THE PROTESTANT’S DILEMMA BY DEVIN ROSE: A REVIEW

Just a writer, who refuses to typecast his blog by giving it a title ^ | March 18, 2014 | Scott Eric Alt

[rwa265]

If a Protes­tant look­ing into the claims of Catholi­cism were to ask me, “What one book should I read, where I can find a quick answer to any ques­tion I have?” I would tell him to read Devin Rose’s new book The Protestant’s Dilemma. I would also rec­om­mend this book to Protes­tant apol­o­gists, even those of many years, well-skilled in polemics. It will remind them of the heavy bur­den of proof they face, and the weak­ness of their posi­tion on point after point. The truth may set them free and bring them home too. (It has happened.)

All this may seem like over­state­ment — the oblig­a­tory praise from one Catholic blog­ger to another. But it is not.

Con­sider first the range of issues this book takes up. There are thirty-six chap­ters, each one on a dif­fer­ent topic, from the papacy to sola scrip­tura, from the canon of the Bible to Pur­ga­tory, from con­fes­sion to Eucharist to infant bap­tism. If some­thing about the Catholic Church trou­bles you, this book has the answer. If you think you have found the point on which Catholi­cism fails, this book will show you why it is one more point upon which Protes­tantism fails.

Con­sider also the brevity. The book is just over 200 pages long, which means that Mr. Rose’s answers get to the root of the ques­tion with­out a knot of aca­d­e­mic detail. It is harder to do than it might seem. This is the book of a man who has spent a long time study­ing the ques­tions that divide Protes­tants and Catholics, and who knows how to present his case in a way that is easy for any­one to under­stand. At the same time, the book is use­ful for the pro­fes­sional apol­o­gist, for it recalls his mind to the basics.

[Elsie]

13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.

And yet...

 

 

 

 

 

[metmom]

I love your post 78...I haven’t seen your list of naughty popes in a while....it means nothing to anyone, but it is interesting.

It means a lot to people who can see the truth clearly, but not those so heavily indoctrinated with Catholicism that they can blow off that kind of abominable behavior as being inconsequential.

Only someone thoroughly deceived could believe that what those popes did was meaningless.

[metmom]

the church is, after all, an organization of Christians and as such, certainly has a right to make institutional rules.....no skimpy garb in church, no bad language, moments of silence, holy days of obligation, no meat on FRIDAY....what's the big deal.

The big deal is that is indicative of false teachers.

1 Timothy 4:1-5 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.

Colossians 2:20-23 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations—“Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.

[metmom]

Christ told us to....whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven, whose sins you shall retain, they are retained......pretty clear to me.

Where did He tell us to go to priests when in fact, He never established a hierarchy of priests in His church.

[metmom]

I'm still waiting for a list of those traditions which were failed to be included in Scripture which were FAITHFULLY passed down.

For terycarl to answer, since no other Catholic to date has taken a stab at it....

Just what are those traditions Paul was referring to that he handed down that we are to keep that were not included in Scripture?

How do you know?

How do you know they’re from the apostles, Paul in particular?

How do you know they’ve been passed down faithfully?

What is your source for verifying all of the above?

Please provide the sources for verification purposes.

[metmom]

I have NEVER read one post from anyone that calls Mary a "loathsome animal" nor has anyone said anything that disparages her in any way.

And you never will.

It's all hyperbole for sensationalism's purpose to try to discredit the messenger because the message is correct and they have no legitimate way to refute it, or they would have already.

Therefore, all they have left in their arsenal is to disparage the messenger.

[metmom]

GMTA

[metmom]

It is not for us to say who would or would not be saved. Only God can look into our hearts and make that judgement.

Which is a non-answer if ever there was one. It was simply an evasion of answering the question.

[metmom]

.over 2,000 years I guess they are entitled to have made a few minor mistakes.

Minor mistakes?

The Banquet of Chestnuts was a *minor mistake*??????

The Cadaver Synod was a *minor mistake*????

Adultery, fornication, bastard children, extortion, abuse of power, etc,.... Minor mistakes?????

With an attitude like that it sure explains a lot about Catholics........

[mgist]

http://www.orlutheran.com/html/aftersoul.html

The link is how the original Protestants explain it. This beginning paragraph certainly holds true. "The Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and some evangelical Christians hold to the soul sleep view. Lutherans, Catholics, and most Protestants hold to the soul leaving the body view." I would add that Jews also believe that the soul and the body are separate, and the leaves the body at death.

[Theo]

So Paul was a Roman Catholic. Gotcha.

Again, your denominational bias is really showing.

The truth is that Paul, along with the rest of the founding fathers of the Church, were followers of Christ, members of His Church — which consists of all those who’ve been adopted into His family, and is not restricted to those who are members of the Roman Catholic denomination.

[verga]

Do YOU actually believe these men were hand picked by God to lead you?

Well do you believe that Jesus hand picked Judas?

[LurkingSince'98]

hi eagle...

That is an easy one since the forgiveness of sins BY ANY PRIEST, let alone the Pope entails three very important conditions PRIOR to forgiveness:

1) The crusader must know and acknowledge his sins in detail by a detailed examination-of-conscience,

2) The crusader must make a ‘firm-purpose-of-amendment’ agreeing to sin no more as much is humanly possible, and

3) the crusader must have made an ‘act-of-contrition’ similar to this prayer:

“On my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, because I dread the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, but most of all because I have offended Thee , oh my God, who are all Good and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve with the help of they Grace to confess my sins, to do penance and to amend my life. Amen”

So Urban essentially reiterated that He or another priest would forgive their sins if they were properly deposed, because even the Pope cannot forgive a sinner who does not accept the above conditions.

Regards,
AMDG

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm

[LurkingSince'98]

hi eagle

you said:”The only condition for salvation is faith in Christ...not fighting in the Crusades.”

I am sorry you are categorically wrong - nowhere will you find that Urban II made fighting in the Crusades a ‘condition of salvation’.

You will need to find the quotation from a papal bull, encyclical, etc. exactly where he stated that - otherwise it is just a figment of your protestant imagination.

Ad Majoram Dei Gloriam
For the Greater Glory of God

[rwa265]

So if you don’t have time to think to ask for forgiveness, cause car wrecks happen fairly quickly and usually without warning, you would not be saved???

It is not for us to say who would or would not be saved. Only God can look into our hearts and make that judgement.

Which is a non-answer if ever there was one. It was simply an evasion of answering the question.

---

I agree it is a non-answer, but it wasn’t because I was evading an answer. Well, maybe it was. You see, I cannot find it in my heart to say someone will not be saved, even in a hypothetical situation. The bible tells us over and over again that we should not judge others; rather, we should always forgive.

The following verses guide me:

Lke 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

Rom 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

Mk 11:25 And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.

Mt 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Rom 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.

Let me put it this way. Do you think that Osama Bin Laden had a change of heart before he died and ask God to forgive his sins? Not likely. But we are called as Christians to pray for him and hope that he had a conversion of heart. As much as we may want to hope that he went to his eternal damnation, we cannot hope for that or we call eternal damnation on ourselves.

[ealgeone]

Within Fulcher of Chartres account of pope Urban’s speech there was a promise of remission of sins for whoever took part in the crusade.

All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested.

sure sounds like it to me.

[ealgeone]

hi eagle... That is an easy one since the forgiveness of sins BY ANY PRIEST, let alone the Pope entails three very important conditions PRIOR to forgiveness:

1) The crusader must know and acknowledge his sins in detail by a detailed examination-of-conscience,

2) The crusader must make a ‘firm-purpose-of-amendment’ agreeing to sin no more as much is humanly possible, and

3) the crusader must have made an ‘act-of-contrition’ similar to this prayer:

“On my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, because I dread the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, but most of all because I have offended Thee , oh my God, who are all Good and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve with the help of they Grace to confess my sins, to do penance and to amend my life. Amen”

So Urban essentially reiterated that He or another priest would forgive their sins if they were properly deposed, because even the Pope cannot forgive a sinner who does not accept the above conditions.

But that's not what his speech said. He said they would have IMMEDIATE remission of sins. No other conditions attached.

[Colonel_Flagg]

nope, He was busy elsewhere so He inspired mere mortals to actually put pen to paper and write the actual book....those were Catholics.

The Hebrews who put the Pentateuch to paper will also be surprised.

I have to hand it to you, though. You are all-in for your church. :)

[ealgeone]

I think it's a very legitimate question as it goes to the heart of "can you lose your salvation" as some Catholics and others believe.

So what happens in my question?

Forgiven?

Heaven or Hell if you don't make it in time to the priest?

[LurkingSince'98]

hey eagle...

maybe you missed the point of what I wrote or maybe you are willfully ignoring the truth of it....

I restate: “...because even the Pope cannot forgive a sinner who does not accept the above conditions.” no matter what he says.

In addition, whenever I wonder about a fact regarding the Holy Roman Church I always consult ‘Fulcher of Chartres’ first before anything else to get his take on things.

wow, are you sure your not a liberal Democrat?

here are my sources:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15210a.htm
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/all.htm

AMDG
For the Greater Glory of God