Love this, here it is in one sentence. Catholics cooperate with Grace, many protestants: you've either been given it or you haven't. I like the Catholic position as it gives everyone hope, even after rejecting initial graces, for God's Grace is always present.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the thoughtful comment :) God bless you! The Catholic Church just makes sense.

For me, as a former Calvinist, I was incapable of sustaining my obligations to God. I always loved Him and prayed to Him and practiced meditative prayer..but on my own, I was a total failure. I absolutely need the Sacraments, particularly Penance and the Eucharist in order to both obey and to have a continually unfolding relationship with Jesus. I need Jesus to be with Jesus..so it’s grace and cooperating with grace both at the same time.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

The Sacraments are an absolute game changer! Thanks for the comment :)

@martinploughboy988

Ай бұрын

That doesn't sound like Calvinism to me, for a Calvinist it is God's grace that saves, not what we do.

@teeemm9456

Ай бұрын

@@martinploughboy988 it mostly makes sense, because if you adhere to Calvinism, it doesn't really matter what you do if you're elect.

@martinploughboy988

Ай бұрын

@@teeemm9456 Paul makes it clear that it does matter & as James points out, if you don't behave as a believer should, it's pretty good evidence that you don't have the faith you claim to have.

@teeemm9456

Ай бұрын

@@martinploughboy988 except you're behaving exactly as God sovereignly determined you to behave and election is unconditional. If you're elect, it doesn't really matter because propitiation covers all sins, unless you think Christ is insufficient.

I really appreciate how you outlined why you disagree with a Protestant belief without any vitriol. I know my fellow Protestants will often straw man Catholic teachings and it's really unhelpful. You provided an accurate portrayal referencing two famous Protestants.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the positive comment :) I love Protestants and I hope to see them in heaven!

As someone who left a Calvinist church known as the Reformed Church in the US (RCUS), I can tell you that Calvin was all about controlling people. I have never seen a group of people more determined to dictate everything in anyone's life like the RCUS. Members could-and would- be disciplined for any reason if anyone in Classis wanted to. Furthermore, classis and synod had total control over who the churches called for a minister or guest speaker and if they had something against a particular congregation they would harass the minister and refuse to ordain him. I left in total disgust and joined a Baptist church and am much much happier.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

What an intense experience! God bless you!

I'm glad you mentioned that bit about the poor in India. I heard an interview a while back with this guy who used to drive the Maharishi around. He was attracted to the Maharishi because he was a big Beatles fan and George, with all his talk about the Hindu faith and all its love and closeness with God on a personal level, more so than Christianity, got him hooked. Anyway, this guy went to India and ended up working for the Maharishi. Well one day he was driving the Maharishi around in one his limos, I guess he had a fleet of them to go along with his helicopter, and they were driving through a poor part of town. The man asked the Maharishi why he wasn't out helping the poor like Mother Theresa and the Maharishi, in a very casual way, without even looking out of the window at the misery, calmly said they were all living out their karma and it wasn't his place to get in the way of that. Once they got back to the compound the guy said he packed his bag and left without saying a word. When he landed back in the West he became a Catholic. He said up until that point he didn't really get the Maharishi or his scam, primarily because he never bothered asking or digging into the matter on a deep level. He just accepted what he was told and did what was expected of him. He did say looking back the whole caste system should have clued him in but he was so enthralled to be in the Maharishi's orbit that it never occurred to him to think. That's one thing I love about our faith. Not only do we honor the individual, we think for ourselves, at least we do if we are doing it right. That's just my take though, I'm curious by nature. Cool video. I liked this one and I don't hand those out very often. Thanks for posting.

@CameronRiecker

26 күн бұрын

Thanks for the interesting comment!! :)

This is amazing! Best explanation of the difference between the two faiths I have ever heard! 🙌🏼 Keep up the good work!

@JessicaRiecker

Ай бұрын

We are students 🤓

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the positive comment :) God bless you!

I think you do a nice job of raising an important theological difference and giving food for thought. However, my personal experience has shown that the biggest difference between Catholics and Protestants is what constitutes salvation. You will never get agreement between Catholics and the Protestant denominations as to what the true scriptural basis is. At the end of the day, our salvation, our relationship with Christ is what matters most to all of us. I believe that if you boil Protestantism down to its essence, you will get a John 3:16 version of salvation. If you boil down Catholicism to its essence, you will get John 6:53 (or the bread of life discourse as a whole.) My perspective on this is having been a Protestant for the first 49 years of my life and then converting to Catholicism 7 years ago. I am the lone Catholic in a Protestant family, so I live this stuff, it directly impacts my relationships and how I interact with my siblings and others. God bless you Cameron, I'm praying for your channel to blossom, you're doing a fantastic job.

@JessicaRiecker

Ай бұрын

What was your turning point to Catholicism? Those who convert or make stands for the Catholic faith DESPITE family counter forces are incredibly brave and examples of visual displays of Gods grace to do what they are doing. And the person themself is incredible because they have accepted the grace and call, on their own free will, to defend the faith Family persecution is not easy to go up against. God bless you!

@davidcole333

Ай бұрын

@@JessicaRiecker As a protestant, I fell away into a "spiritual, not religious" type of walk with Christ. After being away from church for many years, it started weighing heavily on my heart to return to church. However, I had zero desire to go back to the churches I had known. So, I started thinking about other alternatives than the traditional Protestant denominations and it just hit me to go to a mass. At that point in my life, I had never been to a mass, I didn't know any Catholics, I didn't know anything about the Catholic church other than traditional stereotypes. So, long story short, I went to a mass, I LOVED it...I felt such a reverence in that mass, which in hindsight, I contribute to the real presence. I kept coming back to mass every Sunday for many months, then went into RCIA and from there really took a deep dive into learning about the faith. So, I think my turning point to Catholicism was just following the Holy Spirit, saying yes to that tug in my heart to go to a mass. Most converts research their way into the church. I followed the Holy Spirit into the church, then stared to study and learn once I was already in love with the church. My walk with Christ has never been deeper, closer or stronger.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the thoughtful comment! These are good insights :) God bless you!

@xaelath7771

Ай бұрын

That's an interesting way to put it, but if we understand them correctly, both the 3:16 and the 6:53 "versions" of salvation must be the same. The bread of life discourse opens with 6:26 ends with the chapter. It includes: 29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” 35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. 40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 58 This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.” 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 69 We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.” Throughout the discourse, Jesus emphasizes belief in Him as the means of salvation, just as he does in 3:16 and elsewhere. He also clarifies that the words he spoke were spirit, but the flesh profits nothing, and that we must eat of him "not as the fathers ate" - refering to the manna they physically consumed in the wilderness. Doesn't this suggest that whatever he means by eating his flesh and drinking his blood, that they are spiritual activities, synonymous with believing in Him?

@tomcha75

Ай бұрын

That's an interesting thought. But in light of the video, I think you could think of the difference you mentioned as an extension of his point - Protestants believe we are saved by faith alone because we cannot do good works out of free choice (I'm grossly paraphrasing and perhaps butchering the wording) where as Catholics believe you have a say through actions via free choice and therefore they have merit (thus salvation not by faith alone, but rather faith as a foundation and good works in addition).

the synthesis of all heresy is found in the disbelief in the incarnation

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Christ is Lord! Thanks for the comment :)

Christ be with you I think Faith is the biggest differentiator. I think Catholic and Protestants have a completely different understanding of what it is. God bless you

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Interesting! Can you explain more? :)

Here is one for you to ponder! When Peter answered Christ’s question “ who do you say I am”? Peter answered “you are the Messiah, the Son of the living God”. What was Jesus’ reply? “Blessed are you Simon, ….. for this WAS NOT REVEALED TO YOU by FLESH and BLOOD, BUT BY MY FATHER IN HEAVEN” ….. Peter or you or I cannot h believe who JESUS is truly and put our faith in Him without the work of the Father in us! In our fallen humanity we do not understand spiritual things - they have to be revealed by the Father in Heaven! Another Scripture says the same sort of thing - “the natural person does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned”. 1 Corinthians 2:14 How do you receive the Spirit - by being born again - regenerated and only God regenerates! Baptism does not regenerate. Babies in the Catholic Church are NOT regenerated or forgiven for anything or receive grace!!! That is false teaching. Now, when do you come to Faith? When you are regenerated! That is when one understands who Jesus is and believes in Him. God does all of this in a person. We do not do it! Just like Peter above.

@CameronRiecker

23 күн бұрын

Thanks for the comment :)

Protestants have varied beliefs on free will. Methodists, Nazarenes, Salvation Army, Assemblies of God, (some) Baptists, etc. all do theology through a free will lens. Reformed and (some) Baptists do theology from a more predestination lens. But that's just taking something of a God's-eye view on how human events unfold. It's really not contradictory to the more free-will-centric perspective of the aforementioned denominations - it's just a different vantage point. Nobody denies free will in a conventional, practical sense, or asserts that man is a robot. Even if we didn't believe in God, we'd be debating whether free will truly exists. Most scientists would say it doesn't since we're bound by physical laws. A few contrarians would try to use the indeterminate nature of quantum physics to try to make a case for free will. But nobody would buy a taco and say, "I was conditioned by existence to get hot sauce on this taco." They would just say, "I want hot sauce on this taco." The vast bulk of human language is constructed to use the framework of choice and intent, because that is contextually appropriate. No Calvinist parent looks at her child's A+ report card and says, "Thank God he manipulated you into studying hard." That's ridiculous. She says, "Good job. Tonight you get pizza " Many of the assertions in this video are absurd. "Priest" is a contraction of presbyter and it literally means "elder." There was nothing wrong with calling clergy priests as long as the pagan and Old Testament Jewish shamans were called "sacerdos" and the two words weren't confused. Unfortunately, we started using "priest" to refer to shamans, and people eventually thought Christian elders had shamanistic abilities. (No thanks to creeps like Cyprian, who were all too eager to claim such power.) The later medieval theology on a sacrificial priesthood is a muddled attempt to justify this linguistic mess. The gulf between Catholics and other Christians is far greater now than at the time of the Reformation, thanks to relatively new doctrines like Papal infallibility and the Immaculate Conception.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) Perhaps Protestants today have different views, but Luther and Calvin both certainly held a very low view of free will.

@xinosaj

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker No problem. (I hope the comment didn't come across as more strident than intended.) For fruitful Protestant-Catholic dialog, it's best not to overemphasize Luther and Calvin. We see them as people more like Rosa Parks than Moses. They kicked off a much needed conversation, but many of their particulars were flawed or just speculative. Most non-Catholic western Christians are Baptists (though they might prefer "non-denominational" as a label), more rooted in anabaptism and later revivals than the 16th century disputes. The Pentecostals are like uber-Methodists with a touch of Quaker.

@martinploughboy988

Ай бұрын

Priests in the Old Testament did not match the NT elder, they sacrificed, as do the priests in Romanism. I don't think it is a contraction of presbyter at all. As for 'free will', that is utterly destroyed as a notion by: The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the Lord; he turns it wherever he will. (Proverbs 21:1) How can we have free will if God can change our will, rather we have creaturely will, subject to God's will.

@xinosaj

Ай бұрын

@@martinploughboy988 No, a priest today is not an NT elder. That's because the word has changed meaning so it means a shaman. This is common usage in English today, so "priest" should be avoided in reference to Christian clergy. Free will is actually a very bad idea, both Biblically and simply logically. There is no way to describe how free will can exist that doesn't reduce our actions to random chaos. When Christians talk about free will, they mean that you are free to do what you will - but you're not free to choose what you will.

This is what I’ve been saying to my Protestant friends!!! We waste all our time debating Mary or the sacraments when we keep speaking PAST each other. Catholics and Protestants are using the word “grace” even though each of us means completely different things by that word.

@CameronRiecker

26 күн бұрын

Well said! It’s very important to define terms from the outset 😄 thanks for the comment!

In this way, it appears that we Eastern Orthodox think virtually identically with our Catholic brothers and sisters. While I do not hold with it, the moral state of secular societies in the modern, developed world on its surface appears to make a good argument for the Protestant view, though.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Theosis is such an interesting concept :) Thanks for the comment!

@chouyi007

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker Excellent use of our parlance, friend! I was prepared to call it divinizatio when speaking with someone from the far larger, and frankly more successful, western half of Catholicism.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

@@chouyi007 I have some good friends who are Eastern Catholic!

Grateful for your videos!

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the positive comment :) I am glad you find my content useful!

I am not Catholic myself but have been looking into it and watching Catholic masses and such on youtube, I am also looking into other protestant, and even some Orthodox views, though it is a bit more unlikely as there is no Orthodox Church around where I live. What I have scratched off the list is anything heretical that seems to not fit with the Bible, especially anything that counters the New Testament...though I study both Old and New, but I also reject Calvinism, because not only do I see anti-Calvinist passages all through the Bible but also I am certain I made the first step to Christ, and then He answered. I spent most my life as a "Christian" I did not really know the Bible well other than the basic stories they told me as a kid, never went to church past Bible School in the summers, but I did pray a lot, maybe not always the best, most selfless prayers, and I tended to embrace less sin than many "Christians" would, but for decades I never fully put my faith and trust in God. Like, I went through the motions to be good and moral, ask for things I wanted, but didn't really ask Him what He wanted. It was not until a couple years ago I was going through a rough time, and I made a conscious choice to stop going after what I wanted, and I said basically "you know what I want, but I will trust in you, if you guide me and I will do my best to listen." Nothing happened over night or anything but slowly, I would have thoughts and solutions that were not what I wanted, that did not often seem to come from me, but they made sense, and felt benevolent. But I started feeling better, even though I was not getting anything close to what I wanted, but I think I was getting what I needed. Then, I one day close to a year ago picked up the New Testament and started reading it, when I was done I read the Old Testament, then I started looking at the different demonstration and cross referencing those with what I read, then mixed watching things with reading, once I finished the Old Testament, I grabbed a different translation, for a re-read of the New Testament, and today I just finished 2 Samuel, in that translation. I keep trying to learn more and get a deeper understanding What I can say, with certainty, is God was perfectly happy for decades to let me ask for things, with little help. He'd let me go though the rough times, and not answer my prayers nor change me as a Calvinist would say since I would not even be praying nor trying to be good if I was not chosen long before I was born. I never doubted his existence, never stopped trying but I never got anything, until I humbled myself, and said I can't do this without Your help, and I'll trust you to take me where I should be. I am still learning, and growing every day, and have a ways to go yet, but I am a lot better than where I was, living for better things, and I will be better tomorrow than I am today.

@CameronRiecker

26 күн бұрын

Praying for God to guide you brother! God bless you!

Just an fyi, John 3:8 does not work on us like a puppet. The spirit goes wherever it pleases, we have no control over it. This pattern is actually consistent all throughout scripture. Although, we like to think we have control, but we don’t.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

So, do you deny free will? Which school of thought do you follow? I'm a Thomist :)

@soteriology400

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker I agree with John 6:44, no one can come to Him, unless the Father draws him. This draw is found in 1 Thessalonians 1:5 "5 because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake. " No one can come to him, we can try, but we can't. For example, the gospel is preached to two different people. One experiences an inner change found in 1 Thessalonians 1:5, and the other does not. This inner change is dependent upon the spirit (John 3:8) who goes wherever He pleases. The call to repent goes out to everyone, but one is based on flesh and blood, and the other is based on the spirit which produces sorrow (2 Cor. 7:9-10). We have free will during our walk of salvation, but the initial point of salvation is 100% His doing, where we have absolutely no room to boast. We are completely dependent upon God for the initial point of salvation, it is not based on our works at all. Our rewards found in 1 Cor. 3:14-15 are dependent upon our works, but we do not lose the salvation though. We suffer losses for sin in this life as well as these works get burned up per 1 Cor. 3:14-15 (straw). So I believe Gods sovereignty and sovereign choice over His creation. Not based on anything we did.

Excellent, thank you very timely for me personally , may God Bless You.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment! Glad you enjoyed it :) God bless you!

Perfectly explained. ❤

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the positive feedback :) God bless you!

Well done. May God please to bless you

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the support :) God bless you!

Broad brush, indeed - far too broad. As too many Catholic apologists do, you misunderstand (or misrepresent) Protestantism. Trent Horn is an exception because he DOES understand Protestants and often approaches subjects from a simple Christian (truly catholic) perspective. Most Protestants have an understanding of being transformed daily by the Holy Spirit to be more like Jesus. Transformation, sanctification, theosis (the Orthodox variation) and other terms all refer to becoming progressively like Jesus. Calvinism's understanding of "total depravity" is not shared by most protestants. Most of us understand human depravity just as Paul explained it in Romans. No, Protestants have serious doctrinal disagreement with Catholicism, but we also have far more in common than most think. Respecting each other as Christians rather than fighting the reformation all over again makes more sense.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment! :) I find that the difficulty with arguing with Protestants is that I cannot argue against a strict set of beliefs. Even if someone says they are a Lutheran they very well may reject many of the teachings of Luther. Since there is no uniform interpretation of Scripture to argue against, each discussion with a Protestant has to be tailored to their own interpretation of the Scriptures. Perhaps I made my generalizations too sweeping, but I think my claims still are true for a great number of Protestants. I will try to be more precise with my language in the future :)

The title of the video should be the "Difference between Catholics and some or even most protestants." Since there are non-Catholics who also affirm libertarian free will, fully affirm both judicial redemption by faith alone and salvation in the life of Christ (regeneration, sanctification, renewing, transformation, conformation to the image of Christ and ultimate glorification) to be made the same as God in life and in nature, but not in the Godhead, such that His communicable divine attributes may be expressed in human virtues, which correspond to the "righteous deeds" of the saints in Rev. 19, and the wedding garment in Matt. 22, and which is produced by God through the believer's cooperation, i.e., working out their own salvation in fear and trembling, through grace, such that it may be no longer the believers who live, but Christ who lives in them. The New Testament theme of reward and punishment (faithful vs evil slaves, wise vs foolish virgins, the overcoming believers in revelation) clearly shows that there is "merit" that is earned through the cooperation of the human will with the divine will, and yet, as Paul says "it is by the grace of God that I am what I am, and labored more abundantly..." so that none may boast in anything except in Christ alone. Long story short, it is sad that most protestants are stuck at and don't move past judicial redemption, endlessly debating Calvinism, etc., but trust me, there are non-Catholics for whom theosis is the very meaning of their human life.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the comment :) What denominations believe in theosis?

@e.z.1913

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker No mainstream denominations that I know of, but a great deal of non-denominational groups who are not ignorant of church history, the Greek fathers in particular. Any group that is familiar with Johnathan Edwards contribution on the subject or who have read classic books like the Normal Christian Faith by Watchman Nee etc. Of course the mainstream groups are too busy with their laser show rock concerts, to know anything about it, but elsewhere I'd say that theiosis is definitely making a comeback. Just look up a 2015 article in the Reformed Journal entitled "Deification: A Truly Ecumenical Concept" by Dr Carl Mosser

@e.z.1913

Ай бұрын

​@@CameronRiecker No mainstream denominations that I know of, but a great deal of non-denominational groups who are not ignorant of church history, the Greek fathers in particular. Any group that is familiar with Johnathan Edwards contribution on the subject or who have read classic books like the Normal Christian Faith by Watchman Nee etc. Of course the mainstream groups are too busy with their laser show rock concerts, to know anything about it, but elsewhere I'd say that theosis is definitely making a comeback. A recent 2015 article in the Reformed Journal entitled "Deification: A Truly Ecumenical Concept" by Dr Carl Mosser just about says it all.

If Mother Theresa saved that man's soul, he was hopelessly lost forever.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) She saved him by leading him to Jesus

@DavidTheZealot

26 күн бұрын

​@@CameronRieckerGod saved the man through the mean of Mother Theresa I believe the person's eluding to not Mother Theresa saving him. For all glory goes to God

Just a thought, since this has been corrected in the Catholic church but still shows up a lot - there are not thousands of Protestant denominations. There are perhaps two dozen categories... just like Catholics. And Calvinists believe in total depravity, yes. This does not mean a person cannot or does not choose good and do good. It means all glory goes to God for his common grace when that happens. Not like a puppet.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment! For Calvinists, the wicked cannot choose good, is that correct?

@AndrewKendall71

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker Imprecise. It's that all are wicked, and therefore have no individual will to do good (the heart being desperately wicked, dead in trespasses and sins). But, all are operating in this life under common grace. So, good may be chosen and done-moved by God who is sovereign over his own grand and minute plans even outside of the faith. But that good done is still not righteousness: Romans 14:23 says, “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.”

Very well explained! Thank you. Many atheists also believe there is no free will - humans are conditioned to act in certain ways.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Free will is a beautiful mystery of our faith :) Thanks for the comment!

@SurrenderNovena

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker Yes it is! Bl. John Duns Scotus made some excellent points on free will, back in the late 13th century. It was an issue even then!

Which Jesus are you following? Within 10 years after Jesus Crucifixion we find many false teachers preaching. For St. Paul had warned the church in Corinthians . "For you gladly tolerate anyone who comes to you and preaches a different Jesus, not the one we preached; and you accept a spirit and a gospel completely different from the Spirit and the gospel you received from us!" *2 Corinthians 11:4* False teachers, were masters in creating confusion in the minds of innocent sheep. They used ancestry to create it. Si. Paul says "I want you to stay in Ephesus, just as I urged you when I was on my way to Macedonia. Some people there are teaching false doctrines, and you must order them to stop. Tell them to give up those legends and "*those long lists of ancestors*," which only produce arguments; they do not serve God's plan, which is known by faith." 1 Timothy 1:4 The false teachers were Jews well conversed in OT and they are the ones who created the Masoretic Hebrew text to prove that Jesus is not the Messiah ! The Septuagint Bible, from which Jesus quoted the OT verses pointed towards him as the Messiah. Thats the reason why the Jews created Masoretic Hebrew text, by making a few changes in the genealogy and deleting 7 books from the Septuagint Bible. Project started in 90 AD and *got completed in 10th Century*. The corrupt priest, Martin Luther, called Vatican corrupt and recommended deletion of 7 books and adopting the Masoretic Hebrew text as the OT !! If Vatican was corrupt during reformation period the CHURCH OF ENGLAND would not have been formed by King Henry VIII and his successor King James would not have come out with KJV Bible. As KJV Bible has incorporated Masoretic Hebrew text as OT, its the wrong Bible for any christian who follows Jesus Christ ; who died on the cross for us sinners. Matthew 27:17-26 says So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: *Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah* ?” For he knew it was out of self-interest that they had handed Jesus over to him. So which Jesus do you follow ? If you read KJV, you follow Barrabas If you read a Catholic Bible / Bible which has the Septuagint Bible as OT ,you follow Christ !!! So which Jesus do you follow ?

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

This reminds me of Matthew 16 when Jesus asks "who do men say that I am?" God bless you! Thanks for the comment!

So salvation based on faith and works is a big separator between prots and caths but I think that the papacy is actually really the biggest differentiator (also in the case of orthodoxy). Not all Prots believe in Sola Gratiae and Sola Fide to the same extent as Calvinism and hence some Prots can be sympathetic to the Catholic doctrine of how salvation works, but virtually all Prots share in their denial of the magisterium of the pope.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment! I need to do another video on the pope because if you get the papacy right, all the other issues dissolve!

@MrKev1664

Ай бұрын

Christ be with you I think Faith is the biggest differentiator. I think Catholic and Protestants have a completely different understanding of what it is. God bless you

@tsp8855

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker Exactly

As a protestant, I think the brush you're painting with is a little to broad on this occasion! A lot of us are Arminians (especially here in England) and we broadly agree with the Roman Catholic posistion on this. Calvin errs by making the decision to put our faith in God itself into a work, and then says, since we are saved by grace, that that decision must have been made by God for us - else we would be saved by our works. In contrast, Arminians believe that grace is what allows us the free will choice to either put our faith in God, or to reject his offer of salvation. Where will still differ, is in the claim that since we cooperate with God, that therefore our good works are meritorious. But Jesus said: “He does not thank the slave because he did the things which were commanded, does he? So you too, when you do all the things which are commanded you, say, ‘We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done.’” Luke 17:9-10

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) I did not mean to misrepresent any of my Protestant brothers and sisters! There is a lot of nuance in their positions. But unless I wanted this to be a 3 hour lecture I was forced to generalize and focus on the teachings of Luther and Calvin. God bless you!

@PC-vp2cg

Ай бұрын

To take this verse as a defense for protestantism is wild

@xaelath7771

Ай бұрын

@@PC-vp2cg Technically I'm using it to attack the Roman posistion - either way though, can you explain why you think it's so wild?

@PC-vp2cg

Ай бұрын

@@xaelath7771 Well, the verse says "what we ought to have done". Doesn't this imply that there is actuallay a lot of stuff, meaning works, that we have to do? The only thing this verse seems to say is that we ought not to deem ourselves worthy of anything, just because we did things that are pleasing to God. Which is obviously also not the Roman Catholic view, that there is a checklist of things and afterwards you can feel satisfied. I'm not Catholic btw.

@xaelath7771

Ай бұрын

@@PC-vp2cg I agree, we ought to have lived sinless lives, but obviously none of us meet that standard - hence the need for a saviour. No one is justified by works, because no ones works are good enough. To be clear, we should still do good works, but not in order to earn or maintain our salvation - but rather out of love and gratitude for the One who saved us by grace, through faith in Him.

Basically The difference between Catholics and Protestants is that Catholics have a cross where Jesus sacrificed himself and we willingly come to him as coheirs to grace and eternal life through the Spirit and Eucharist while Protestants have an empty Cross still believing that there is unabridged gap between mankind (because of a lack of free will) and God even with Jesus’s death..

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

That's a very interesting way to put it! You might be right :)

@Justyouraverageguy172

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker Also thank you for this video as it answers a lot of things for me personally both from what I have been struggling to believe about how God can still work with me and my evil and sins and also how he spoke to me affirming that I am one of his children and to go out and rise above the world as he has done.

You really need to do more study. You do not understand biblical free will or Calvinism. Westminster Confession on Free Will, Chapter 9: God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that it is neither forced, nor, by any absolute necessity of nature, determined to good, or evil.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) My focus in this video was on Calvin and Luther and less on how they have been interpreted over the years!

@mikekayanderson408

24 күн бұрын

@@CameronRiecker and you misinterpreted them both and made a mockery of them both. The Reformed faith is far mor biblical than the catholic faith which I’d full of myths and lies and superstition.

You assume that all Protestants are Calvinists which is not true. Take a look at Soteriology 101 channel where Leighton Flowers(a protestant) has been doing videos on why Calvinism is wrong. So, really this video is incorrect because it assumes too much about Protestantism. The real difference between Protestant and Catholic is Sola Scriptura which believes the Bible is above Church tradition.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment 😄 The reason it is difficult to argue against Protestants is because they are each their own magisterium. If you want to argue agains the Catholic Church, read the catechism and the councils, if you want to argue against Protestants, there is no uniform teaching. Each Protestant has their own unique take on the Scriptures. I know this from conversing with hundreds of non Catholics in the comments and in person. Each Protestant has their own unique reason for rejecting the Catholic Church. There are some major commonalities, but very little unity!

I’d love to be one of Gods little sunsets!! 💕🥲

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

That would be pretty cool! haha

Love your explanations. We are blessed to be Catholics. 🙏

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thank you :) Indeed we are! God bless you!

Sorry dude, but this video is a huge fail. Augustine is the one that introduced total depravity, you know "Saint Augustine" the man that had free will loving Pelagius killed? Many others followed in his footsteps, many "church fathers" according to the RCC. Most of the other detractors of the RCC were killed by the RCC, and then later Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli contributed to the version we have now, suppressing others and I imagine would have done the same to the RCC if they had the resources. You are talking about Calvinism or "Reformed", which doesn't even represent the majority of "Protestantism". The major beliefs are Grace through Faith alone (Reformed says Faith through grace), the only head priest is Christ and all believers are saints, no (S), and outside of God, the ultimate authority is the bible, not catechisms, papal authority/infallibility, absent apostolic succession, nor councils of fallen men. To clarify, Mother Theresa was an amazing woman and deserves to be honored among men, especially nailing that fallen mankind stops well short of Jesus, with her own work representing some of the best we've ever had to offer. She didn't get a golden ticket where people should be praying to her though, that is the "Glory" line. Emulating Mother Theresa where she emulated Christ, is perfectly fine, but redirecting prayer from God to a dead human is walking the fence of idolatry, at best.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) Why do you think Augustine teaches total depravity?

@teeemm9456

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker Pretty sure all scholarly work on Augustine of Hippo indicate that he believed Adam's sin was passed down to mankind and we were powerless against it. The term wasn't keyed by Augustine, but Calvin was heavily influenced by him. Additionally, most historians believe that Augustine came to this conclusion at least in part because of the mistranslated Vulgate he was using for Romans 5:12, but not that it was the basis of his opinion in totality. So the teaching was previously catholic based, but as a "protestant" I don't adhere to TULIP and believe it is false doctrine that our reformed brethren adhere to.

In The Old Testament God says that all our good works are like filthy rags , the Bible says this not Calvin! Another error!

@CameronRiecker

24 күн бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) That is why God must perform the works through us!

You really are talking a lot of rot! We get accused of misunderstanding Catholics - well you certainly misunderstand what we believe and teach in the Reformed faith - you mock and you distort everything…..if you are going to critique something then learn about it first and do not just make it up as you go along! You have to understand the Reformed teaching to be able to discuss it sensibly.

@CameronRiecker

23 күн бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) What is the official Protestant position? The Lutheran one? The Calvinist one? The Baptist one? All of them? None of them?

Oh dear, you don't know what total depravity is, nor do you understand what grace is. The Bible tells us that God draws the sinner to Christ, not that the sinner moves of his own will. Again, Scripture tells us that God can move the heart of the king, so why should not he move the heart of the common. Again, Scripture tells us that the natural man cannot please God. Total depravity means, not that a man is as bad as he could be but that sin has reached into every aspect of his nature. Salvation is God changing the nature of the sinner so that they no longer love sin, but love God & His law. Thus they repent & turn to God in faith. What you are saying is that the sinner isn't dead in their sin, there's a little life left & God helps that life to reach out to Him. The Bible says that the sinner can do nothing, it requires God to make him alive. I'd suggest that Mother Theresa did what she did for her own pleasure & pride. There are no Christian priests other than Christ, because Jesus was the priest who made an offering, once for all time. His offering was complete, unlike the Jewish offerings that had to be continually repeated. Thus for us on Earth we have no priest.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) I think the idea that Mother Teresa took care of the poor for pleasure and pride is a difficult thing to defend!

@martinploughboy988

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker Since Mother Theresa is not a Christian, it is quite clear from Scripture that deeds done by such are not done for the right motives. I have also heard tales that she was not the nicest person to work with.

There is no such thing as the Calvinist religion! Calvin was a Christian and he wrote commentaries on the Bible. That’s all. He commented and explained Biblical Doctrine. So maybe you had better get your facts straight.

@CameronRiecker

23 күн бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) How do you define religion?

Protestants Sola Mea Sententia Only my opinion

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) LOL

I don't think we can compare Christianity and catholicism. One follows Christ, the other follow Mary and the Saints.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment! Catholics only follow Mary and the Saints insofar as they lead us to Christ :)

@John_the_Paul

Ай бұрын

Did Christianity exist before the Protestant reformation?

@timothybasil

Ай бұрын

Speaking as a Catholic: we follow Christ first and foremost.

@LinhNguyen-hi9sk

Ай бұрын

This comment is based on ignorance. I pray that you seek to understand first.

ACTUALLY - this is the biggest difference: ROMAN Catholics believe in human merit that somehow obtains something, say, Justification, but Bible-believing Evangelicals flatly reject this understanding of 'HUMAN MERIT" because it isn't perfect, and actually the human himself isn't perfect. THAT's the difference.

@CameronRiecker

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) So, do you deny that we are saved by works? What about James 2:24?

@soulosxpiotov7280

Ай бұрын

@@CameronRiecker Cameron, my goal is not to corner you, but instead I hope you I really really really REALLY think this through, and not take a position, "Ah, that's a classical Protestant (so-called) position" - please do think about this. So.....man justifies himself (Lk 10:29) , man justifies his best friend (1 Sam 20), man is justified in court (Deut 25), and man JUSTIFIES GOD (Psa 51). God is not the only entity who justifies, for MAN also justifies. And part of the formula, Cameron, includes Romans 4, to which Roman Catholics either don't know or ignore. And hence, God does NOT justify a man because of works (Romans 2 & 3), however man IS justified by his works (James 2), BUT NOT BEFORE GOD (Romans 4). So James 2 does begin with "When someone SAYS that he has faith ....he SSSAAAAAAYYYYYSSS that he has faith....yet doesn't have works....can The Faith save him?" These are two people talking to each other; one person PROCLAIMS to have faith, and the other person says to himself "He SAYS he has faith...but..." You see, us Evangelicals talk like this practically every Sunday; "You know, my sister SAYS she's born-again, but, you know, I DON'T THINK she is." And actually Roman Catholics also say the same thing; "Nancy Pelosi SAYS she's Roman Catholic, she SAYS that she is, however she supports homosexual marriage...so you know, I JUST DON'T KNOW IF SHE'S TRULY a Roman Catholic even though she SAYS she is!" And thus, Cameron, Romas 2 & 3 point to man being justified God, but James 2 talks about man being justified before MAN. You may have to read this a few times, but I hope you've read it with good appetite. The Lord be with you, and if you're not truly born-again yet (if you put partial dependence on your standing with God based on your performance or works), then I hope you will soon.

Again you misrepresent irresistible grace and use words to describe it that make it sound awfu! You are so unbalanced. Also irresistible Grace has to do with salvation and coming to faith - not doing good works!

@CameronRiecker

23 күн бұрын

Thanks for the comment :) So, works have no bearing on salvation?