Transcription
The gospel of the Roman Catholic religion is under Divine anathema. We cannot unite with that. But because of the influence of these highly visible people, 640,000 evangelicals have now signed The Manhattan Declaration. And if I gave you some of the names, it would blow your mind. People that you would think would be doctrinally sound. And so what this does is it's confused the Evangelical Church. They don't know whether to evangelize Roman Catholics. Does it represent a mission field or is it a Christian denomination made up of our Brothers and Sisters in Christ? Everyone is confused.
Welcome to Pastor Scholar, Bridging the Gap, examining how Academia and the church influence each other. I am Chris Miller, your moderator. With me as always is founding Pastor, Revolve Bible Church, Ryan Day, and of course, Dr. Cory Marsh, author, editor, and professor of New Testament at Southern California Seminary. Joining us is Mike Jenden, evangelist and founder of Proclaiming the Gospel, an outreach ministry dedicated to equipping Christians to evangelize and reach Roman Catholics with biblical truth. Leaving behind a successful career in corporate management, Mike went on to study at Dallas Theological Seminary, where he and his wife Jane were inspired to start the ministry. Faithfully serving now 33 years, he has preached across the globe and authored two books, Preparing for Eternity and Contending for the Gospel. You can access his teaching and resource materials at proclaimingthegospel.org, as well as find links to media broadcast and sign up for his monthly newsletter. We are privileged to have him. Welcome, Mike.
Well, it's my privilege to be here, Chris. Thank you.
And the first question that must be asked, and you probably get this all the time, aren't Catholics Christians?
Well, it's interesting because one of the things I like to do in sharing the gospel is when I meet somebody for the first time, I'll ask them, "Are you a Christian?" Whenever I ask that question to a Catholic, you know what they say? "No, I'm a Catholic." And so they see a distinction between Christians and Catholics. And so what is the distinction? Well, there's quite a few, but I think the major ones: You enter the Catholic religion through water baptism. You enter the Church of Jesus Christ through Spirit baptism. We as Christians have the promise of eternal life. Roman Catholics do not have eternal life. They have conditional life. Whether or not they get to heaven depends on what they do rather than what Christ has done. And so there's a lot of differences between the two, Christians and Catholics.
But when you look at the history of Christianity, you see that Jesus founded one church, and that began at Pentecost. You look at Roman Catholicism, and most scholars would say it began in the 4th century when Constantine, the Roman Emperor, he saw a fragmented Roman Empire, and so he decided to make Christianity the official religion that would cement a fragmented Roman Empire. And so his brand of Christianity was that if you were a pagan, you could come into Constantine's church, and you could bring your pagan traditions. There was no call to repentance. And so many of the pagan traditions that are practiced by the Roman Catholic Church today had its genesis in the 4th century. Constantine, by the way, was called Pontifex Maximus, which is the highest priest. And so that's when you see the origin of Roman Catholicism as we know it today.
Can you trace, uh, some say, well, you can trace the Catholic Church to, you know, Jesus Christ in the New Testament. Uh, what do you say to that?
Well, again, Jesus started one church. But what most Roman Catholics don't acknowledge is apostasy. We see that apostasy began in the first century. 1 John 2:19: "They went out from us, because they were never part of us. Had they been part of us, they would have remained with us." Another way John could have said that is, if they had been born again, they would have remained with us. But since they were not born of the Spirit, they departed from us. And so you see these two streams of Christianity operating side by side for 2,000 years. And so the Roman Catholic Church has departed from the faith of the Apostles. In fact, if you look at the history book of the first century, the book of Acts, none of it resembles what Roman Catholicism is today. You don't have priests offering sacrifices in the book of Acts. You don't have, um, headquarters in Rome. You don't have sacraments. You don't have Purgatory. You don't have indulgences for the remission of sins. And so all these things can be traced back to the 4th century when paganism crept into the church.
And speaking doctrinally, um, what do the Catholics add to the gospel message?
Well, when you look at Galatians 1:16-19, you see that Paul issues a divine anathema on anybody who would pervert the gospel. The Judaizers came into town saying, "We believe in Jesus Christ. We believe in his death and burial and resurrection. But if you're a Gentile, you not only need to believe that, but you need to be circumcised." So they wanted to add one requirement, which ultimately was putting them under the law. And so the Catholic Church has gone way beyond that. If you want to be saved as a Roman Catholic, you have to be baptized. That's the sacrament of regeneration and justification. Once you're baptized, then you have to receive the sacraments. They're necessary for salvation. The Catholic Church has also added good works. You have to do good works in order to be justified. They've also added the law. You have to obey the law. That's a requirement for Catholic salvation. And we know that in Galatians 3, that puts you under a curse. Because James says in chapter 2:10, "If you keep the whole law perfectly but stumble at one part, you're guilty of breaking the whole law." So nobody can attain eternal life by keeping the law. And yet that's one of the requirements for the Catholic Church. And so when you look at the anathema that was placed on the Judaizers for adding one requirement, the Catholic Church has added six additional requirements. So that places every Roman Catholic, pope, cardinal, bishop, priest, none, all the clergy members are under a divine anathema for preaching a perverted gospel. And a lot of people don't realize the word anathema is a Greek word that means a cursed. And so Jesus defined what it is to be a cursed, that you're put into the eternal fire that was made for the devil and his angels. And so we need to rescue Roman Catholics out from the system that is under a divine anathema.
And what is the role of Mary in the Catholic Church, and why do Catholics pray to her? I mean, some make the distinction, well, we're not praying to Mary, we're praying to God, and we're really just petitioning Mary and petitioning the saints. Um, I know I, there's a lot there, but, um, what do you have to say to that?
Well, they've elevated Mary. Even though they don't call her deity, they have given her a lot of the divine attributes. And that's why Catholics pray to her. We know that, uh, in order to hear the prayers of a billion 300,000 Catholics, you have to be omniscient, omnipresent. And so the Catholic Church recognizes Mary as mediatrix of all grace. And I actually have a quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It says, "Without a single sin to restrain her, she became the cause of salvation for herself and the whole human race." And so she robs Christ of His glory by being the cause of salvation. But that's not all. In paragraph 969, as mediatrix, she did not lay aside this saving office, but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. So they look at her as an advocate, a mediatrix of all grace, an intercessor. And so again, even though they haven't made her the fourth person of the Trinity, they give her divine attributes. And that's why Catholics esteem her so highly. And many Catholic women would rather go through her rather than Jesus because she's said to be more understanding.
Do you know roughly when that doctrine was introduced in the church?
Well, sure. 1854 was the doctrine of Mary's, um, Immaculate Conception, which declares that Mary was conceived without sin. And then they go on to say she lived a sinless life. So some of the Catholics began asking questions, well, wait a minute, if sin is what causes death, and Mary never sinned, where is she? And so in 1950, almost a hundred years later, they pronounced that Mary's body was miraculously assumed into heaven. That's why she's no longer around. It's convenient. Yeah. So one lie led to another lie, and that's how the Catholic Church operates. Wow.
Um, given that, and and I'll open up to also you, um, Corey and Ryan, um, is the Pope's word given equal weight to scripture? Do Catholics consider when the Pope speaks, that's the word of God?
It all depends. They say that whenever he speaks *ex cathedra*, in other words, from the chair of Peter, then he is making an infallible pronouncement. But then if you ask Catholics, "Do you have a list of all the infallible pronouncements?" They have no list. And so it's, uh, a moving target. We've got a Pope now, Pope Francis, that not only is anti-biblical, he's also anti-Roman Catholic. In fact, he goes against historic Roman Catholicism. He's made such statements as, "There is no hell." Just last week, he said, "I believe that hell is empty." And then he says, uh, he believes all people will make it to heaven, even atheists, as long as they are sincere. So sincerity is the key for Pope Francis. And so it's really a good time to witness to Catholics because they don't know where to search for truth. They have a Pope that is said to be infallible, but he doesn't represent the Bible or Roman Catholicism accurately.
That's very interesting. What is a, I'm just thinking about it, what would be a sincere atheism? Yeah, like how do you have a sincere non-belief? How's that even measured? Like, what makes that sincere? And how can you be saved by a sincere non-belief? It doesn't make any sense. It doesn't make any sense. Yeah.
Well, given that, um, I'm sure there's an answer to it by some from someone, but just hearing that now, that's just crazy to me. Yeah.
Chris, if I could give a direct quote from what he said two weeks ago. What I will say is not a dogma of faith, but something personal. According to the report in an Italian press, he said, "I think of hell as empty. I hope it's reality." So his language is often cunningly ambiguous so that it can mean different things to different folks, thus creating a lot of confusion.
You know, it's interesting as I, as I hear that quote, how does he differentiate between when he speaks *ex cathedra* and when it's just his own opinion? In other words, he has a theological opinion. That's, that's what he said in the quote. "This is my opinion. It's not Catholic dogma." And yet he's supposed to be able to speak infallibly. I wonder how he would separate that in his mind. How does he determine what comes out of his mouth is his own opinion and what is actually dogma? Do you know the answer to that, Mike?
Well, often times Popes will send up a trial balloon and they'll see whether or not the majority of the Catholics will buy into it. Good example was John Paul. Um, he wanted to make Mary co-redeemer. And many of the Catholic theologians said, "If you do that, it will thwart the ecumenical movement. Protestants will not buy into Mary being a co-redeemer." So, uh, they decided that that trial balloon should be shot down before it gets any altitude. Wow. Wow.
And what of this recent, uh, sort of a controversial move where he, um, he now allows a blessing for same-sex couples? Is that, is that true?
Yes. And we think this is a precursor to him blessing same-sex marriages. So again, it's a trial balloon. Will the majority of Roman Catholics buy into the blessing on same-sex unions? And if so, then they'll move a step forward to blessing same-sex marriages.
And it's the Bishops that do that? Is that correct? The Council of Bishops that formalize that?
That's a good point. You know, a lot of people know that the Pope is said to be infallible when he speaks *ex cathedra*, but a lot of people don't know that when the Bishops speak with one voice, such as at a council, then they are said to be infallible as well. And so many of the infallible dogmas from the Council of Trent were pronounced by this group of Bishops. And together with one voice, they are said to be infallible.
Can you define that term? Just for those who may not know, what does it mean to speak *ex cathedra*?
It means from the chair of Peter. In other words, uh, the Pope, um, believes he's the successor of Peter, who was the first Pope. And it's really interesting because, uh, on my website, I did a contrast between Peter, who Catholics believe is their first Pope, all of his teachings side by side with what Pope Francis teaches. And it's really an amazing contrast. And so we want to encourage Catholics to look to Peter and believe what he said rather than the current Pope.
And I've heard that presentation. It's excellent. And one of the things that you point out is when Paul rebukes Peter in Galatians, so did Peter even actually speak *ex cathedra*?
Catholics would say no. But that proved that Peter was a fallible man. Yeah. In fact, even in Matthew 16:18, when Jesus asked the question, "Who do men say that I am?" Peter, the first to answer, said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God." And Jesus said, "That wasn't revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And upon this rock, I will build my church." And so the Catholic Church believes that Jesus was saying, "Peter, you're the rock. I'm going to build my church on." But just a few moments later, Jesus says, "Before I build my church, I must first go and die for my church." So what does Peter do? "Lord, Lord, may it never be." He calls him Lord, then he rebukes him. And then Jesus said, "Peter, get behind me. You have the mouth of Satan." So is this a man that Jesus would build his church, one he said was the mouthpiece of the devil a few moments later? You take out that reference of "on this rock I will build my church," take that out. There is nothing that would ever suggest, no inference at all, that Peter could have been the first, what they called Pope.
I mean, I'm thinking what Mike is bringing up is so powerful, so, so much explanatory power again, powerfully against Peter being the first Bishop of Rome. And I'm also thinking the letter of Romans, Paul makes it very clear in Romans 15 that he's not building on another man's work. So the letter of Romans to the Romans from the Apostle Paul is the very first apostolic witness they had in Rome, which again would suggest it wouldn't be Peter. Um, if we were going to make this up, which apostle has the right to Rome? A case could be made for Paul, um, because the letter of Romans would stand in place of the Apostle. So in a sense, represented his teaching and his personhood by them receiving that letter. And he makes it very clear that it hasn't, there's there's been no foundation there before that. Law, before that letter, there's just absolutely nothing other than that, what can be a cryptic reference in Matthew 18, that "on this rock I will build my church," which there's a good case, I think, Mike, to be made that the confession that that Peter gave may have been the rock to build the the church upon. But I mean, we don't want to deny that Peter didn't have a, we don't want to deny Peter didn't have a, um, a strong, uh, leadership role and and influence in the early church, of course he did. But to to exalt that to Pope status, you know, Father, which is Pope in in Greek, to actually make him some type of Holy Father, stands against the, the witness of the New Testament.
And, you know, it's really interesting, since we're talking about the papacy, a lot of people don't realize that the papacy has stolen the three names given to the Triune God. The Pope wears the title of Holy Father, a title given only to God the Father. He also wears the title Head of the Church. The Pope never died for his church. Jesus did. But yet he steals that title. And then he steals the title Vicar of Christ. Jesus said, "I must depart, but I will send a helper in my place." He wasn't referring to the papacy, but to the Holy Spirit as the Vicar of Christ.
What do you think, Mike, when you said when we started off, how Catholics now make the distinction, they won't refer themselves as Christians, they're Catholics. Is that new? Is that modern? I tend to think like, before they would want to be known as Christians. Now they're making a clear sort of distinction, I guess, which is helpful so we don't have to make the distinction for them, because you're not biblical Christians, you're Roman Catholics. Is that something modern or have they done that for a while?
I think it's been since the Reformation. Yeah, that was the great divide. Sure. But they wouldn't refer to themselves as Christians, but Roman Catholics. Interesting.
Just to go really quickly over, this is from an article that was published in 2022 by The Institute for Advanced Catholic Studies at the University of Southern California. They examined Vatican statistics for 2020, showing that the number of Catholics worldwide increased by 16 million to now number 1.36 billion. So, given these stats, the Catholic Church has expanded more through the last 100 years than any other time in its 2,000-year existence. In fact, roughly 17.7% of the world's population is Catholic. Now, of this total, 48% are in the Americas, 28% actually are in South America. And following recent trends, the Catholic Church has actually grown, and this is fascinating, most rapidly in Asia and Africa. In fact, both these continents now provide 60% of all Catholic seminarians worldwide. It is even projected that by 2050, 75% of Catholics will live outside the West. What is contributing to this rise? Do you have any thoughts?
Well, sure. Um, we have to recognize that the primary growth of the Roman Catholic religion is through physical birth. So when a Catholic has children, they're baptized at seven days of age, and they're considered a Roman Catholic at that point. The baptism is the sacrament of regeneration and the sacrament of justification. So not only are they a member of the Catholic Church at seven days of age, but then they grow up as Roman Catholics, they have children, and they also become Catholic. And so that's their primary method of growth. And when you look at Africa, that's where the population growth is really taking place. Europe is on the decline population-wise, and you see a decrease in the, uh, number of Roman Catholics in Europe. And so I would say that also the missions focus right now is on Africa and Asia. I know my uncle was a priest, and he spent 30 years in the jungles of Rangoon, Burma, so converting the Burmese to Roman Catholicism. So, yeah, there's the missions, and then there's also the, the primary method of birth.
That's just fascinating. And of this, particularly in America, is the Catholic Church on, would you say, on the decline or just as in Europe? What would you say to that?
I would say in, in America, it's pretty steady. It's not increasing like it is in Asia and Africa, but it's holding its own in America. Right now, there's what, 65, 66 million out of a population of 360 million. So about one out of four Americans are Roman Catholic. That's been holding steady. And that's definitely the, the ratio where Revolve Bible Church is. One and four are Roman Catholics. You know, 25% of the population of around our local church in our city, there's a basilica, and so about 26% of our city is Roman Catholic. Yeah.
But Chris, also referring to that USC study, yes, it said the gospel needs to be presented in a way which people can relate. Yes, yes.
Well, and I don't know if Catholics realize what the word gospel means. It means good news. There is no good news in the Catholic Church.
You know what? I hear that and I'm thinking that, you know what, it actually does make sense because the human default position seems to want to do things to please our deity. And so can the people relate to just do a certain things, whether it's these, you know, prayers or this charity given or or or receiving the, the even last rites at the end, doing these things to please God? Is the human default way of thinking? So they can, people can relate to that. Unfortunately, what they're relating to is a false doctrine.
Well, sure. And Corey, you make a good point. Every religion in the world teaches a works righteousness salvation. Every religion teaches you must do things to appease your deity. Biblical Christianity is set apart because we have an all-sufficient Savior. Therefore, salvation is offered as a gift of God's grace. Amen.
So one of our, our social media director, I'll call him that, uh, he had a question for you. So he has a relative who, they have what they're called Eucharist miracles. Have you heard of these?
Sure.
Can you speak to those? And what are they? And why are Catholics so enamored of these?
Wait a second. Before Mike answers, before we bash on Roman Catholics for having those things, I've seen quote-unquote Protestants late at night on infomercials selling miracle handkerchiefs, and they're not Roman Catholics. So we have our own crazies too. Well, true. All right. Sorry. Unquote. Sorry. Yeah.
It's amazing the different Eucharistic miracles you see. I mean, all you have to do is go on the internet and Google them, and you'll see bleeding Eucharist, and you'll see fleshly Eucharist, and even supposedly doctors and scientists have evaluated and found it to be true flesh. But, you know, how do you explain all these lying signs and wonders? We know that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one. He's going to deceive the world with lying signs and wonders. And, um, you know, just as, uh, Jesus called the apostate Jewish leaders, they said, "Your father is the devil." Roman Catholicism has the same father. There are only two spiritual fathers. You're either a child of God, and that is through birth, spiritual rebirth, or you're a child of the devil. Those are the only two possibilities. And so I believe Roman Catholicism is Satan's greatest counterfeit. Because it has this thin veneer of truth that hides a false and fatal gospel. And that's why many evangelicals look at it as a valid expression of Christianity.
Speaking, going back to Catholic doctrine, can you talk a little bit about the doctrine of transubstantiation? And can you define what that is? And what Catholics actually believe about communion?
Well, sure. The Catholic Church teaches that the priest has the power to, to call Almighty God, the Lord Jesus Christ, back down from heaven to continue on an altar what he finished on the cross. And the way they do that is through the quote-unquote miracle of transubstantiation, where the Eucharist becomes the physical body and blood, soul and divinity of Christ. And the priest leans over the wafer and he pronounces *hocus as Mays s*, which, by the way, the magicians of our day, they say "Hocus Pocus." That's kind of a transliteration from the Latin of what the priest is doing when he changes the Eucharist into the body and blood of Jesus. But, yeah. And so how do we know whether or not Jesus is really represented in the Eucharist? Is this a valid truth that Catholics have? Well, the Bible says that it's a false Christ. And we see that in Hebrews 9:28, that Jesus is going to return a second time, and not to deal with sin. And so this transubstantiated Eucharist is not Jesus, because he returns every day, and he returns to deal with sin. The Catholic Church has a book by a Roman Catholic priest, *The Faith of Millions*. In it, it has the official *Emperor Moer* of the Catholic Church, and it dares to say that the priest has the power to call Almighty God down from heaven to be a victim. He was never a victim. He went to the cross willingly, laid down his life. But yet Catholics believe that the priest has this power. The priest speaks, and lo, Christ, the omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest's command. This is official Roman Catholic teaching. So this is where transubstantiation came from. And that's why it's a sin to not go to mass, because that's how you have a relationship with Jesus in Roman Catholicism. When the priest calls down Christ into the Eucharist, if you go to a Catholic mass, you'll see them bowing before it, and then the priest distributes Christ. That's how they have a relationship with Christ, is through the Eucharist. A lot of even Catholics don't know that.
Or so we see of people in our church all the time. Don't participate in a Catholic mass. I tell people, don't go to a Catholic baptism because they're saying that that baptism regenerates the baby. We're Protestants. We have to speak up about the, the, the demonic deception of the Eucharist and baptism. And we need to be bold about it because it's damning many thousands, billions. I mean, if you want to quote this number, and it's, it's heartbreaking because people are worshiping a cracker and a cup of juice or wine because a guy says, "Hocus Pocus." That should break the heart of every true believer.
Ryan, you make a good point because to worship the Eucharist as Jesus Christ is no different from the Israelites worshiping the golden calf as the true God that delivered them out of Egypt. We know that the Eucharist is a false Christ because the Bible says he's going to return after the tribulation. He's going to return the same way he left, in a body. He's going to return to the Mount of Olives. And so over and over again, we see in scripture that this cannot be the true Christ. It's a false Christ. He's coming to judge the living and the dead. Right. Yeah. He's already died for our sins and he's seated at the right hand of the Father.
You would, you would think, like the letter of Hebrews alone just demolishes Roman Catholic dogma as it's, you know, canonized from Vatican. Things like, you know, Jesus being superior above all things in in Hebrews. Hebrews 3, consider Jesus your your priest of and and and conf and worthy of your confession of your high priest. You go straight to Christ. That is, he died once for all. I mean, this idea of the mass where he continues to bleed. I really can't see anything more blasphemous when it comes down to it than and opposed to what the picture we get of Jesus and his the finality of his work in the letter of Hebrews than what the Roman Catholic Church teaches. Yeah.
You're right, Corey. Hebrews 10 destroys the Roman Catholic mass because you see in verses 10, 12, 14, and 18, "He died once for all sin for all time. There are no more offerings for sin." How much more clear could the writer of Hebrews make it? If Catholics would only read chapter 10.
And going to just sort of going to academia a little bit, and Corey, maybe you'd like to address this. Are pastors today equipped enough in seminaries to help refute the doctrines of Catholicism?
That's a hard question because there's a party that wants to say pastors are hardly even equipped to be able to refute any doctrine, false doctrine. You know, seminaries are doing their their jobs. Sorry, not all pastors, of course. I'm the jury is still out on this one across the across the table. We have, Corey, at our church, right, right, right. There's got to be someone there keeping this guy accountable. No, didn't answer your question. In all seriousness, I think here's an interesting statistic, and this bears on what we, what you just asked, Chris, is that 95% of the world's pastors are not seminary trained. Think globally. That means only 5% of pastors have been G have gone to seminary. And think of all the horrible teaching and preaching and false doctrine coming from pulpits. It's, it's easy to blame the seminary that maybe they just, they went and got trained and became, you know, progressive and liberal in their doctrine and and denied the doctrines of the faith, which happens, which does happen, of course. But a seminary's purpose is to come alongside the church and help equip, uh, teachers and preachers and missionaries and workers of of the church to be able to better serve their congregation. So if you have a seminary, um, that is devoted to doing that and understanding its place, that, you know, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God is made known, Ephesians 3, not the seminary. The seminary is a par church ministry. It should come alongside the church, even submit to local church accountability. Then I think you have a, you have some good ingredients for a seminary that's going to do what I think its purpose is to do, is to equip believers in the local church.
To your question, U, are pastors equipped enough in seminary today to help refute Catholic doctrine? Here's the thing. We have, like at Southern California Seminary, we have an apologetics program. We have concentrated, we have courses concentrated on, uh, giving, uh, presentation and refuting false doctrine. There is this fear, I think, too often, where pastors and even everyday Christians think they need to know everything about false religions before they start proclaiming the word of God. I'm a New Testament professor. I'm big on, I'm biblical theologian. That's my PhD in that. If you know the word of God, if you know the, the Christian scriptures and the truth is there, you don't have to find all the nuts and bolts and all the cracks of every false religious system because it will be contradicted against the true teaching. Right. So I'm big on, if you're reading scripture, becoming biblically literate, knowing the, the, the Holy Bible to be able to refute these things. And if you do that, then you should be able to just look at this conversation. We mentioned biblical books, Romans, Hebrews. I'm looking at, uh, First Timothy chapter 4. Mike and I had a conversation briefly before we started about the doctrines of demons that are there in First Timothy chapter 4. And he goes right into two, what they are. Two of them: "who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be good." The Roman Catholic Church still forbids marriage again for for their clergy, and there are foods that are now considered to be right or holy to eat. And of course, this happens within Protestantism too, but these are demonic doctrines. So as long as you know your New Testament, you know your biblical canon, I think that's the best way to equip pastors to be able to refute whether it's Roman Catholic dogma or other false religions.
Just a footnote on what you said, they don't just forbid marriage, they call it a sacrament. So God dispenses grace, uh, for abstaining from marriage. That's demonic. It's not just to forbid it, it's that they're, they're twisting, uh, how God actually bestows grace upon people.
I would, I would piggyback on that. I really appreciate the first thing that came to my mind was Second Timothy 4:2, "Preach the word." I think in one sense, pastors don't need to understand what, everything Mike Gendrin understands. Mike Gendrin is a gift to us. He understands a lot more of Roman Catholic dogma than I do. But to refute the lies of Rome, I just need to proclaim the gospel. And the gospel of God will be used by the Spirit of God to do the work of God in the hearts of those who hear it. So in a sense, are pastors equipped to deal with it? Yeah, if they know the gospel. I think the sad thing is, a lot of pastors today, they just aren't actually preaching the gospel. And I think that's a lot of the time why we're ineffective.
And do you, a point, Ryan, not to cut you off, but on a seminary level, the problem is just like you said, a lot of pastors aren't proclaiming the gospel. A lot of seminaries are not teaching Bible, biblical harmonics, correct interpretation. They're teaching management principles and all these other things under the sun. And so they're not being equipped in Bible to be able to refute doctrine. It's the same problem. You know, if, if it comes back to knowing your scriptures, then then you're equipped to be able to to see these false doctrines when they come.
One, maybe a follow-up question that I would have as you were talking, that just came to my mind, do you think ecumenism has something to do with maybe seminaries, even conservative seminaries, straying away from not hammering it?
It does. In fact, if you don't mind me, I was going to ask Mike this question. Please. Several decades ago, you'll remember the, um, Chuck Colson and others, sure, came together to do this, um, um, oh my goodness, Evangelicals and Catholics Together, right, right. Funny, I can forget that. That's exactly what it is. Evangelicals and Catholics Together. And a whole movement started from that. What do you think of that? Because that was an ecumenical attempt to bring Protestants, I.E., even more narrow evangelicals, united with Catholics.
It's been very successful. In fact, there's been subsequent accords. The most recent one was The Manhattan Declaration in 2009. And what the Roman Catholic Church does is they go after highly visible, highly influential pastors and scholars to put their name on these accords. And we've got a lot of evangelical, well-known pastors and theologians and seminary heads that have signed The Manhattan Declaration. In the first paragraph, it says, "We are united in a common faith and the gospel." That is the furthest thing from the truth. The gospel of the Roman Catholic religion is under Divine anathema. We cannot unite with that. But because of the influence of these highly visible people, 640,000 evangelicals have now signed The Manhattan Declaration. And if I gave you some of the names, it would blow your mind. People that you would think would be doctrinally sound. And so what this does is it's confused the Evangelical Church. They don't know whether to evangelize Roman Catholics. Does it represent a mission field or is it a Christian denomination made up of our Brothers and Sisters in Christ? Everyone is confused.
Which, you know, when we first began this ministry 33 years ago, it was primarily to equip the body of Christ to be effective witnesses to this huge mission field. But now we're seeing, equally important, is to educate evangelicals that it is an apostate form of Christianity, and they do need to be evangelized.
Is it, is it that evangelicals these days, they don't even know the gospel?
Yeah, you know, I, I think for sure that makes a contradiction in terms. Evangelical, right? The Evangel, don't even know their own gospel, unfortunately. Yeah. I mean, now that that's become, it's very, so, so difficult to define evangelicalism because of everybody that fits underneath that term. But I think that's that absolutely true. The gospel is where justice and mercy meet. The gospel is good news because we are totally depraved people that have rebelled, go against God, and offended God because he is holy. And God, because he is holy, he must judge sin and sinners. There's an aspect of the gospel that's very, very offensive. Earlier, I think, you know, Mike was talking about, um, presenting the gospel in a way that, what was it, relatable? Relatable. The Catholic, there's nothing relatable about the gospel because it's offensive. Right. Because before you can even understand what Jesus has done, you got to come to terms with with who you are. Right. Yeah. So I, I think, I think that, yes, Chris, I think that's part of it. I think Roman Catholics should, if they were to sit through an evangelical service, there should be a, they should be offended. Mhm. If they, if they understand and believe Rome's dogma, they should not be able to sit through your sermon unoffended. And if they are, you've not proclaimed the biblical gospel. That's a good point.
Is it, is it because of this ecumenical push, going on, is that why so many pastors seem to be want to shy away from discussing in their own churches the difference between biblical Christianity and Catholicism? Is that why they're shying away from this?
Sure. If you look at, we talked about the ecumenical unity accords. You also had Promise Keepers, that had a big impact on suppressing doctrinal truth so that we could all come together and sing Kumbaya. And so that was a movement too, to unite Catholics and evangelicals because the founder, the former Colorado football coach, he was a Roman Catholic. Bill McCartney. His president was a Roman Catholic. And so it was a Catholic influence movement, and evangelicals bought into it. Let's suppress doctrinal truth so we can have unity together. This is, you know, this is a obviously controversial issue because me, and I'm just speaking for myself, I can see, I would appreciate, I can unite with someone who believes something differently if we know we believe something differently, and we're not, we're not hiding that fact. We can unite over a common cause, whether it's politically or some type of humanitarian aid, whatever. But when we bring it together as, and we share doctrine and theology together, and that's why we're doing it, when there's such a clear difference between biblical Christianity, you are saved by grace alone through faith alone, and not just, you know, you're saved by grace, of course, but also adding these other works to get you there, you can't. It is wrong to be able to to unite on a common front, whatever that front is, if it's under the guise of we are believing the same thing. I, and this is just me, I have no problems when there is a catastrophe, there's a world event, something, say 9/11 happened, and everybody's running to the rubble to help. I saw pastors and priests and Jewish rabbis uniting to be able to help people. I think that's a wonderful thing. But it needs to be known from it. It can't be under the guise of we share one common faith. There's got to be, I, I, I don't know how to, I'm put, I'm thinking as I'm talking, but there's more unity within diversity, I guess, than trying to make everybody the exact same in what we believe. And therefore, we can get together. Like I have more, I have, I'm, it's easier for me to be able to unite with someone knowing they believe something different, and everybody in front of us knows that too, but we can still share a cause elsewhere, and that's okay. It just can't be over doctrine that is so clearly placed in scripture that this other person, this other system, does not believe in.
You know, I look at, again, going back to the scriptures, Ephesians 2:8-9. If I had one verse, one passage, you know, you're in a drive-thru, and and the person, the kid giving your food is Roman, by the way, because I've done this several times, is Roman Catholic. And you ask him very quick, "Do you know the difference between biblical Christian and Roman Catholicism?" They never do, hardly ever. And you've got one thing to say, quote Ephesians 2:8-9, "that by grace you are saved, right, uh, through faith, and this is not of your own doing. It is the gift of God. All of it comes from God, starts with God. It's a, it's a gift, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." Roman Catholic dogma is going to say, "Yes, you're saved by grace, of course, but and through faith, just not alone. You have to now do these other things." You know, so Ephesians 2:8-9 is just a wonderful passage to be able to at least memorize and quote biblically something that is a clear difference between the soteriology of Roman Catholicism and biblical Christianity.
I think it's a sticky issue. I appreciate you bringing it because I, I think in the sense of as a Bible-believing Christian, yeah, I have partnerships with Roman Catholics in the sense that there's services that people that believe in Roman dogma provide to me. Some of them might work on my car, some of them might, you know, help me at the grocery store. So in a very practical sense, how do they help you in the grocery store? Helping me, helping me figure out the machines that I can scan the food on anymore. Um, but I do think that when we as Christians, uh, remember the poor, or we are trying to offer humanitarian aid, we're doing that under the banner of Christ. And Paul tells us very clearly, specifically talking about our partnerships with with, um, unbelievers, and namely those who, our ministry partnerships with unbelievers, "Do not be bound together with unbelievers, for what partnership has righteousness and lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?" And the context of that passage is ministry. So I do think that when, and I understand what you're saying, but I am very hesitant to even stand at an abortion clinic with a Roman Catholic because the reason I'm standing in an abortion clinic is not simply to save that physical life. I'm standing in an abortion clinic because yes, that baby's made in the image of God, but I am supremely concerned with that baby's soul. And I don't want to confuse someone about about how someone's soul is saved. So I understand your point 100%. But I do think it's a, it's difficult to, to untangle that mess because, yeah, can do Roman Catholics do good humanitarian stuff? Yeah. I think on a, on a, on a human level, maybe there's some things that for sure they do. But, but again, their, what is their motivation for doing it? Well, certainly it's to build the Roman Catholic Church. It's not a pure motive. They're, they're, they're under demonic deception.
Ryan, I'm with you. I often go out to abortion clinics, and they really put us to shame. The Roman Catholics, they're outnumbering us 10 to one in some cases. But a couple of reasons I go is number one, to try and protect the physical life of the baby in the womb. But secondly, and more importantly, is to share the gospel so that spiritual life can be offered to Roman Catholics who are dead in their sins and they don't know. And one of the things that we have to be careful of, going back to our discussion, we cannot unite with them in prayer. They have a different spiritual father. And so if we open a prayer, "Father in Heaven," no, we can't do that with Catholics. They have a different father. And so I usually, if I'm going to pray with unbelievers, I'll say, "Almighty God" or "Lord." You know, that's how we open the prayer, but not "Father." Yeah. You know, and if you go to a, a Roman Catholic church, I, I recently attended a, a funeral for a family member, not recently, but a couple of years ago. And there is a part in the service where you, everybody kneels, and they're praying together. And I think I stood up while they were praying, just a protest, so everybody knows I'm not in this. Still carrying on the Reformation. The deacons and the priests, man, they marked me. And simply reformed. And I didn't. So anyway, yeah. But we encourage that because we need to take a stand and say, you know, what we believe about the gospel is true, and it really matters, and that we're dealing with eternal souls, and we do need to stand up against those who are preaching a false and fatal gospel.
Ryan, if I could also interject, we get so many questions all the time via email, phone calls, letters, "My family's Roman Catholic, should I attend baptisms or confirmations or weddings in the Catholic Church?" And so I often respond, this is a good teaching opportunity. You have to explain to them why you cannot attend because the Roman Catholic view of baptism is that of regeneration and justification, and that goes against clear biblical teaching. And so use it as a teaching moment to explain.
Great counsel. Yeah. And, um, and then I always leave it with a caveat, as much as I love you and my family, I love my Lord and Savior more than that, and I cannot dishonor him by going into a church that teaches a false gospel and leads people down the wide road to destruction. Luke 14. If you don't love Jesus more than your mother and father, then you cannot follow him. Yeah.
And Mike, what would you say to those who identify as Catholic not just for religious reasons, but for social and political ones? You see this often in especially South America, other countries. Yeah, it's, uh, an issue that we've really been touching on as far as, you know, we can have a common camaraderie, if you will, on political issues, but when.
Whenever we introduce theology to it, that's when we have to stay separate. You know, we have been sanctified by the truth. We've been called out of the world of people for God's own possession. So, as you quoted from 2 Corinthians 6:14-18, in spiritual enterprises, we cannot have unity with unbelievers.
And what do you say to those, um, I'm sorry, I want to get to that question, but maybe just to insert a question, please, would be just to ask Mike to at some point, if, uh, to the Roman Catholics that may be watching this, what would you say to them? Yeah, I would encourage them to not believe anything I've said unless it lines up with scripture. That must be our supreme authority. Amen. In all matters of faith. So, test my teaching, test your priest's teaching, test your Pope's teaching. Does it line up with scripture? If not, reject it.
The second thing I would say is, you need to look to Jesus as your all-sufficient Savior. And I know Catholics will be unwilling to let go of what they're doing to save themselves until they know that Christ is sufficient. And the third thing I would say is, the promise of the Gospel is eternal, everlasting life with Christ. You don't have that now. All you have is conditional life. You have no good news as a Catholic. So, by trusting Christ alone as your all-sufficient Savior, by repenting of the false way, getting off the broad way and getting on the narrow way, you too can have eternal, everlasting life with the Savior.
And Mike, one question that often comes up, uh, regarding the Bible. Um, so many Catholics would say, well, we gave you the Bible. We gave Protestantism the Bible. What do you say to that? Well, first of all, the Catholic Church was not around in the Jewish Old Testament. It was closed 400 years before, uh, Christ in the first century. And we know from the first century that the scriptures were passed around from church to church. And the church in the first century knew what the inspired word of God was. In fact, we even had Peter saying Paul's writings were scripture. And so, the scriptures in the first century were consistent with the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. In fact, we're even to hold the apostolic traditions that were given in the first century as we see. But they were already delivered. And then we see in Jude 3 that we're earnestly contend for the faith that was once and for all delivered in the first century. So, the canon was closed. Everybody knew what the scriptures were. Later on, in the third and fourth century, they had canons primarily to eliminate spurious books that wanted canonicity. And so, everybody again knew what the scriptures were. Christians were dying for the scriptures that they believed in. And so, when Catholics tell me, you wouldn't have the Bible except for the Catholic Church, I respond, well, why don't you read it and believe it? Then you can be set free from the bondage of religious deception.
Yeah, there's, uh, this whole, I appreciate what Mike just said because it's so important. And the history of the canonicity of scripture, there's a lot of misunderstandings about that. But there's some great resources, even newer ones, I'm thinking off the top of my head, that really delve into this issue. That see the Roman Catholic Church are going to think like councils and creeds, um, you know, different church gatherings with, with, with a bishop or perhaps a, a notable priest or a committee is what gave the scriptures its authority. And that's one of the biggest differences between Roman Catholicism and, and Protestantism within how we view the Bible. Because we're going to say, no, the church did not give the, give the Bible its authority. The people that recognized certain writings were of a different nature, it's inspired, it's inerrant, it's theological, it's, it's not non-contradictory, were recognized as holy writings. So they were already by the first century, by the end of the first century, and certainly in the second century, there already was this, what Chad Spelman has written a monograph on called a con, a canon consciousness. There was already a consciousness of a, of a group of writings that were different than everything else.
I would also, uh, recommend Benjamin L's, uh, Creating the Canon, and 40 Questions of, um, on the Apostle Paul also gets into this. Uh, Charles Quarles and Kellum Scott Kellum do 40 Questions on Text and Canon. These things, these issues are, are, are delved, delved in a very deep matter to be able to show, even on an accessible matter, that when the canon was created, when we say created, quote unquote, it was recognized as being inspired writings. And then the canon has authority as this, this list or this group collection of writings, but it didn't give it its authority. It recognized the authority that was already there. And this is very early in church history. It's not until, and Mike, you can, uh, correct me if I'm wrong here, I think what we call the Apocrypha books, these these works that were never considered in even in the Jewish faith, because these were, there were intertestamental writings, were never considered on the same par as what we consider the Old Testament books or the Hebrew scriptures. They were always helpful. There were, there were a movement of writings when God was now silent in his giving of revelation between that and our present canons, between Malachi and the Book of Matthew, that 400 years, there came out of all these new writings, in a sense, to give hope and encouragement to the Israel people, to the Jewish people and the Israel nation. Those were never looked at on the same authority, having the same authority and the same nature as the inspired writings of what we call the Old Testament. It wasn't until, I think, Council of Trent, perhaps, where canonized those Apocrypha books.
You're right, Corey. We really need to address why the Catholic Church added it to their canon. And the reason being is because they were trying to give credibility to their trilogy of deception, which is venial sins, purgatory, and indulgences. You know, we didn't discuss it earlier, but I call it, uh, the trilogy of deception. The, the lie of Satan was perpetrated by the Catholic Church with its doctrine of venial sins. And, uh, when Catholics die with a venial sin, they need a place to sin them. So they created this place called purgatory. And now they're in purgatory. Now you need to get them out. So they created the doctrine of indulgences. All this to say that the Catholic Church recognized in 2 Maccabees that they were sending alms back to Jerusalem for the dead soldiers that died with pagan amulets around their neck. And so the Catholic Church said, see, the Jews sent alms back to Jerusalem. Therefore, there must be an intermediate place that people go to that's not heaven or hell. And so, doctrine, you will not find in any scriptural writings, inspired canonical writings. These are outside the canon.
Right. In fact, uh, how do we respond to Catholics? Well, we don't do things just because the Jews did them. After all, the Jews rejected Jesus as a Messiah. And so, yes, the Jews did some things that were wrong, but we don't pick them up and say, these are good things to practice today. But that's why they added the Apocrypha to their canon. Cory, you brought up biblical literacy. How biblically literate are, is your average Catholic? They don't read the Bible. You know, more than ever, I think since, um, since a lot of the Catholics were leaving to go to Evangelical Bible studies, the Catholic Church initiated what's called The Little Rock Scripture Study. And they started to study the Bible more than ever before. However, it's always through the grid of Roman Catholic tradition. And so they're really being blinded a lot from what the scriptures say clearly because of the tradition that's involved in it. But, um, I would say that, uh, Roman Catholics who now read the Bible, you know, Jesus said, a true disciple of mine is one who abides in my word. Then they will know the truth, and the truth will set them free. But Chris, we've come a long way since the Counter Reformation because the Council of Trent put the Bible on the list of forbidden books. And the reason is because the truth was setting people free. So the only way they could stop that was to take the Bible away from the people. In fact, if you had a Bible as a Catholic in the 16th century, you could not have your sins forgiven until you returned it to the church. Wow.
Mike, just picking up on that, is that one of the reasons why a lot of Catholic masses are still in Latin? Is to keep the, the word from the untrained? Sure. Good observation. Yeah, it's called the Trientine movement of the Catholic Church. And Mike Gibson is a part of that. Yeah. So they keep it in Latin and, uh, keep the people ignorant from what the word of God says. Going back to indulgences, isn't that why Protestantism broke away to begin with with Martin Luther? I mean, isn't, wasn't that the issue that was one of the sparks of the Reformation? Yeah, the nailing of the 95 Theses on the church door in Wittenberg. Um, the selling of indulgences. A lot of people don't realize, but that's what funded St. Peter's Basilica was the selling of God's grace and forgiveness through indulgences. And for those that don't know what the word means, it's the remission of temporal punishment for sin. And so we know there's no such thing as temporal punishment. You sin, then you deserve eternal death in the second lake of fire. The sins, whose sins will die, Ezekiel 18:4. Scripture is clear. This is something Martin Luther, I mean, to take it back to the Bible, what he did. It's hard because scholars have to, they have to pinpoint when did the Protestant Reformation start, as if it was one day. And it wasn't. There were things in place for many years. I mean, go back to John Wycliffe in the 1300s. I mean, he was already bringing the, the God's word into the, into English in the vernacular. Um, but wherever, wherever a revolution broke out over correct doctrine and, and scripture, it was because it was being translated or understood in the vernacular. So 1517, sure, we have Martin Luther's 95 Theses on the, on the Wittenberg church door, uh, Catholic door, door, there, against indulgences primarily. But I would make a case even in academia, he wrote 97 or 98 Theses, I think it's 97, several months prior, in Latin. So the 95 Theses was in German so that everybody can see it because that's what they read. Latin was the scholastic language. And he wrote to his colleagues 97 or 98 reasons why we have to go back to scripture, back to the original Greek and Hebrew, not rely on, uh, Aquinas, who was relying on, uh, on, uh, Aristotle for so much, what was scholastic philosophical theology. And it started a revolution right there in the academy, really, going back to scripture. Um, so I, there could be a case being made that the Reformation proper, as we understand it, was even a few months before the 95 Theses. And Martin Luther, he also in 1520, so like three years after that, he, he rapid-fired three amazing texts, quick, quick, rapid-fire, three treatises that probably is what gave the Reformation its shape and its form. Um, one was a letter to the German na, uh, to the Christian nobility of German Nation. One was The Babylonian Captivity. What do you call The Babylonian Captivity? Meaning that Christians are, as like a new Babylon, were held in the shackles of the Roman Catholic Church. And then the third was, uh, The Freedom of the Christian. And this really gave the Reformation sort of that kick it needed because what Martin Luther did was like a battering ram of scripture alone, showing that church councils and popes prior have all contradicted each other. The scriptures are saying, especially Peter, if we're going to say he's the first pope, well, 1 Peter makes it very clear that we are a priesthood of believers. So we don't need this other person in our way. So a doctrine of priesthood of believers, we have the Holy Spirit, we are priests in ourselves, if you are regenerate and a Christian. So you have the authority to be able to read and, and, uh, contradict the very teachings that Rome has been thrown out there. And the freedom of the Christian, that you have not to be doing all these different sacraments. Now, he wasn't perfect in, in some of these treatises because he still, he was a Roman Catholic Augustinian monk holding on to some of these things. But it was really in those three tracks, those three treatises in 1520, um, where Roman, where Martin Luther realized, you know, there's no purifying of the Roman Catholic Church. We actually have to break away. And that was where it was like a split thing. And it brought back to the Bible. He was using scripture, and a lot like a battering ram to just, just, just demolish what he called the Romanist walls at that time.
You know, my church history is a little fuzzy, but wasn't it his students who translated into German and put it on the church door, or did he translate in German? I know his students put it on the door. He, he didn't expect his students to be able to disseminate it, which they did. Yeah. Um, maybe I'm wrong here. I'm thinking that he wrote in German. Maybe he did in Latin, and then it got translated. That makes sense as well, too, because my church history is on the fly right here as well. The reason, just for our, I don't mean, but that's why it was the 95 Theses was so, became so widely disseminated because it was in the, in the language of, of the people. Yeah.
For our, one of the things that happens is I talk to Roman Catholics and they really don't like Martin Luther. But, but I would encourage Roman Catholics to read about the life of Luther. Luther got a hold of the original languages and he began to realize what he was taught was in contradiction with scripture. And this is what I love about Mike's ministry. He just hammers it. Read the Bible. God speaks through his word. And so we would just challenge those listening, you know, go to the word of God, compare it against the doctrine of Rome. Luther, that's what Luther did. He did, and he wasn't consistent with it as well. He, he had problems. But I, what I like what what Mike did is that when the question was, how do we, how do you equip? How do you know your, you know, what, what do you say to Roman Catholic friends? He's like, being a good brother, hold me accountable to the word of God. Go back to the scriptures. So we're not saying we follow Martin Luther as in what became Lutheran or John Calvin, which became Calvinists, which the joke is always these fountainheads probably wouldn't be part of their own tradition. You know, celebrity cults always seem to, to, to, to, to form around a, a very well-known, you know, energetic Bible teacher. You see that in First Corinthians. But go back to scripture and keep our leaders and teachers accountable, accountable to that.
And Corey, it's good, I think, to bring this up because a lot of Catholics will say, well, there's a lot of division among Protestant churches. And we say, amen. There are many Protestant denominations and churches that have gone apostate, just as the Roman Catholic Church has. They no longer submit to the authority of scripture. They've compromised the gospel, even removing the essentials of the gospel so that it can be more encompassing, more unifying. And so that's what happens when you start altering the gospel. You have a wider audience. But the true church of Jesus Christ is united. We've been called out of the world of people for God's own possession. We all have unity in the gospel. That's the only way to be in the Lord's church. We are baptized by one Spirit into one body. And we do that because we believe the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
And what do you say to those, um, who want to dismiss doctrinal differences? Let's just dismiss it. Let's just all get along. It's all in favor of unity. You know, you know, it's unloving. What? Yeah, Jesus, uh, came to divide. Father against son, mother against daughter. The personification of truth, Jesus said, I am the truth. I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. He's the way for those who are lost. He's the truth for those who are deceived. And he's the very life for those who are dead in their sin. So they've got to come to Christ. And, you know, if you really love someone, you won't let them march proudly toward hell's gate. You will intervene. You will give them the gospel and call them to repent and believe the truth.
Yeah. Was it, wasn't it Charles Spurgeon that said that if someone's going to go to hell, let them go to hell over our dead bodies? That's right. And I'm thinking as Mike is talking too, the Francis Schaeffer decades ago made it very clear, truth demands conflict. Sure. And when, when you're speaking truth, especially biblical truth, it's not about making people comfortable. Um, and you need to expect opposition. It's going to demand. As soon as you say some a proposition this way, there is an opposite to it. And there's going to be a slew of people that agree with the opposite. And so it's going to, we can't, our gauge can't be, is it friendly? Do we have more friends? Do we have more people in the church that are that are coming in because they're feeling comfortable or whatever it may be? Truth demands conflict. And as Mike quoted from from the Gospels, Matthew, I mean, Jesus made that very clear. He came to divide. And that's what truth does. And I would like to commend Corey Marsh's book to our listeners, Biblical Literacy, by Dr. Corey Marsh. Mike's got a copy. He's going to hold it up. If you're, that wasn't my shameless plug, that wasn't scripted at all, but I'll take it. It's a, it's a, it's a primer on, or primer in-house debate, uh, on biblical literacy. Primer. If you're a Roman Catholic and you're not sure how to start as it relates to understanding the Bible, that's an excellent book that will help you begin to, uh, understand how to study scripture. Thank you, Ryan.
And Ryan, one last thing too. The very nature of deception is that people do not know they're deceived until they're confronted with the truth. And Christians are truth bearers. We have to lovingly confront people in their error. That's the only way they're ever going to find out they've been deceived. I was deceived for 35 years of my life. It wasn't until I opened the word of God that I was confronted with the truth. So that's what we need to do. Amen.
And I can, you speak to some of the resources, um, those watching or listening can find at proclaimingthegospel.org? Sure. Our book, Preparing for Eternity, has set so many Roman Catholics free from the bondage of religious deception. And what I do in the book is I just lay alongside side by side the truth of God's word with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. And it forces a Catholic to do what I was forced to do. Am I going to trust Christ in his word, or the teachings and traditions of my religion? Because it's impossible to believe both when you see them side by side. You know, there's a direct conflict. And so we just pray that God would open their eyes, open their hearts to receive the truth with gladness and joy. So that's, uh, our most popular book. The ecumenical movement motivated me to write Contending for the Gospel because so many evangelicals were signing unity accords with Catholics. And I think the greatest attack on the Christian faith today is an attack on the purity and exclusivity of the gospel. And so that's what Contending for the Gospel does. It, it says the battle is for the souls of men, and it's a battle between the truth of God's word and the lies of the devil. And we need to stand firm on the truth of God's word. We really believe in literature evangelism. After we give the gospel verbally, we need to leave it in written form as well. And so we have eight different gospel tracts. And depending on how the conversation goes, we know exactly what to leave behind. We also have DVDs with all of our messages on keynote and PowerPoint, a set of gospel cards, the 12 most important words of the gospel that define each word according to scripture. And more than ever, I think we need to re-educate people on what the gospel is and what the gospel is not. Amen. And we've got a monthly newsletter that goes out to keep people informed of what's going on in the Vatican and how we can be more faithful witnesses for the Lord Jesus Christ.
That's just tremendous. And, and I'll credit it to you and Jane, who is outside your helper extraordinaire. Yeah, she does all my slides. And she's, uh, the second greatest blessing in my life. Well, praise God for her. Right. Well, thank you, Corey. Thank you, Ryan. And thank you, Mike, for joining us. And thank you for tuning in. [Music]