Catholic Truth debunks Gavin Ortlund and Protestantism

Catholic Truth debunks Gavin Ortlund and Protestantism. Gavin Ortlund Claims Protestantism is true and not Catholicism, but Catholic Truth debunks his claims on Protestantism and Catholicism. Follow Catholic Truth below.

SUPPORT: Please help us to keep growing and saving souls!

FOLLOW CATHOLIC TRUTH:
Instagram: Catholic_Truth_Official

APOLOGETICS TRAININGS:

BOOK: Counterfeit Spirituality: Exposing the False Gods (All about New Age practices, Yoga, Reiki, Astrology, Law of Attraction, etc.)
Also see Barnes & Nobles, etc.

Related searches: Pastor gavin ortlund, gavin ortlund roman catholicism

[gk]

Excellent response Bryan!!🎯Thanks for all you do in defending the One Holy Catholic & Apostolic Church…Viva Cristo Rey!

[josh]

Protestants conveniently leave out the fact that the biblical cannon was assembled by the Catholic Church

As someone who is going to be converting to catholicism from baptist the fact all the contradictions within Protestantism which lead me to catholicism.

The quote holds true: "To be deep in history is to cease to be protestant."

[TCM]

God Bless Catholic Truth! I was just having a conversation about Gavin!

[candyclews]

I've given you a hard time Bryan, in the past, about the Roman Catholic Church only coming to Britain in the 6th Century (which was true) but now I realise, through your teachings, that the Celtic Christians in Britain prior to that time were indeed 'Catholics' - probably descended from the Antioch and Alexandria rites. I humbly apologise and thank you for helping me understand. A whole new journey ahead for me!

[lonedesertfox]

CATHOLIC TRUTH OVER HERE DROPPING BOMBS! 🔥

[timboslice]

Ooooh do Jeff Durbin next! His recent video was full of lies about the church!

[jonatasmachado]

Excellent content. As a former Baptist, son, grandson, nephew and cousin of sincere, faithful and holy Baptist Pastors, I became Catholic through reading the Fathers of the Church. They were Catholics. Even when they differed among themselves, the fathers of the Church accepted the authority of the Pope and the Councils. Protestants divide the Church when they disagree with each other, creating the most confusing theological cacophony. Even in a small country like Portugal, two Baptist denominations were always at war with each other, as I noticed in family discussions. After reading the Fathers of the Church I changed my opinion on topics such as the Eucharist, the biblical canon, Baptism, confession, the Papacy, the Church, Mary, the communion of saints and the relics. I myself was surprised by such a radical change.

[jorgemendez]

❤ it’s amazing being prepared. I am so proud of you. That is the way to keep Catholics in our faith which it’s only one I totally agree.

[kzbaby]

I was driving home from Adoration tonight and thought, what YouTube video can I listen to? I got all excited when I saw this and sat back in satisfaction to listen to Bryan rip a new one for Ortlund (rude saying, sorry), but Bryan is just so good at this and his delivery humors me so much. Great job Bryan. I watched Ortlund on Bennett Cook’s channel and got so annoyed because he kept saying this is what Catholics believe… and he was always wrong!

[DUZCO]

God bless all you catholic apologist gentlemen - guys like Gavin honestly have no chance. Praying for his conversion

[manub.]

Luther and the Reformation: the interesting thing about it is that Luther, Zwyngli, Melanchton and Calvin got into disputes about the respective interpretations and rites early on and the "dispute" thus drove the Reformation in different directions right from the start.
Everyone did and believed what they wanted or understood.

[userlovesfr]

I am so very proud being a Catholic for almost 70 years now.

[georgepierson]

How can Protestantism be true when, by its very nature, it is self contradicting?

[pattip]

I love your explanations, keep up the good work!! God bless

[davidfabien]

Great rebuttal.
Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.
Not every commandment is written in the bible and St Paul confirmed that when he said in 1 Corinthians 7: 25 "Now in regard to virgins, I have no commandment from the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy."

[thomasfolio]

In his first videos, Dr. Ortland seemed to be a refreshing change from previous Protestant Apologists, he attempted to use the Fathers rather than destroy them, and did not depend on old fables from Boettner and Hislop. Over time he showed that his objectivity was blunted and blinded by his falling back on the "Proof Text Method" he was raised with. He seems to find Fathers and Authors that agree with his ideas, and even though many are taken out of context, he does worse and ignores the rest of the writings of the authors he cites.
As to Phillip Schaff, the Presbyterian historian he quotes, I've noticed that the collection of the Fathers he has pictured on his shelf is the Shaff edited set. I have it as well as A couple of English Translations from Catholic and Orthodox sources, and Catholic sets of the Fathers in the original Greek and Latin (I don't read Syriac or Aramaic, so I've not spent money on those languages) In comparing the sets, one would note that the Schaff edition omits whole books, sermons and letters of the Greek and Latin Fathers. When you look at the text itself, Schaff and the other translators of his set have removed sections of the writings which they disagreed with and in the footnotes comment that it must be a later addition because it does not agree with the Protestant view. Since the Schaff translation in the mid 1800s there are older copies of the Fathers that have been discovered than those Schaff used, all containing the sections of the writings Schaff omitted. So Ortland seems to have not been exposed to or read the full text of those he quotes, and seems unaware of other writings or rejects them because Schaff did, means he is not objective or able to do the research he needs to before making a determination as to what the individual Fathers taught. Another problem with the Schaff edition is that it includes writings that were suspect even at that time or other writings that Ortland uses to "Prove" that the Fathers disagreed on major points, so you can't trust them. These writings are among those that Protestant Orthodox and Catholic scholars all agree on today to be forgeries, some even when Schaff was editing the books. But Schaff does not identify even those as spurious. It has been pointed out to Ortland, but he seems not to want to address the issue.

[deusvultiam]

Greetings from Ecua🇪🇨
God bless your soul for unmasking that false teacher. He and others like him (Graham, White, etc), who know that Christ's Church is only one, will receive their payment for leading people away from Her.

[cantrait]

Well done Bryan thanks for all you do
From Canada 🇨🇦

[franciscoguzman]

Martin Luther was a brute and confuse man. He started his own doctrines. 2 Timothy 4:3.

[nonfecittaliter]

Wisdom and common sense at its best! Thanks Brian for this priceless service to the Church.