Part One     Part Two

Worship, Roman Catholic or Protestant

Differences

Roman Catholic George Farmer debated Protestant Allie Beth Stuckey on the Candace Owens Show.  Picking up midway of part two, Owens challenged Stuckey about the silliness in evangelical worship.  I see this as a legitimate criticism of evangelicalism, not however a legitimate promotion of Roman Catholicism.

Everything about Protestantism does not not translate to modern evangelicalism.  Worship and church growth philosophy are two of these.  These relate more to the decaying culture of Western civilization and its effect on the church.

I imagine far less change in the formal tradition of Roman Catholic liturgy than what occurred to Western evangelicalism as an offshoot of Protestantism.  Built into the formal liturgy of Roman Catholicism is a dogma of a transcendent imagination of God.  Cavernous cathedrals, stained glass windows, robes, huge wood carved lecterns, sacraments, and pipe organs, even removed from sincerity and true spiritual reality, communicate reverence and seriousness more than evangelical practices today.  Both are false, just like Judaistic and Samaritan worship had become in Jesus’ time.

Perversions in True Worship

Stuckey could not give a coherent answer to Owen’s criticism of evangelical worship.  She doesn’t show understanding of the problem from a biblical or theological perspective.  Stuckey made some good points about seeker-sensitive church growth philosophy and its effects on worship.  It’s true that when churches become man-centered through strategies of church growth, it corrupts worship.  She didn’t seem concerned about the issue, which is normal for evangelicals.  Very few care that God isn’t worshiped by their worldly, irreverent, intemperate, lustful music and atmosphere.  This shapes a false view of God that undermines true evangelism and biblical sanctification.

God calls on us to worship Him in the beauty of His holiness (Psalm 96:9).  Beauty is objective.  It is defined by God and His nature and the perfections of His attributes.  Modernism, which includes modern evangelicalism, ejects from objective beauty and, thus, true worship of God.  This changes the true God in the imagination of the worshipers to a false God.  This corrupts worship in a significant way akin to the corruption authored by Roman Catholicism.

The Gospel

John 3:5

Allie Beth Stuckey then asks George Farmer what the gospel is.  He starts by talking about baptism and the eucharist, first quoting John 3:5.  Farmer says that this verse is explicit for baptism as a necessity for salvation.  It reads:

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Farmer points to baptismal regeneration as sola scriptura, using John 3:5 and saying he depends on scripture for his doctrine of salvation.  He argues this is salvation by grace, because the child can do nothing.  At the moment of baptism, we do nothing, so that must be grace.  He says the early church agreed with that argument, and I’m assuming he refers to the patristic testimony for it.  Farmer follows the infant sprinkling as a means of salvation by speaking of the avoidance of mortal sin to stay saved.  He doesn’t explain that, but that clarifies his view.

Ephesians 2:8-9 and James 2

Stuckey quotes Ephesians 2:8-9 from the ESV.  She says his description of salvation is grace plus works, bringing merit or works to it.  Stuckey explains the Catholic view of grace as an ability to earn the salvation.  She continues with a mention of 2 Corinthians 5:21, that we become the righteousness of God in Christ.

Farmer rebuts Stuckey by saying that the Roman Catholic Church does not believe salvation by works.  He compares infant sprinkling to irresistible grace.  The child can’t resist.  He says that as long as someone doesn’t commit a mortal sin from that point, he will go to heaven.  Then Farmer brings in James 2, that God inscribes a person with grace and through works he receives more grace.  He interprets James 2 as, you are not saved through faith alone.

Stuckey makes two arguments.  She references election, that we’re chosen before the foundation of the world.  Then she reinforces Ephesians 2:8-9 again.  When Owens pushes back, she explains James 2.  It is works that accompany faith, as seen in the context of the New Testament, all the clear passages for faith alone and grace alone.

Baptism and the Lord’s Table

The conversation comes back to baptism for Farmer.  He says the person receives grace through baptism, so it is grace by which someone is saved.  He quotes Chesterton to say that it is more than a symbol.  This was the issue for Farmer for turning Catholic from Protestant.  He sees baptism and the eucharist as more than symbols.

Stuckey had good things to say to Farmer, but it did not seem that she participated much in evangelism or apologetics with Roman Catholics.  She needed refutations for the proof texts Farmer gave her.  She also needed more verses on the contrast between grace and faith and works.  Actually, Roman Catholics will almost never argue like Farmer.  I can count with one hand out of thousands of Catholics, those who try to defend their beliefs.  However, Church of Christ, Christian Church, and others will argue like Farmer or harder.  They keep you sharp on the issues of the debate.

Farmer continued later with an explanation of the real presence of Christ in the elements.  He said this is the earliest Christian teaching, found again and again in Christian writing.  He taught baptism and the Lord’s Table as crucial to his becoming Roman Catholic.  It is important to show that Roman Catholic history is not the history of true Christianity.  False doctrine and practice already corrupted the church by earlier than the third century.

Final Comments

John 3:5

I don’t know what Stuckey thought about John 3:5.  Farmer used it first and she said nothing about it.  Many Protestants think “water” in John 3:5 is baptism.  Martin Luther and John Calvin thought so, so maybe that’s why Stuckey wouldn’t touch it.  Thomas Ross and I both believe it is natural birth, the water being amniotic fluid.  In answering Nicodemus, Jesus described the second birth, born first of water and then second of the Spirit.  He explains the new birth or being born again.  A second birth is necessary, a spiritual one after a physical one. This reads clear to me and a quick exposition of this text would have been better.

James 2 and Romans 4

Stuckey should have dealt with justification, which is a good place to answer James 2.  Abraham was justified by faith before God, as seen in Genesis 15:6 and Romans 4:1-6, the latter a good place to explain, also including Romans 3:20.  Paul doesn’t mention baptism in Romans 3 through 5.  In James 2, works justified Abraham before men, which means they “vindicated” him, another meaning of “justified.”  A man shows his faith by his works.  James explains this.

Galatians and Hebrews

I also think someone must go to Galatians and Hebrews to talk to a Roman Catholic, especially Galatians 2, 3, and 5, and then Hebrews 9 and 10.  A good question to ask a Roman Catholic is if he believes he has full forgiveness of sins throughout all eternity.  He should explicate four verses in Hebrews 9-10:  9:27-28, 10:10, 14.  Through the one offering of Christ someone is forever perfected and sanctified.  These are perfect tense verbs, completed action with ongoing results.

I like Galatians 5 to show that even adding one work to grace nullifies grace.  Stuckey could have quoted Romans 11:6, which says if it’s grace it is no more works and if it is works, it is no more grace.  Grace and works are mutually exclusive.

Preparation

This encounter between the three participants shows a need for regular evangelism.  Stuckey seemed uncomfortable with boldness.  She might not be able to be friends with the other two.  And then maybe she doesn’t get the kind of show or podcast that she has.  I don’t know.

Someone who does not in a regular way confront the lost over their false gospel or false religion may stay unprepared for a difficult occasion.  It is hard to keep good arguments in your head if you don’t use them a lot through constant practice.  Hopefully, as you listened to this conversation with these three, you were ready to give an answer for the glory of God.

Addenda

I wanted to add one more thing, which I thought about driving somewhere this afternoon.  Farmer brought in infant sprinkling as salvation by grace.  He said this was scriptural.  Stuckey also should have pushed back against infant sprinkling.  It’s not in the Bible anywhere.  She could have gone to a number of places on this.

Obviously, Farmer could just bring the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, the Pope, and tradition.  When you can make it up as you go along, you can believe anything.  Not only is infant sprinkling not in the Bible anywhere, but it is refuted by several places.  I think of the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts 8, what doth hinder me from being baptized?  Philip said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.”  Infants can’t believe in Jesus, so they are still hindered from being baptized.  Every example of baptism is believer’s baptism.