Response @VoiceOfReason_ Bad Arguments on Charlie Kirk vs Michael Knowles Catholicism Debate PT2

Response refuting Alex from Voice of Reason bad arguments on the Catholicism debate Charlie Kirk vs Michael Knowles debate. Charlie Kirk @RealCharlieKirk exposed Roman Catholicism unbiblical dogmas in a discussion he had with ft Michael Knowles @MichaelKnowles just before Christmas answering a question from the audience on the Eucharist, Santa Claus, and Jesus Christ. The discussion focused on Jesus which Charlie Kirk said we should be leading them to Jesus not Catholicism which started their friendly debate. Since then many Roman Catholic apologists have responded such as Trent Horn, a guy named Alex from Voice of Reason, and others. This is part 2 response refuting Voice of Reason, and check PT1 response refuting Trent Horn below. If any of these gentlemen would like to have a discussion with me I would be interested.

Berean Perspective is an online Christian Ministry providing streams, conferences, and videos on Apologetics, Discipleship, Evangelism, with offline private discussions, mentoring, and classes. This ministry is supported by donations. To support this ministry see links below.

Berean Perspective Apologetics
Kelly Powers

[BereanPerspectiveApologetics]

This is part 2 response refuting Voice of Reason, and check PT1 response refuting Trent Horn below. If any of these gentlemen would like to have a discussion with me I would be interested.


Kelly

[METALPUNK]

Thank you for all that you do, brother. God Bless.

[Neil_Catholic]

22:30 I get the impression that you perhaps dont understand Eucharistic theology which explains why you are puzzled. You are just reading English sentences without knowing the underlying theology that brought forth those statements. The Catechism is a concise summary of the Catholic faith. A summary by definition only hits at the gist of that which is summarised. You wont find the full Eucharistic theology in a few paragraphs of the Catechism. By the way, did you know the Reformers also believed in the Eucharist as being a sacrifice? Why? Because they have a Eucharistic theology too - and even if its at variance with Catholicism in some main points, it is still congruent with Catholicism on others.

[Freeinwind]

Maybe the Eastern Orthodox Church and RCC can have a debate to decide which is the first true church founded by Jesus. They both claim no salvation out of their churches.

[Grzleeoso]

Jesus has been with the Church, even when the pope and inquisitors had them tortured and burned alive. Men, women, and children.

[SeekTheCross]

25:50 so basically the eucharist has replaced Jesus His everlasting sacrifice on the cross in the RCC? Ufff.. heavy. Why would they do that? Insane.

[MendamCaedo]

All religions apparently head to God and salvation, except for Protestantism for... some inexplicable reason. Really gets the noggin joggin.

[rexlion]

The Roman church is summed up in one verse of Scripture:
2Tim 3:5  *"Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away."*
Their doctrines effectively deny the full efficacy of Christ's blood sacrifice on the cross for our full redemption from ALL of our sins, both past and future.

[godtriunealonematters]

THE ROMAN PRIMACY by Luke Rivington is a great book on papal primacy in the two very important councils of ephesus and chalcedon. it will really help peoples' ignorance on this topic of the one and only Church the Lord Jesus Christ founded, the Roman Cahtolic Church.

[SeekTheCross]

1:01:05 "turning to myths" like Mary ascending to heaven, like Mary being forever virgin, etc.

[Neil_Catholic]

8:24 Laughter is funny (pun intended), my friend. Back in the days when Catholics other than me were active in the comment section, quite a few of them found amusement in your arguments. :)

8:51 Catholics dont say otherwise - and this was proved in one of my comments on the previous video. Like I told you before, you should first understand the argument before you make the bold decision of critiquing it. You are not even trying at this point.

[gerardoramirez]

7:36 Bishop Irenaeus discusses apostolic succession in Adversus Haereses ( Against Heresies). Specifically, he addresses this topic in Book III, Chapter 3

[Neil_Catholic]

43:46 Alex is correct and you are wrong, Kelly. See Lumen Gentium paragraph 15.

[DD-bxrb]

The practice of 'Bible-alone above the Church' asserts we should form our theological beliefs by Scripture alone, following the example of the Bereans, who ‘were more noble than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with all eagerness, examining the scriptures daily to see if these things were so’ (Acts 17:11).”

This seriously misreads the passage. The context for the Berean incident is found in Acts 17:1–10. When St Paul and Silas initially visited the Macedonian city of Thessalonica, they began preaching and making converts, which led to conflict with some in the Jewish community: “And taking some wicked fellows of the rabble, they gathered a crowd, set the city in an uproar, and attacked the house of Jason, seeking to bring them out to the people” (Acts 17:5).

They then dragged Jason and some of the new Christians before the city authorities, charging them with sedition against Caesar (Acts 17:6–7). The situation was so alarming that the Thessalonian Christians hurriedly sent Paul and Silas away by night (when traveling was not safe) to the nearby city of Berea. The non-Christian Jews in Thessalonica remained so opposed to Paul that they sent men to pursue him to Berea and incite the crowds against him, forcing him to flee at once to Athens (Acts 17:13–15).

That is the background against which the statement that the Bereans were more “noble” (other translations: “open-minded”) than the Thessalonians. The contrast is not between credulous Thessalonians, who accepted whatever Paul said without evidence, and skeptical Bereans, who demanded proof from Scripture. It is between actively hostile Thessalonians and Bereans who “received the word with all eagerness” (Acts 17:11).

This is no prooftext for sola scriptura. Paul’s message did not include merely things found in the Old Testament Scriptures. It included the many new elements of the Christian faith. What the Bereans did was confirm the basic elements of his message (i.e., the fact that Jesus fulfilled messianic prophecy) and then proceeded to accept all the new, unwritten teachings that were part of it (e.g., baptism, the Eucharist, the inclusion of Gentiles in God’s people without circumcision). In short, they accepted the whole of apostolic Tradition, and they accepted the Church as FINAL AUTHORITY after confirming the core elements of the Christian message with OT Scripture. To follow their example, we should do the same.

[jakemoore]

This guy is a nice fellow, but Trent Horn cooked him on Sola Scriptura💀

[zewisdom]

We lack a protestant that engase Catholic and Eastern Orthodox. I hope you fill the gap right there. A lot protestants are leaving their faith for Orthodox.

[Madman-]

51:00 The gates of hell will never prevail against the Church. So what are you talking about??? Jesus even said this. Yes individuals will sin and fall away but the bride of Christ will always be ready. There's is only Church. Because of a few verses, one of them saying that when your brother sins against you got to take it to the Church. Ladies and Gentlemen there was only One Church when this was said. 😂 Paul wasn't allow to teach until Peter and one other apostle listen to him and brought him into the Church and into the office of a spiritual Father.

[Neil_Catholic]

24:37 Kelly Powers is at variance with historic Protestantism. Only radical reformers held this view, and they were considered outside the scope of the Reformation movement, and are still considered that way by some.

[Daviddaze]

In the eucharist, why is there graven idol trinkets like moon strikes and sun bursts. In the ceremony, you must kneel to a priest as proceeding happens. The idea of Jesus suffering again for each activity is contrary to scripture. Hebrews ch 10, Jesus suffered only once for sin. Paul describes communion as remembrance for calvary. In 1st Corinthians ch 10, he desribes bread represents believers and the cup as the new testament of Jesus.

[actsapologist]

It took four minutes to get to the first falsehood about the Catholic faith.