctrine of the Trinity is biblical.

Brad’s list raises plenty of good Cat-Prot debating points, but wording them as complex questions should be expected to inspire the reader to just wave them off as so much smoke and mirrors.

And, apparently, that’s exactly what his readers at biblebelievers.net did.
 
40.png
Kevan:
A straightforward question may yet be loaded.

A loaded question is like loaded dice: there’s something in there besides what you see. In logic it is called a complex question. Two (or more) things are being asked, but only one is shown to the listener.

“Have you stopped beating your wife?” is a clear, straightforward question, but it contains a hidden question: do you beat your wife? The listener might reply “I have not stopped beating her, but I never began to beat her.”

A question like “Where in the New Testament does it say ***?” might be answered “Nowhere, but I never said that it did.” A complex question accomplishes no more than "Where in the Bible is the word “Trinity, huh? Huh?” The correct answer is “Nowhere,” but that tells you nothing about whether the doctrine of the Trinity is biblical.

Brad’s list raises plenty of good Cat-Prot debating points, but wording them as complex questions should be expected to inspire the reader to just wave them off as so much smoke and mirrors.

And, apparently, that’s exactly what his readers at biblebelievers.net did.
Click to expand...
Your point is well taken and well put. Still, I think that there is something else going on here that needs to be addressed.

The bottom line is that if you are going to rant against Rome, I think that you should be able to defend your doctrine with scripture…as we in Rome can. If you can’t, and this is the point that I am hoping to drive home here, how can you call your belief Bible based?

Catholics have taken a lot of criticism for years for what the anti-Catholic movement describes as “man made traditions”. The hipocracy is unbelievable in my opinion, when you consider the “Bible believer” crowd can’t back up what they teach with…well…the Bible.

I am not trying to start a war over this, I just wanted to point out the inconsistencies in Protestant teaching that lead me to Rome. And, I think that if there are groups out there that are trying to get members of the Catholic faith to turn away from our “evil” ways, they should be able to defend their beliefs with scripture…as we can. I further think that in most cases, they should bother to actually study what we teach. Take for example a comment that the person from biblebelievers.net made: “It is obvious that you hate the Bible and all her teaching. That is probably why you chose to belong to a Church where they have tried to keep people from reading it.”

This is the kind of response you get from someone who has no idea of history or church teaching.

Brad
 
40.png
Kevan:
A straightforward question may yet be loaded.

A loaded question is like loaded dice: there’s something in there besides what you see. In logic it is called a complex question. Two (or more) things are being asked, but only one is shown to the listener.

“Have you stopped beating your wife?” is a clear, straightforward question, but it contains a hidden question: do you beat your wife? The listener might reply “I have not stopped beating her, but I never began to beat her.”

A question like “Where in the New Testament does it say ***?” might be answered “Nowhere, but I never said that it did.” A complex question accomplishes no more than "Where in the Bible is the word “Trinity, huh? Huh?” The correct answer is “Nowhere,” but that tells you nothing about whether the doctrine of the Trinity is biblical.

Brad’s list raises plenty of good Cat-Prot debating points, but wording them as complex questions should be expected to inspire the reader to just wave them off as so much smoke and mirrors.

And, apparently, that’s exactly what his readers at biblebelievers.net did.
Click to expand...
The questions are clear. You can see what the point of them is. The point is to show that there is no where in the scriptures that endorses sola scriptura. If someone can’t support that doctrine they can’t support protestantism.
  1. Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?
 
  1. Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?
He didn’t! 👍
 
Hi Daniel;
Daniel Marsh:
Hi Brad even my driver can answer number 4.

The seat of Moses was the civil legal system of the day. Romans 13. (There was little - if any - distinction between the hebrew “civil” system of justice and the hebrew “religous” system of the day. You are imposing modern western notions of separation of church and state upon an ancient culture. Separation of Church and State did not occur for another 1700 years after Christ. Nice try but no cigar Dan. 😃 )

Exodus 18:13
The next day Moses took his seat to serve as judge for the people, and they stood around him from morning till evening. (At the time Moses was also the spiritual leader of the Israelites. Again, nice try but no cigar Dan. 😃 )
Click to expand...
 
I also went back and asked a few additional questions. Here they are…again…they could provide no answers. What does this say about the foundation of thier convictions?

Oh, and just an FYI. I sent this to multiple organizations, to date I have only had a response from the one I already listed, and they just attacked me in their response but made no effort to answer the questions asked.
  1. Who in the Church had the authority to determine which books belonged in the New Testament canon and to make this decision binding on all Christians? If nobody has this authority, then can I remove or add books to the canon on my own authority?
  2. Why do Protestant scholars recognize the early Church councils at Hippo and Carthage as the first instances in which the New Testament canon was officially ratified, but ignore the fact that those same councils ratified the Old Testament canon used by the Catholic Church today but abandoned by Protestants at the Reformation?
  3. Why do Protestants follow post apostolic Jewish decisions on the boundaries of the Old Testament canon, rather than the decision of the Church founded by Jesus Christ?
  4. How were the bishops at Hippo and Carthage able to determine the correct canon of Scripture, in spite of the fact that they believed all the distinctively Catholic doctrines such as the apostolic succession of bishops, the sacrifice of the Mass, Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist, baptismal regeneration, etc?
  5. If Christianity is a “book religion,” how did it flourish during the first 1500 years of Church history when the vast majority of people were illiterate?
  6. How could the Apostle Thomas establish the church in India that survives to this day (and is now in communion with the Catholic Church) without leaving them with one word of New Testament Scripture?
  7. If sola Scriptura is so solid and biblically based, why has there never been a full treatise written in its defense since the phrase was coined in the Reformation?
  8. If Jesus intended for Christianity to be exclusively a “religion of the book,” why did He wait 1400 years before showing somebody how to build a printing press?
  9. If the early Church believed in sola Scriptura, why do the creeds of the early Church always say “we believe in the Holy Catholic Church,” and not “we believe in Holy Scripture”?
  10. If the Bible is as clear as Martin Luther claimed, why was he the first one to interpret it the way he did and why was he frustrated at the end of his life that “there are now as many doctrines as there are heads”?
  11. The time interval between the Resurrection and the establishment of the New Testament canon in AD 382 is roughly the same as the interval between the arrival of the Mayflower in America and the present day. Therefore, since the early Christians had no defined New Testament for almost four hundred years, how did they practice sola Scriptura?
  12. If the Bible is the only foundation and basis of Christian truth, why does the Bible itself say that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15)?
  13. Jesus said that the unity of Christians would be objective evidence to the world that He had been sent by God (John 17:20-23). How can the world see an invisible “unity” that exists only in the hearts of believers?
  14. If the unity of Christians was meant to convince the world that Jesus was sent by God, what does the ever-increasing fragmentation of Protestantism say to the world?
  15. Hebrews 13:17 says, “Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.” What is the expiration date of this verse? When did it become okay not only to disobey the Church’s leaders, but to rebel against them and set up rival churches?
  16. The Koran explicitly claims divine inspiration, but the New Testament books do not. How do you know that the New Testament books are nevertheless inspired, but the Koran is not?
  17. How does a Protestant know for sure what God thinks about moral issues such as abortion, masturbation, contraceptives, eugenics, euthanasia, etc.?
  18. What is one to believe when one Protestant says infants should be baptized (e.g., Luther and Calvin) and another says it is wrong and unbiblical (e.g., Baptists and Evangelicals)?
A Few Bonus Questions

Where does the Bible . . .

. . . say salvation is attainable through faith alone?

. . . tell us how we know that the revelation of Jesus Christ ended with the death of the last Apostle?

. . . provide a list of the canonical books of the Old Testament?

. . . provide a list of the canonical books of the New Testament?
 
40.png
jimmy:
The questions are clear. You can see what the point of them is. The point is to show that there is no where in the scriptures that endorses sola scriptura. If someone can’t support that doctrine they can’t support protestantism.
Click to expand...
Of course they’re clear and of course their point is visible.

And, of course, they are loaded questions.

And, of course, they accomplished just about what should be expected of that approach. So long as one likes that result, he should keep using that approach. When he wants a different result, he should try not posing loaded questions in writing.

In person, against most enemies, such a technique fares pretty well since the opponent hasn’t the time to unpack the question, display its parts, and inquire as to which issue the questioner would like to discuss. In writing, though, even the slow among us will see the nature of the questions and understand that they are intended to tilt the table in such a way that the dessert rolls down toward the Catholic end.
 
The OP stated that his list of questions was meant for an anitCatholic site. I am surprised that the Protestants on this site, who are obviously not antiCatholic and therefore, not the intended targets of the letter, would feel the need to defend themselves.:confused:
 
Boy Daniel, 20 questions and all you can do is attempt to answer one by claiming even your “driver” knew it. I think you drive yourself and frankly that one question is the only question you can even attempt to answer.

Interesting with all of the protestants on this forum, only one has attempted to answer these 20 questions. And Daniel attempted only one of them.

Wow, come on Protestants, if you really believe in your faith and know so much, let’s hear the answers.
 
40.png
Pjs2ejs:
Boy Daniel, 20 questions and all you can do is attempt to answer one by claiming even your “driver” knew it. I think you drive yourself and frankly that one question is the only question you can even attempt to answer.

Interesting with all of the protestants on this forum, only one has attempted to answer these 20 questions. And Daniel attempted only one of them.

Wow, come on Protestants, if you really believe in your faith and know so much, let’s hear the answers.
Click to expand...
And as I pointed out, Daniel’s attempt to respond was somewhat less than persuasive IMO.

At the very least I’d like to see an explanation that cleary describes exactly* how* each of the OP’s interrogatories is a “loaded” question. In other words, what hidden presuppositions make fair responses to these questions impossible like in the “Have you stopped beating your wife?” analogy?
 
Robert in SD:
And as I pointed out, Daniel’s attempt to respond was somewhat less than persuasive IMO.

At the very least I’d like to see an explanation that cleary describes exactly* how* each of the OP’s interrogatories is a “loaded” question. In other words, what hidden presuppositions make fair responses to these questions impossible like in the “Have you stopped beating your wife?” analogy?
Click to expand...
As the OP, allow me to suggest something. It is not a question of if the the questions are loaded. Rather, it is a question of if those who aspouse those beliefs can defend their position with scripture. I think that this is a good example that they cannot. What happened in this interaction is very typical…when they find themselves unable to defend their beliefs, they resort to personal attacks.

The point of this enire thread is that the positions of the Protestant faith cannot be defended and fall to ash in the light of the Catholic Church. This is a central truth the the whole of humanity needs to grab onto.

Love you all.

Brad
 
Robert in SD:
At the very least I’d like to see an explanation that cleary describes exactly* how* each of the OP’s interrogatories is a “loaded” question.
Click to expand...
Many of them are not loaded. Questions 4 and 5, for instance, are simple. I think the example I gave is helpful, although I didn’t quote one of the OP’s questions specifically. If that example is used as a model, you should be able to see which questions are loaded.

But I’ll go ahead and elaborate. Take such a question as Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?. The obvious answer is, of course, “nowhere.” But like I showed earlier, the additional, implied question would have to be answered as well for the answer to communicate something clear: “But no Protestant ever said such a thing.”

Now, if no Protestant ever said such a thing, what has the Catholic apologist accomplished by asking that question? He has set up a straw man and knocked it down, the Protestant knows that it is nonsense, and no discussion takes place. All that one gets when he sends such questions to Protestants is the good feeling that comes from being mighty and invincible.

An honest, unaffected approach to the same issue would be “I’ve never found sola scriptura taught in the Bible. Do you think that it’s taught in the Bible? If not, why do you believe it?” The Protestant might learn something from the question and the Catholic might learn something from the answer.

And, hopefully, neither will come away crowing about how asinine the other side’s position is.

Unfortunately, though, I fear all effort will be wasted when trying to talk with biblebelievers.net. Brad’s report of Kelly Condron’s response is, sad to say, profoundly typical of the King-James-Only crowd. As I wrote sometime earlier on this forum, interacting with them is like trying to stop a weedeater with your teeth.

I think that Brad’s basic point is well founded.
 
40.png
Kevan:
Many of them are not loaded. Questions 4 and 5, for instance, are simple. I think the example I gave is helpful, although I didn’t quote one of the OP’s questions specifically. If that example is used as a model, you should be able to see which questions are loaded.

But I’ll go ahead and elaborate. Take such a question as Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?. The obvious answer is, of course, “nowhere.” But like I showed earlier, the additional, implied question would have to be answered as well for the answer to communicate something clear: “But no Protestant ever said such a thing.”

Now, if no Protestant ever said such a thing, what has the Catholic apologist accomplished by asking that question? He has set up a straw man and knocked it down, the Protestant knows that it is nonsense, and no discussion takes place. All that one gets when he sends such questions to Protestants is the good feeling that comes from being mighty and invincible.

An honest, unaffected approach to the same issue would be “I’ve never found sola scriptura taught in the Bible. Do you think that it’s taught in the Bible? If not, why do you believe it?” The Protestant might learn something from the question and the Catholic might learn something from the answer.

And, hopefully, neither will come away crowing about how asinine the other side’s position is.

Unfortunately, though, I fear all effort will be wasted when trying to talk with biblebelievers.net. Brad’s report of Kelly Condron’s response is, sad to say, profoundly typical of the King-James-Only crowd. As I wrote sometime earlier on this forum, interacting with them is like trying to stop a weedeater with your teeth.

I think that Brad’s basic point is well founded.
Click to expand...
Your point is well taken. I just hope that my questions shine some light on things for everyone that reads them.

Brad
 
Brad, just keep asking the questions and keep the expections low on the replies. I think what is important is to ask and plant the seed to help them realize that they may need to search their hearts a little more. God will do the conversions, we just need to spark the thought process to a deeper understanding of history and the teachings of the early christians.
 
40.png
MMG:
Brad, just keep asking the questions and keep the expections low on the replies. I think what is important is to ask and plant the seed to help them realize that they may need to search their hearts a little more. God will do the conversions, we just need to spark the thought process to a deeper understanding of history and the teachings of the early christians.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I could not agree with you more. I am going through a similar thing with my girlfriends dad right now. He is a hard core fundamentalist, and it really kills him that I am Catholic. I have found that our conversations have brought him to certain revelations: like the fact that there may be other Catholics that are Christians out there…other than me who he now accepts as a follower of Christ.

But, because of his views, I am hit often with serious questions from him about our teachings. To tell the truth of it, I have a blast pointing out all of the scripture that supports the teachings of the Catholic faith. This is, of course, the hardest thing that he has to deal with. He was convinced, prior to meeting me, that there was no way to back up Catholic teaching. I find it very interesting to watch him try and deal with it all. And, one never knows, he might just find his way to Rome one day after all.

This was my thought process in sending the questions out to some of the more popular anti-Catholic sites on the net. To date, only the one has gotten back with me at all. I hope that I have stimulated thought in all of them.

Brad
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top