Matt Walsh & Ben Shapiro; Bad For Christianity?

the daily wire the blaze

         Matt Walsh & Ben Shapiro

Matt Walsh is an author, blogger, and speaker who contributes to Ben Shapiro’s “Daily Wire” and Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze.” He is typically recognized as one who vociferously fights for conservative values and Christianity and has amassed nearly 600,000 followers on Facebook. His fighting for Christian values has netted him endorsements from websites such as and given his expanding platform we thought it prudent to discuss why Matt Walsh is “bad for Christianity.”

Firstly, this is not an attack on his personal character, per se, nor is it a critique of all he stands for. What he says is generally true insofar as it concerns denouncing things like yoga, Ouija boards and hypocrisy from the politically liberal end of the spectrum (the same can be said of Ben Shapiro and Glenn Beck). Given that this author has never met Matt or Ben personally it is assumed that they are nice guys and don’t have intentions to deceive deliberately; however, the aim is to be objective and to get at truth, which we suspect even they would applaud. Matt Walsh has become a prominent voice not only in politics but in Christian communities and unabashedly affirms his lifelong adherence to Catholicism. This article is written from a decidedly Christian perspective and as such will rely heavily upon Scripture; the foundation of Christianity, as I’m sure Matt would agree.

Let us begin by acknowledging that espoused affiliation with an organization or claim of a title does not validate the claim. One cannot simply declare that they are a member of the Chicago Bulls and it be so. There are certain criteria that must be met for that claim to be valid. To be considered a contributor to the Daily Wire, one would have to have contributed actual material that was published by them. Claims become irrelevant without empirical support. This is evident. We have all, at one time, met someone who claimed to be something they were not. We typically refer to them as “posers” or even hypocrites and imposters. Time would fail us to speak of all the “cage-fighters” we’ve met, who have never stepped foot in a cage. A drunken brawl at a BBQ is not the same as being a trained athlete or a “cage-fighter.” You get the point. Contradictory affirmations nullify one or the other. This is the law of non-contradiction at work; and it always works. Given this reality, we must address the Blue Whale in the room (elephants are overrated); Matt Walsh is NOT a Christian!

This is not said to be mean or merely provocative but as a statement of objective fact. Catholicism and Biblical Christianity hold mutually exclusive views and as such both cannot be true. Catholic doctrine makes claims that are antithetical to the Bible and cannot be deemed truly Christian. Bear with us. If two men named Matt Walsh are found in the phone book, are they the same person? Obviously not. The name may apparently refer to the same person, but does not necessarily refer to the same person. Muslims claim to believe in and revere Jesus, as Matt is likely aware. Muslims will often tout this “fact” to garner favor with Christians in public forums. This claim, however, is massively deceptive. The only thing the Jesus of the Quran and the Jesus of the Bible have in common is the name “Jesus.” Herein lies the deception. The Jesus of the Quran didn’t die on a cross, much less rise from the dead. This is a fundamentally different Jesus from the one in the Bible, and thus a false Jesus. The same can be said of the “Jesus” of Mormonism, who is the “spirit-brother” of Lucifer, or the “Jesus” of the Jehovah’s Witnesses who is “a god” and actually Michael the Archangel in disguise. As you can see, a title says nothing of substance. How many College Degree holders have you met that were complete dunces? Nancy Pelosi has a degree. There is no shortage of cults that have been formed claiming to be “Christian” and using the name of Jesus to draw people in. What does it matter what label you put on an empty bottle?

Walsh catholocism

Matt Walsh: not all are Catholic who claim to be

Even Matt Walsh agrees with this principle. In this exchange on Twitter, he tells someone who claims to be a Catholic that despite their proclamation they are not, in fact, Catholic due to the mutually incompatible views they hold. Matt’s reasoning is sound here. To affirm Catholicism and deny a fundamental tenet of it is to nullify your espoused affirmation.

The foundation of Christianity is Christ Himself, but our understanding of Him and all He taught is found in the Bible, and NOWHERE else. Without the Bible, there is no Christianity as we know it. This was true for the Jews as it is for Christians. In the Old Testament, “…holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” (1 Peter 1:21) and it was recorded in the Old Testament. The Bible itself belabors the importance of the written Word. Psalm 119 is a prime example of this.
“Your word I have hidden in my heart…” (Psalm 119:11)
“Your word has given me life.” (Psalm 119:50)
“Because I have hoped in Your word.” (Psalm 119:74)
“My eyes fail from searching Your word.” (Psalm 119:82)
“Your word is settled in heaven.” (Psalm 119:89)
“Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.” (Psalm 119:105)

In the New Testament Jesus Himself is called “The Word.”

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.” (John 1:1) …. “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us…” (John 1:14)

Jesus is tempted by Satan in Matthew chapter 4. Three times Satan tempts Jesus and all three times Jesus responds with, “IT IS WRITTEN.” This is a constant theme in the life of Jesus. He routinely says, “have you not read…?” Jesus, as did all Jews, relied upon the written Word as their guide from God, as this was the method by which He chose to speak to them and preserve what He had said; this carries into the New Testament as well. This must be understood. The sufficiency of Scripture is one of the grandest themes of the Bible. God cannot contradict His own Word, nay, he elevates it above His name:
“For You have magnified Your word above all Your name.” (Psalm 138:2)
Jesus, in His prayer to His Father in John 17:17 says,
Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.”
Failure to understand this is failure to understand the very person of Christ Himself; the Word incarnate:

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life— the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us—” (1 John 1:1-2)

Catholicism is not, nor has it ever been, compatible with the Bible, as its foundations are firmly planted outside of the Bible, which is the undisputed and only foundation of Christianity. The big “Sola” of the reformation was “Sola Scriptura” which ensured all the others. Catholicism emerged as the Bible was systematically departed from. It should be noted that Jews did NOT consider the “Apocrypha” (literally; “Doubtful”) canonical. They were never part of the Jewish Bible, nor should they be consulted as canonical today. We will shortly look at this through the lens of deductive reasoning, which Matt (and Ben) would, no doubt, appreciate. If the premises are true, the conclusions necessarily follow.

The Gospel itself is the “good news” of Jesus; who He is and what He has done. Namely, that He came to save sinners (1 Timothy 1:15). The apostle Paul says this in Galatians 1:8:
“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.”

Even in the first century there were false gospels being peddled by some. The Bible says that men are saved by faith in Jesus and Him alone:
“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.” (Ephesians 2:8-9).
But, Catholicism says something entirely different. According to the Catholic Catechism:
“The church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation.” (Part 2, Section 1, Chapter 1; Article 2; IV; 1129).
It then goes on to list the 7 “sacraments” (works) and expand upon them.
This is in diametric opposition to the Bible, which says:
“…if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Romans 10:9).
There is NO mention of 7 sacraments! This is a complete fabrication of the Catholic Church and as such cannot be rightly called “Christian” as the term Christian is one that applies only to those that follow Christ and what He taught. As Christ says that, “Whosoever BELIEVES in Him will be saved” these two ideas are incompatible therefore making either Christ or the Catholic Church a liar. Jesus said, “I am the way, the TRUTH, and the life…” Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the Catholic Church is the liar, not Christ.
But let’s look further. 1 John 1:7 says:
the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.

The Catholic Catechism says:
“All who die in God’s grace…still imperfectly purified……undergo purification….to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.” (Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 3, Article 12; III.1030).
These ideas are mutually exclusive and irreconcilable. To quote Jacob Prasch of Moriel Ministries, “Does the blood of Christ cleanse from all sin, or do you atone, in Purgatory, for your own? Which gospel do you want?”

According to Galatians 1:8, the Catholic “gospel” is a false Gospel and a damnable one at that. “A” cannot be both “A” and “not A” at the same time and in the same way; this is the law of noncontradiction. Either the Bible is wrong, or the Catholic church is wrong. Though Catholics claim to be Christian, they deny the fundamental teachings of Christ and His apostles and are therefore mislabeling themselves. Given that salvation is the central theme of the Bible and the primary mission of Jesus Himself, it is not necessary to indulge the untold hundreds of other falsehoods taught by the Catholic church. This alone is enough to disqualify it from any claim to be “Christian.” Even Matt Walsh himself, albeit unwittingly, agrees with this.

Matt Walsh on Christians

Matt Walsh: Christianity has boundaries

Let’s put it in formal deductive form, shall we?
(“P” stands for “Premise”; “C” for Conclusion)

P1: The Bible (OT & NT) is the foundation for Christianity
P2: Christianity is believing and following Christ and what He taught
P3: What Christ taught is found in the Bible alone
P4: To deny what Christ taught is to deny Christianity (P2)
P5: Christ taught that salvation is by faith (belief) in Him alone (John 3:16; Romans 10:9; Ephesians 2:8-9)
P6: The Bible teaches that the blood of Christ cleanses from ALL sin (1 John 1:7)
P7: Catholicism denies both P5 and P6

matt walsh catholic

Matt Walsh is as “Catholic as they come.”

C1: Therefore, per P4, Catholicism is not Christianity
P8: A Catholic is one who adheres to Catholicism
P9: Matt Walsh, by admission, is a Catholic
C2: Therefore, per C1, Matt Walsh is NOT a Christian

The above argument is presented in deductive form, meaning that if the premises are true (and they are), the conclusion necessarily follows.

Catholicism is inherently, at its foundation, incompatible with biblical Christianity. The “gospel” it espouses is a false one, and the Christ it touts does not share the same characteristics as the Christ found in Scripture and is, therefore, a false Christ. Again, this is not said to be mean or to unnecessarily belittle Matt Walsh or any Catholic for that matter. I’d much rather they be saved. This is said as a point of fact, and because love engenders truth. Truth and love are two ends of the same coin. One cannot exist apart from the other (1 John 3:18). Because of the love Christ had for people, He spoke truth and very often that truth was said to “cut to the heart.” It has been said that your best friend is the one who tells you the most truth. Jesus did not refrain to declare truth to all those He interacted with, even if they found it offensive or politically incorrect.

So why are Matt Walsh and Ben Shapiro bad for Christianity (as of now)? Well, it is NOT because they are hostile toward Christians; they are not. Their general political affirmations with respect to conservative values that coincide with Christian living are quite agreeable. There is a subtlety about deception, however. Being a Christian will produce conservative values but holding conservative values will not produce righteousness. Unfortunately, as it stands, many well-meaning conservatives (even professed Christians) will be quite shocked to discover, on judgment day, that Christ never knew them (Matthew 7:23). False security will blind the best of them. For many, they believe that some nondescript belief in God will do. They believe that somehow polite manners and an affirmation of “God and country” will benefit them on judgment day. Let me be clear. IT WILL NOT! If salvation was attainable through polite manners and patriotism, then Christ died in vain. His propitiatory death is the ONLY thing that God will accept. Either our own righteousness, which is naught, or the righteousness of Christ is what we will stand clothed in. There is no middle ground. The first words from Jesus in His ministry were, “Repent, the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matthew 4:17). Turn from sin to Christ and Him ALONE!

This applies to Ben Shapiro as well. Though he is an openly practicing Jew and makes no claim to be a Christian, unless he believes in Jesus as his promised Messiah, he is in a perilous spiritual state. Jesus Himself said, “He who believes in Him (Jesus) is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” (John 3:18)
According to a fellow Jew, John the Apostle, Ben is actually a liar:
“Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ?” (1 John 2:22).
Let’s be clear. This author “likes” Ben as a speaker, is in general agreement with him, politically, and wishes him no ill as God desires that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4), especially given his place as a “natural branch.” The same goes for Matt Walsh. This, however, must be firmly established. When eternity hangs in the balance, truth is of the utmost importance.

Given the broad conservative platform available to these two, and the fact that they engage with many professed Christians, it was deemed prudent to warn of any ecumenical tendencies that might creep in.

walsh not christian

Walsh confused as evangelical

Many are either unaware or don’t seem to care what Matt’s beliefs really are. Christianity is firmly rooted in the TRUTH of Christ and His Word, not mere conservative values or patriotism, though those are not expressly being shunned either. Those who are of Christ must contend earnestly for the faith (Jude 1:3). Given that Matt has thus far given a false impression that he is a Christian and represents Christianity and, by implication, that therefore Catholicism is good and acceptable, the “contention” arose. Catholicism is, in a word; Satanic. A seemingly blindsided accusation, but a biblical one no less. Given the fundamental falsehood espoused by it and its progenitors, and its usurpatious nature toward Christ and His Word, there is no other conclusion to draw. This was precisely the conclusion of such men as Martin Luther, John Knox, John Wesley, Charles Spurgeon and many others; all concluding that the Papacy itself was the seat of the Antichrist.

It is the author’s genuine desire that repentance and ensuing transformation take place on behalf of both Matt Walsh and Ben Shapiro, but until or unless that happens, others who follow them must be keen to keep their espousals in perspective. Being right about one thing does not mean someone is right about all things, or even the next thing. Don’t forget that Peter was commended by Jesus for affirming Him as the Christ (Matthew 16:17), and a mere 6 verses later Jesus calls him “Satan” (Matthew 16:23). All things must be tested by the Word. Sharing values can be influential, but truth must be the aim and more specifically, Christ and His glory. He is glorified when truth is spoken, especially the truth of the Gospel. Repent! He became sin who knew no sin; to save sinners who were deserving of eternal death, taking the very wrath of God upon Himself… that whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life. There is ONE Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5), NOT the Pope, NOT a priest, NOT the Catholic church… always, ONLY Jesus. Amazing Grace, indeed.
It can be easy to allow emotions to lead the way, but as Ben often says, “Facts don’t care about your feelings.” Agreed. 

Share this...

Joshua Chavez

A slave of Christ. My name is Joshua Chavez.

You may also like...

48 Responses

  1. It’s amazing how many people claiming to be Christians will attach their train to anyone who even appears to be on the same moral trajectory. All one can really ask is this, “Who are these people placing their trust in?” All these causes and still very little real change for the better and why? Because we the people have long forgotten what really changes people. We have traded the power of the gospel to recreate people and subsequently their societies for one moral cause after another……fighting abortion or gambling or prostitution etc. Personally I believe, none of these causes are really even about God at all- there more about what we dislike and are uncomfortable to us- therefore we must rid ourselves of them for our sakes.
    It’s kind of like the way we look at radical Islam. Despite Jesus commanding us “do not kill” most professing Christians would gladly throw in their lot with others doing their dirty work for them. Who really believes the old saying “turn the other cheek, “bless them that persecute you” or “love your enemies.” Somehow murder doesn’t seem to coincide with what Jesus said.

    Lucky me. I’m meeting with someone soon who’s looking for a church that is not a 5013c and someone steered them in my direction. I’ve been forewarned that they listen to Alex Baldwin, Alex Jones and are all about 2nd amendment rights. Ought to be interesting. Am I in danger?..
    I would just just hope those who profess Christ would learn to be about their Father’s business alone. People waste so much time and energy on causes like “saving America” all the while neglecting to preach the gospel, warn of falsehoods and teaching the truth. Keep setting the right example Joshua.

  2. Karen says:

    I wish you would pray over what you think you know because in my opinion which really doesn’t matter any way neither does yours but what the Bible says and there is no one in this atmosphere that brings that truth better than John MacArthur ,you really should be ashamed of yourself for your attack on God’s man. I’m not into idol worship either . I just have a great deal of respect for a person who brings God’s truth in watered .shame on you

    • Servus Chrisit says:

      This article is primarily about Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro and Catholicism. I’m not sure why you would comment about MacArthur here. That said. If you can state anything I’ve said about him that is biblically or factually in error, please do so. Any truth he has said does not justify the error. I’m ashamed of those who refuse to call out his error because they have perceived some truth from him in the past. This is personal favoritism. I’m ashamed of those who have no problem with this man making over one million dollars per year. I’m ashamed of those who don’t care that he says you can take the mark of the beast and still go to heaven. I’m ashamed of those who have all but deified this man simply because he correctly assesses the heresy of Osteen ans so-forth. Even the Pharisees acknowledged the error of the Sadducees. This did not preclude Jesus from calling them sons of hell.
      Again, if you have a specific charge related to anything I’ve said about him that is without scriptural precedent or that is factually inaccurate, please say so.
      Thank you.

      • Ray says:

        Yes, shame on you Joshua for attacking “God’s man”, Johnny Mac. And shame on Jesus for calling Peter “Satan” in Matthew 16:23. And shame on anyone for attacking our sacred cows! 🙂
        Perhaps if more Christians studied John 18:37 and the magnitude of such a statement for the Savior to make to his executioner, perhaps then, more Christians would let go of their idols and sacred cows and realize that we/they are commanded to test the spirits, prove all things and earnestly contend for the faith… That’s not to say we should not speak graciously, but we should not sacrifice truth for the sake of some kind of biblically corrupted unity.
        “Pilate therefore said to Him, “Are You a king then?” Jesus answered, “You say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” John 18:37

    • Wayne says:

      Karen, seems you are trusting a man who Once spoke truth but slowly slid to the darker side and now his words and “action” put him in the category of a ‘False Teacher” None of us want to believe that the one we trusted for years has gone astray, but allowing the Holy Spirit to guide you is crucial and necessary, I have had a few of my once favorite teachers say little things that seemed not to be spiritual and they slowly increase that view. You Cant trust anyone based on their past, those teachings may have been true But its what they say, teach and do today that matters, when people like greg laurie started yoking together with the false teaching networks was a sad time and now he is not to be trusted, same with john macarthur, he to has done the same, (as with Many others).. Jesus’s MOST repeated words were “Be Not Deceived” it would appear that we are Now in the midst of the greatest falling away from the truth as many once good men are now on the other side and accommodating all sorts of non biblical notions, The End Is Near!!! the Rapture is at the door, the Great Tribulation is close by, are You Ready??

    • Brian says:

      Very good article by the way, you always point to the Gospel and to Jesus Christ with each charge. Aside of that, it’s very surreal to me: the accusations to you and other Christians who correct and exhort biblically, are never made biblically. Pulpit and Pen self acknowledge that their retort of your article on John MacArthur is primarily rational (which by itself, would be more of a compliment than that article deserves) they do not attempt to exhort biblically aside from using scripture as a feint and running to “logical devices” which should be considered a very simple and egregious oversight of anyone in thier or your shoes.
      Very good job in service to Christ and putting His glory far above your own sir.
      I decided to put this comment here specifically because of the sheer level of virtue signaling Karen is attempting to mask as biblical, Karen please do read the accusations against John
      Quick retorts: You are into Idol worship because MacArthur is more defensible to you than Jesus Christ.
      The opinion of man is folly, but he word of the Lord is truth, which is why this host chooses to rightly utilize the Word over opinion in which there is no shame. If you are unwilling to study the Bible and elevate its truth above virtue signaling, victimization and emotion in regards to John MacArthur, it becomes clear that you are deceived by the same spirit as far too many ‘Christians’ that also do not search the scriptures. Jesus loves you Karen, he doesnt want to shame you, and neither do we (or Christians) shame for the sake of shaming. God wants you to search the scriptures daily and to wait on Him for your answers, he asks us not to do what seems good in our own eyes and to separate ourselves from those who would deceive or abandon Gods children (John MacArthur)

  3. Ella Gamberi says:

    Thanks for this. There are a lot of conservative commentators who have recently taken the internet by storm, Ben Shapiro is one of them. He has an incredible grasp on debate and a lightning fast recall of pertinent facts. Most people who listen to this guy are fairly overwhelmed with his talents. I read recently he is thinking of running for the 2020 presidential campaign. I hope he doesn’t frankly. They would destroy him. As a christian myself, I have been guilty of thinking Shapiro is the hero of the conservative voter. He may well be, but you are right, we have to keep reminding ourselves he is not a Christian. It’s hard, he seems very respectful of Christianity, but then he would, Christians would endorse the same things he endorses politically. Jordan Peterson is another one we should keep at arms length. He and Shapiro had a recent couple of conversations. I am concerned for his approach which is rooted in psychology and the occult (you have to listen carefully to some of his messages especially about ‘the logos’ which doesn’t mean what a Christian would think it means).

    It is very important in this current environment not to fall victim to the cult of personality. It wasn’t until I saw the sorts of people who were following Shapiro unreservedly that I suddenly realised that he had become an internet sensation. This is where I get very antsy and recognise I have just fallen victim to another media manipulation.

    • Servus Chrisit says:

      Yes. While it’s OK to listen to him and he may even have some valuable insight, neither him nor Walsh are Christians. Walsh is particularly dangerous because he claims to be and we live in a biblically ignorant world now where any ol’ denomination will do. We must be discerning. Ben, though bright, is ultimately not giving Biblical counsel much of the time. Of course, many things will overlap, but he is not approaching things from a Christian perspective, but from a politically conservative “judeo-christian” ethic perspective. Christians can become preoccupied with political agendas that we forget this is not our home. While those things may have some importance, it is never to the exclusion of our first priority, which is growing in Christ and being transformed by the renewing of our minds. We ought always have eternity in mind.
      I pray you have been and continue to be edified by whatever you find here. God bless.

      • Elias says:

        Are you a fool? Don’t you know that Bible was given to you by the Catholic Church?

        • Joshua Chavez says:

          Are you a fool? Don’t you know the bible was given by the Jews? “What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God.” (Romans 3:1-2)

  4. Cherie says:

    I do not know about Ben Shapiro, but I have read Matt Walsh and he is no Christian. His version of Christianity has so many holes in it, mostly based upon his morality. He has a bad mouth too, could do with a washing. Jesus said that man speaks from the abundance of his heart, and a foul mouth speaks loud in abundance, not good. And let’s now talk about his ego. Being almost right isn’t right, it’s wrong with a twist, a bad twist. If I was face to face with him all I would says is, “Repent, for the Kingdom is at hand.” Shalom

  5. Cherie says:

    Again I see you quoted Jacob Preach, and he is correct about the RCC, but he encourages those who partake in the RCC idol worship, so called holy days, to contunue while at the same time saying he does not observe them. Hypocrite. He doesn’t because he knows they are both idolatry and blasphemy, and will account for encouraging others to observe. He also preaches Christian suicide, which has no biblical reference. In FACT- the Apostle Paul wrote in
    1 Thessalonians 5:23 –

    “And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit, and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

    He and another teacher/speaker say since the Word of God can separate the soul, even the bone marrow, that God will be okay if a professing Christian commits suicide. This is a lie from the pit of hell and not biblical. If that was the case, why didn’t Judas go to heaven after feeling remorseful and hanging himself? He didn’t because he didn’t repent.

    The above Scriptuee doesn’t sound like an endorsement for Christian suicide to me. We are to endure to the end, not claim the Name then break God’s commandment, “thou shalt not kill”. Taking a life, even your own, is a murder.

    Please, please look into his teachings. His teachings used to be spot on, but now, three years ago God let him live, he has gone down the wrong path and I do not know why. There is more but here is not the place for it. I put here in the comments what is already out there. Just pray he repents. Thank you and respectfully submitted. Shalom

    Cherie c.

    • Servus Christi says:

      He does no such thing. He doesn’t encourage paganism of any kind and to assert such is to bear false witness. He doesn’t celebrate Christmas nor does he condemn people who do. It’s a Romans 14 issue. You seem to be hyper conspiratorial at this point. You also made baseless accusations about him and some photos and when I asked about them you became extremely vague and evasive.
      I’m really not sure what you’re getting at, here. You’ve made several accusations with ZERO proof.

      • Heather says:

        Thank you Joshua for your steadfastness and your absolutely no compromise preaching of the gospel. I wholeheartedly agree with your support of Jacob Prasch. I hold no men as idols but I absolutely rejoice when I can listen to men like you and Jacob who will not compromise on God’s word. You both encourage listeners to be like the Berean’s and in a world of increasingly apostate preachers, it is so refreshing to be able to listen to you and Jacob. I am a fairly new listener and I used to listen a lot to John Macarthur. I could excuse his Calvanism (which I personally disagree with), but I could never excuse his mark of the beast wrong doctrine. It made me shudder. Having recently seen the preachers he is now associating with makes me very sad. In any case, thank you so much for your broadcasts, I look forward to your posts and YouTube video’s immensely. I love God’s word more than anything else. Kind regards

        • Servus Christi says:

          Keep sitting at the feet of Jesus daily. He is our hope, our peace, and our salvation. I pray the Lord ministers truth to you through whoever speaks it.
          God bless you.

    • Angel Martin says:

      Repentance is a change of mind. All things, (including suicide) are lawful unto me, but not all things are expedient. Someone could selfishly commit suicide as an ultimate profession of faith in Christ and hatred of their own lives! So frustrating how many doubt the seal of God and trust more in their delusions of righteousness outside of the vicarious righteousness of Christ. Judas never BELIEVED on Christ! He felt bad for killing an innocent man, that is all!

  6. Linda Robey says:

    Servus Christi,
    I am fairly new to this blog, but I have been listening to your youtube channel for about a year and I love it….very informative and edifying.
    Great article on Matt Walsh and Ben Shapiro. I wasn’t aware that Matt Walsh was a Roman Catholic. Roman Catholicism is a cult…it has NADA to do with Biblical Christianity. I knew that Ben Shapiro is either a Conservative or Orthodox Jew.
    It is so apparent that the word “Christian” has become a generic word for anything and everything good and moral. Professing Christians have “divorced” themselves from the Bible.
    Maranatha! Jesus Christ is coming soon!

    • Servus Christi says:

      I Pray you have been encouraged and emboldened by whatever you have found here or through the videos. You are quite right, so many have “divorced” themselves from the Bible. Our refrain must always be “IT IS WRITTEN”… Yes, stay sober. Note the season…. Jesus may be closer than we think.
      God Bless you.

  7. Brian Walsh says:

    The Catholic Church was founded by Christ and carries on the traditions as passed down from the Apostles.

    Tell me, where did Christ command us to follow the New Testament? To whom did he give the keys: Peter or anybody who says “I know the truth”. Heck, where does the Bible says “Follow the Bible”?

    • Servus Christi says:

      When He said, “If you love me you will obey my commands.” (John 14:15)
      The Catholic church is a bogus invention of man set to usurp the commands in scripture.
      Your trivializing of the bible would ironically invalidate the entire Catholic church, since its substantiation supposedly comes from the bible and Jesus’ “giving the keys to Peter”
      Either all of the Bible or NO bible. Which is it?
      If you choose all of the Bible; the Catholic church is dead, if you choose no bible, the Catholic church is dead. Either way it’s dead.

    • Ray says:

      Brian, I am a former Catholic saved by the grace of God and delivered out of that false Christian church you are defending. I now realize why the reformers called it the Great Whore and why they called all popes “anti-christ”. Romanism preaches a false works gospel, puts the pope and the Catechism above the bible and elevates Mary to the level of goddess and intermediary between God and man, which is a great abomination…
      “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” – 1 Tim 2:5
      Catholics are rightly called Romanists and Papists, but never rightly called Christians. It is an enormous insult to the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ at Calvary to say the Catholic church was found by Christ. How dare you accuse the Savior of founding that wicked, pedophile-filled institution. Shame on you even defending that Great Whore and even being a part of it. As Jesus said in Luke 13:3 – “I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.”

  8. Marg says:

    Ummm I’m sorry to burst your bubble, but the Catholics wrote the Bible! Through inspired consultation & prayer along with oral and written tradition, the early Christians (who were Catholic- Jesus only founded one church & thus not until Martin Luther decided he had some kind of authority to make up a new church were there different ‘kinds’ of Christians) put together an agreed upon selection of writings into what became the Bible. The church Jesus founded has the only authority to do such a thing. This tradition/authority of the church came hundreds (300? would have to check my historical facts here sorry) of years before the Bible- in fact at the very moment Jesus founded His church on Peter & gave him the keys to bind stuff here on earth (i.e. the authority to decide stuff). In the Bible itself it says scripture is ‘useful’ for teaching, but that the (Catholic) church is the pillar and foundation of faith here on earth. Thus the magisterium (writings, dogma, teachings, scriptural interpretations etc) of the Catholic church is the ONLY truth. That includes, but is not limited to the Bible. Any other church is man-made & has no authority to interpret scripture or ‘ordain’ ministers etc. It makes so much sense! See Scott Hahn’s ‘Spirit & Letter’ lecture- so enlightening. God Bless

    • Servus Christi says:

      Jews wrote the bible, actually. Catholicism didn’t exist when the New Testament was completed. This is evidenced by the overwhelming amount of erroneous doctrine found in the Catholic tradition that exists nowhere in the bible. Catholicism is not only wrong, it is Satanic at root. False gospels are Satanic gospels.

      • Ray says:

        You said it brother! Oh for the grace of God, delivering me from Romanism and translating me into His glorious Kingdom! It will take all eternity to adequately say “Thank you Lord Jesus”!

      • Hanby says:

        I’m afraid you’ve been misinformed. The Old Testament was written by the Jewish people, that much is true, but the seeds of the Roman Catholic Church had been sown before Jesus Christ had died as seen in Matthew 16:18 where Jesus establishes Peter as the first pope. The most effective lies are seasoned with truth, which I’m afraid has occurred to you. After Jesus’ death the apostles moved across the world and established the Roman Catholic Church. The first books of the New Testament weren’t even written until at least 70 years after Jesus had sacrificed himself for us. The Roman Catholic Church had been established so that the teachings of Jesus Christ and God could endure the test of time. You haven’t cited any of the “overwhelming erroneous doctrine found in Catholic tradition that exists nowhere in the bible.”. I would argue that 1 Corinthians 3:11, Ephesians 2:20, Peter 2:5-6, and Revelations 21:14 all strongly indicate to the makings of the Roman Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ and built up with the apostles. What’s more is that calling Catholic’s inherently Satanist is absurd and speaks of obvious ignorance of what the Catholic Church works for.

        • Beloved & Loved says:

          WHAT nonsense! PLEASE STATE which Scriptures the apostles used for prayer to Mary, indulgences, relic worship, assumption of Mary, confession, prayers for the DEAD…I COULD go on and on and on and on and on

      • Beloved & Loved says:

        Amen Brother!

  9. Jacob says:

    I’m still working my way through the bible. I fall off the wagon often and follow my own eyes. I am one of those lukewarm believers that makes God ill. I can say this because only when you admit a problem can it be addressed. Either by me, or by anyone else. That being said, it seems to me the whole “if you believe then you are saved” argument falls flat, and the reason for this is that many people seem to take the words at a flat face value that doesn’t mean anything beyond what people think it means. I’m not going to call anyone out. That would be hypocritical of me, but according to Strong’s concordance Faith is more akin to obedient and trusting than belief. I’m pretty sure most of us have heard that Satan believes in Christ’s holiness but he isn’t going anywhere but hell right? Doesn’t that apply to us as well? Doesn’t James teach that faith without works is not faith at all? Is it not possible that sacraments can be God honoring if done in the proper attitude of heart? Aren’t sacraments just a tradition to remind us of something found in the Bible? Traditions made by men for men aren’t holy. Traditions made by men for God can be holy, otherwise, why even sing Hymns? I can sing His praises using Psalms or by singing Scandal of Grace can’t I? I’m not saying that I agree with Catholicism, but I agree in the 7 sacraments ideologically, even though I believe that they can take many forms. Is Marriage no longer Holy? It’s a sacrament. We can argue about whether a marriage must or must not be catholic in order to be a “real marriage” before God, but I think we can all agree that marriage itself is still sacred. I could do this same thing with the other six sacraments really. Even the sacrament of Holy Orders is really just a contention of how the new priesthood operates. Isn’t every Christian a priest according to their gifts? This means that while priests, we have different spheres of influence that Jesus has gifted us to be involved in. So there can be different orders within the new priesthood no? 1 Corinthians 12 Just as no man besides Jesus is perfect and never stumbles, could not a person stumble much more often than most and still occasionally do something right? Are we to throw away the good with the bad? My current inclination is to say no. Find the good and name it good, find the bad and name it bad. Always leaving room to the Lord’s correction in prayer and meditations of the heart.

    • Servus Christi says:

      It’s not merely an argument that “if you believe then you are saved” That is explicitly what the bible teaches (Romans 10:9, John 3:16). Faith will produce faithfulness, this is true, but the faithfulness is a product of the true saving faith, not the other way around. Recall the thief on the cross. What were his works? NONE. Yet, Jesus proclaims Him saved before his death. Sure enough if he had been removed from the cross there would have been works to follow, but that is the mere evidence of the saving thing, namely the faith. As shadows are the evidence of a body but does not produce a body, so works are the result of faith, they don’t produce it. We are saved by faith ALONE (Ephesians 2:8-9). Satan believes in the existence of God but is not surrendered to Him. This is the faith we’re speaking of. Also, Jesus says in John 3:3 that a man must be born again. True faith produces another person, not mere intellectual ascent. The problem is the efficacy ascribed to the sacraments in Catholicism. Biblically speaking, NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING but faith has the ability so save. By grace through faith in Christ ALONE. Everything else is a formality or the result of the faith. Never mind that the sacraments as described in Catholicism are largely not found in the bible anyway… last rights? confession? It’s hocus pocus. Marriage is a holy union, but has no bearing on salvation. Millions of married souls will be found in hell one day with zero regard of their marital status. Paul the apostle was single. Is he going to hell? To add to faith is to preach another gospel. Paul says, let them be damned. Catholicism preaches a false gospel and is full of rubbish beside. The whole thing is a laughable farce biblically speaking. From the opulent buildings to the broadway-like costumes; it’s utterly ridiculous. Simply put, 90% of what the Catholic church does is found nowhere substantiated in the bible, making it a purely human invention that occasionally borrows from the bible to deceive people. Truth mixed with error.

      • kketchum says:


      • Angel Martin says:

        Faith will produce works, but not guarantee the works of good will even outweigh the bad works. Works as evidence are simply backloaded works, for what is evidence? That which we place our trust in that a thing is true. Our faith is the evidence!

  10. Pete says:

    You would do well to read the joint statement by the Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church on justification by grace. It’s an old trope to say Catholics believe they are saved by works. Sacraments are not works – unless you count Baptism a work or God’s forgiveness a work or being released in the Holy Spirit a work? I’m sure you know your Lutheran and Calvinist theology but you seem to know little about this subject. There’s a reason why there is more than 40,000 Protestant Churches and only a handful of Catholic Churches and it simply comes down to how Scripture is interpreted. You believe the Bible can be picked up and interpreted by the individual with no regard to the Church – that’s what you say but then you cite Lutheran theology and dogma. Catholics are instructed to read Scripture in light of tradition because 2,000 years of holy men and women have sought God throughout the ages. Should we disregard Luther simply because he isn’t in the Bible? Or should we, with the Holy Spirit, discern his words as we read the Word? Sola Scriptural is a self defeating tenet because it takes Scripture and introduces a tradition of understanding – “the Bible means this when it says this”. That is antithetical to the very notion that the Bible alone is from where all teaching must spring. Either it is good to adhere to reformer teaching and theology or it isn’t.

    Catholics, as do many protestants, believe we are saved FOR good works not BY them.

    All that said, I doubt it will change anything because you believe the things you’ve been taught all your life. And I say taught because such ridiculous misunderstandings about Catholic teaching haven’t come from an honest reading of Catholicism but rather an indoctrination founded in and continued by biased Lutheran and Calvinist preachers and pastors.

    And as a final point of clarity – because Catholics understand that Baptism is Baptism, when a Protestant desires to become Catholic, if they are already baptised in a Protestant Church, we recognise this fact and so there is no need for them to participate in the Sacrament of Baptism – it’s already been done. Is it weird that Protestants insist Catholics get baptised again? It certainly is when you consider the Scripture surrounding Baptism. Who is following Scripture soundly again? Because nearly every single Protestant denomination seems to love re-dipping the sheep over and over, despite the Bible’s instructions.

    Any ways.. hopefully you read this and it causes you pause.

    • Brian says:

      ‘You shall have no other gods before me’
      ‘You shall not make any graven images’
      Catholics are baptized under the authority of man, and in a church in which God has chosen not to make himself present.

      Catholics choose to baptize in a way that is unbiblical and completely disconnected to repentance, as it is done before sins can be known and repented of, and as I showed, in an area where the Holy spirit is not- benefiting nothing.

      The Lord is not present when other gods are worshiped or graven images exist- therefore The Lord is not in a catholic church as long as Idols are and as long as Mary and the saints are revered and prayed to.

      The domination of man is over the Bible in a catholic church- this is shown in the catechism straitly and in the way confession is done to man and not directly to God under the lie that man can intercede for man, while the Bible clearly states 1 Timothy 2:5 that there is only one God and one mediator between God and man.

      My final thought has to go to this: all Catholics are under a spirit of false trust that reproving Christians are not under. Understand that Catholics are told that church tradition and the Bible are equal in importance and that contradictions between the two find church traditions in domination over the Bible. Reproving Christians hold every man a liar and test every doctrine and spirit and man with the Bible itself- the Bible is the great test of all. A religion that takes that mighty tool away from its laity tells its laity that they have no way of proving what they are told and are decieved

  11. Jacob says:

    Joshua, I think you missed the point of what I said. Belief does not necessarily change anyone. My point is that people saying that if you believe then you are saved, but many are not processing what the ramifications are to believing. Lip service and going to a building once a week that says church on it does not save people. There are some who are absolutely convinced that it does save them, because people are always saying by faith alone, but do not explain the depth of what it means to be faithful. Ask most people to define faith, and they’ll tell you that it means to believe. Why then does the bible use these different words at different times if they are indeed, interchangeable? I can believe that selfishness ultimately causes despair both in others and in myself, but still be selfish. Belief doesn’t necessarily imply a connection to action or change. That’s what it means to be a hypocrite, and we know from scripture how Jesus feels about hypocrites. That’s why I say that faith does not equal belief. The thieves who were crucified with Jesus didn’t just believe that he could save their souls, they committed their fates into His hands and asked Jesus to forgive them. At least I can assume that they were genuine. I can’t imagine that Jesus would forgive them if there was deceit in the hearts of the thieves. Self deception is the most dangerous kind. How many people have I heard say that “Jesus is Lord,” but then go and operate in their business just the same as atheists do? Like Mr. Ravenhill said once, “I don’t believe there are five for every hundred that profess the name of Jesus know God. They know the Word of God; they don’t know the God of the Word. You can’t get anywhere unless you know the God of the Word.”

    • Servus Christi says:

      Faith has the implication of faithfulness in the biblical sense. Yet the works themselves do not save. If they did, Christ died in vain. The thief on the cross was saved by faith ALONE. He had no works to boast of and died after professing with his mouth. Faith ALONE saves, but if given the opportunity will produce works or bear fruit. The real issue is this. You must be born again (John 3:3). This is the faith that saves and produces a new man. True believing faith that will produce faithfulness if given the opportunity.

  12. aaron says:

    I’m not seeing the argument here about how they are bad for Christianity… How are they bad for Christianity? It would seem to me that the argument here is that because they are not Christians, and that Christians listen to their ideas and ideologies regarding government, they must be bad for Christianity. Even this is a stretch… The bulk of this article is just denouncing the idea that someone could possibly mistake them for being a Christian… Non-Christians are not necessarily bad for Christianity.

    I would oppose this line of thinking most strongly in the sense that they are advocating for freedom, with freedom of religion being the most important freedom we have. I’d like to argue that freedom of religion is very good for Christianity.

    To say that we shouldn’t listen to them because they haven’t been saved, or they haven’t professed to have been saved, or because you don’t believe they’ve been saved, I think is silly. I don’t think that any reasonable Christian is going to think that one person is going to be right about everything. At some point, if you’re going to evangelize, you’re going to have to actually listen to a non-Christian.

    • Joshua Chavez says:

      Christians don’t merely listen to their ideas regarding the government because they don’t talk about merely the government but present theological ideologies quite often. Mr. Walsh is especially presenting ideas about God on a fairly regular basis, and many people lump him into some evangelical category even though he is a Catholic who adheres to a false gospel. This is quite dangerous. While their advocacy for freedom is good, even Glenn Beck advocates as much as a Mormon. He is equally dangerous as he too adheres to a false gospel. They are not dangerous as it concerns general ideas of free speech, the danger comes in lending and ear to them as it concerns matters of any theological importance. Their ideas of God are devastatingly bad. I never said you shouldn’t listen to them, now you’re putting words in my mouth. They may have a great many insights into various lines of constitutional logic and so forth. Those who perceive them as any form of credible when it comes to matters of theology are deceived already. This was the whole point. There is not a Catholic, Mormon or Orthodox Jew whom you should lend and ear to on matters of theology. Given that Mr. Walsh regularly engages in this realm and has a large Christian audience, this article is most prudent.

  13. Agnus says:

    It’s also not clear to you at the moment whom “The Word made Flesh” is.
    The Memra (Heb) Logos, (Greek) or Word ( English) is whom Jesus was before He became Man.

    St Jude’s epistle refers to Jesus’s pre-existance in his New Testament Epistle…..

    “I will therefore admonish you, though ye once knew all things, that Jesus, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, did afterwards destroy them that believed not:”
    [Jude 1:5]

    If you get hold of an Aramaic translation of the Old Testament, you will see many references to not just the Lord, but also to a figure (also Divine ) called the Memra. For instance it is the Memra – who appeared to Moses, – it is the Memra who the Targums say walked with Adam in the Garden. Two Lord’s are mentioned in Genesis 19:24 “The Lord rained down fire and brimstone FROM THE LORD in Heaven.”

    The Aramaic Targum solves the two Lord dispute – One was the Memra.(ie Christ)

    Quotations in the Old Testament

    1 … [14] For while all things were in quiet silence, and the night was in the midst of her course, … [15] Thy almighty Word leapt down from heaven from thy royal throne, as a fierce conqueror into the midst of the land of destruction.
    [16] With a sharp sword carrying thy unfeigned commandment, and he stood and filled all things with death, and standing on the earth reached even to heaven.”

    2 This person speaking to Solomon in the Book of Wisdom (O/T) is shown to not be God the Father OR Solomon, it is one of the many appearance of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament as “The Eternal Word” – The Memra, ie Christ.

    [22] The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his ways, before he made any thing from the beginning. [23] I was set up from eternity, and of old before the earth was made. [24] The depths were not as yet, and I was already conceived. neither had the fountains of waters as yet sprung out: [25] The mountains with their huge bulk had not as yet been established: before the hills I was brought forth: [26] He had not yet made the earth, nor the rivers, nor the poles of the world. [27] When he prepared the heavens, I was present: when with a certain law and compass he enclosed the depths: [28] When he established the sky above, and poised the fountains of waters: [29] When he compassed the sea with its bounds, and set a law to the waters that they should not pass their limits: when be balanced the foundations of the earth; [30] I was with him forming all things: and was delighted every day, playing before him at all times; [31] Playing in the world: and my delights were to be with the children of men. [32] Now therefore, ye children, hear me: Blessed are they that keep my ways. [33] Hear instruction and be wise, and refuse it not. [34] Blessed is the man that heareth me, and that watcheth daily at my gates, and waiteth at the posts of my doors. [35] He that shall find me, shall find life, and shall have salvation from the Lord:

    Clearly not God the Father speaking above.

    Orthodox Catholicism speaks of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

    Recently published have been (as mentioned above) the long forgotten Aramaic Targums – The Old Testament Canon was loosely translated from the Hebrew and Greek into the Aramaic Language. The Targums were literally a commentary written by the Rabbi’s to expand on the Text. (similar to a study Bible today)

    They show to us that at the time of Christ – the Old Testament had previously not been so unclear as to who the Memra (The Word) was. The Book of the Apocalypse says

    “And he was clothed with a garment sprinkled with blood; and his name is called, THE WORD OF GOD.”
    [Apocalypse (Revelation) 19:13]

    Read the first chapter of the Targum Genesis .. The Lord is the Father, The Memra (word) is the Son – and the Spirit of God’s Mercy is “The Holy Spirit or Ghost”

    “From the begining, with wisdom,the MEMRA of the Lord created and perfected the Heavens and the Earth……..

    These explains more…..

    As Roman Catholics who studied well can tell you, the Disciples trained their followers who became members of the Church – their writings are called “The Apostolic Church Fathers” The ACF’s literally KNEW or were taught by usually St John or St Peter.

    Some were Priests, some Bishops, – usually they were martyred.

    The ACF’s wrote many letters – and here are some of the statements regarding Jesus’s identity as “The Word” in the Old Testament

    St Justin Martyr was a Disciple of St John the Apostle…..the others knew him too.,_Eusebius_Caesariensis,_Church_History,_EN.pdf

  14. kk says:

    Really good read, the only issue I have is with the idea that the “old Testimony” also includes “Prophets and Psalms”. I just noticed you said yoked it all together by making reference to the “old Testament”, and since Prophets and Psalms, (and books of the wise) according to the “Word”, Himself, are separated into parts, as well as in parable as well. Anyways, for example, in prophets we learn that they are speaking by something other than the “old Testament”, the “Law” which cannot fill them, but something else has desired them, to “speak and act”. The first five books which is the Law, is not what they are full of, we learn they are speaking and giving up everything, not for the Law, but for this Holy Spirit that has blown upon them, and given them light into the Truth of Christ.

  15. Bern Anagam says:

    You are circus comical and full of it. The Bible and Catholicism aren’t mutually exclusive. The church gave birth to the book, furthermore, the church is the pillar and foundation of truth, NOT the Bible, says the bible. You protestants are funny
    With your incongruity, lol

    • Brian says:

      The Book existed before the church (John 1:1-2)
      Conclusively based on scripture: the church did not give birth to the book

      1 Tim 3:15 does not mention the Bible or take authority away from the Bible (it does not say “the church is… but not the Bible)”; being the pillar and foundation of truth is not the same as the origin of it. This is willful deception on the part of anyone who would add to scripture in order to change its meaning

      Then what is the origin of truth?
      John 17:17 sanctify them by your truth, Your word is truth
      (Again) John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word and the word was with God and the Word was God”

      So: Word (Bible) is God
      Word=God, Word=Truth
      God holds his Word as more important than his Church, because his church is fallible (Revelation 2 and 3) but the Word is without flaw.

      God asks us to study the scriptures daily and to reprove all things based on what the word tells us. Catholics are encouraged not to do this and to refer primarily to their fallible church. I would encourage you to test all things with the infallible Word of God

      • tyson guess says:

        “The Book existed before the church (John 1:1-2)”

        False, the church was founded by Christ upon Peter and the Apostles long before a single word was written.

        “Conclusively based on scripture: the church did not give birth to the book”

        False. The Catholic church wrote and compiled the Scriptures.

        “So: Word (Bible) is God”

        This commits the fallacy of equivocation.
        The bible is the written word “Graphe”
        The spoken word is “Rhema”
        Jesus is the Logos.

        3 words all mean ‘word’ (written, spoken and person). The first two are authoritative (because they are ‘things’). The last is a person and is therefore an ‘authority’ (authorities are persons not things).

        This is why Jesus gave us a church, made of persons, that carry his authority. Otherwise, if all we have is a bible then it is logically impossible to deduce what it means with certainty.

  16. Bobbie says:

    We need more Standard Bearers like you! Isn’t there anyone who will call the Nation to Fasting, PRAYING and REPENTING? (don’t shut up, don’t be silent, keep saying, writing, proclaiming, shouting, roaring and exposing)!

  17. tyson guess says:

    “P1: The Bible (OT & NT) is the foundation for Christianity”

    Sorry this premise is false. No where in scripture does it teach that the foundation of Christianity is the bible. It does say that “The Church” built upon Peter is the foundation and that foundation will be present in every century and will be infallible.

    “P3: What Christ taught is found in the Bible alone”

    This premise commits the fallacy of ‘begging the question’ as it assumes ‘sola scriptura’ when scripture nor the church teaches ‘sola scriptura’.

    “P5: Christ taught that salvation is by faith (belief) in Him alone (John 3:16; Romans 10:9; Ephesians 2:8-9)”

    Sorry but the only place in scripture where the Holy Spirit inspired and author to use the words ‘faith’ and ‘alone’ together directly denies this premise:
    “you see that a man is justified by works and NOT by FAITH ALONE” – james 2:24
    Argument 1 fails on the above points falsifying the conclusion.

    Re: your Matt Walsh argument –

    Matt Walsh holds the same views of the christians in the first century which can be demonstrated by scripture, the writings of the Apostles successors and the decisions of the magisterium which is Christ’s earthly authority. Given that your argument against Matt was based on faulty premises above, your conclusion fails.

    • Joshua Chavez says:

      Mr. Guess,
      1. You use scripture as the ultimate authority to prove that scripture is not the ultimate authority. This is a fallacy I like to refer to as “comically stupid”. Without scripture, you would not be afforded the opportunity to mangle Matthew 16 the way you do.
      2. The use of puns and wordplay is a common theme througout the Old Testament and the New Testament, which tells me that your ignorance of this is a “testament” (see what I did there?) to your lack of true and meaningful study of the Bible, Mr. Guess. If you do acknowledge this, then it is curious that you would ignore what is very clear wordplay in Matthew 18. Mr. Guess, this is what happens when you begin with a conclusion; satirically bad “reasoning” ensues. “Petros” and “Petra” are not the same word. I’m “guessing” Mr. Guess didn’t know that (See what I did again?). Jesus is directly identified as the “Petra” in 3 verses in the New Testament. There is only ONE Person identified or alluded to as the Petra in the entire New Testament, and it’s Jesus. In Romans 9, 1 Peter 2 Jesus is the “[Petra] of offense” and 1 Corinthians 10:4 says this (much to your dismay),
      “For they drank of that spiritual Rock [Petra] that followed them, and that Rock [Petra] was Christ.” There’s no wiggle room here Mr. Guess (that’s appropriate [pay attention to those puns]). The Petra is Christ. This was precisely Peter’s profession, “You are THE CHRIST, the SON of the living God.” Yes, acknowledging that Jesus is the Χριστός, (Christós) which is precisely how Paul identifies Jesus in 1 Corinthians 10. On this PETRA (Christ Himself) Jesus will build his church.
      3. I don’t think you know what “begging the question” means, though you sound quite sure of yourself. If you assert that what Christ taught is not found in the bible alone, it would ironically beg the question. You are assuming that tradition is valid because your tradition says it’s valid. Unlike my assertion, which is the only valid and universally attested record of Christ’s teachings. Even the so-called “magesterium” invents things like “antipopes” when they want to make ad hoc corrections. I don’t think you realize that you’re actually arguing against yourself. There’s no good reason to believe that what Christ taught is found outside the bible, and there is good reason to believe that what Christ taught is found in the bible alone. At the very least, it is the only thing that can be verified from eyewitnesses. Way to “beg the question” while making the accusation.
      4. You again appeal to the “Holy Spirit inspired scriptures” as the final authority only when it appears convenient to force your presuppositions. This is called confirmation bias, and you appear to live by this rule (It’s the Washington D.C. of Catholicism). Sadly for you, James’ definition of “works” and your definition of “works” is an example of equivocation. You mean sacramental “works” (rites and rituals) effecting grace in themselves. James means “more than a mere profession”. This is what happens when you rip a verse from the context of Scripture; it is a pretext. You must desperately cling to this one passage out of context from the entire bible in order to validate your erroneous conclusion. As he says, “I will show you my faith by my works” which is not at all in line with Catholic dogma which says that the sacraments are efficacious. James cites Rahab letting someone out a window as a type of “work”. Yes, faith without obeidience is illusory faith, but the faith gives rise to the work (non sacramental) not the other way around. So, the theif on the cross was justified by what? FAITH. Faith gives rise to works like objects give rise to shadows. But shadows create nothing, they are only evidence of something. This is a polemic against easy believism that says, “I believe in God” and then disregards everything He says. Funny how you didn’t quote from Romans where Paul speaks about Abraham. Why is that?

      “Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith.Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.” (Romans 3:27,28)

      “For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God….But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,” (Romans 4:2&5)

      “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.” (Romans 5:1,2)

      I suppose you ripped the book of Ephesians out of your bible as well?

      “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.” (Ephesians 2:8,9)

      All of your arguments fail, thereby falsifying all of your conclusions.

      Matt Walsh, like all Catholics, buys into vampirism, cannibalism, necromancy, fairy tales about Mary being perpetually a virgin and sinless amongst other things, all to the woeful contradiciton of the same scripture they claim is “Holy Spirit inspired”. Of course, this is only leveraged when it’s convenient. They appeal to a tradition that says it’s from God because it says it’s from God. This might be the epitome of begging the question. The irony here is unbearable. Good luck, Mr. Guess.

  18. Maria says:

    Scripture is not the undisputed foundation of Christianity. Jesus Christ is the foundation of Christianity.

    • Richard says:

      How can one know anything about Christ that was not learned from inspired scripture? If scripture can be wrong where does one go to determine which parts of scripture can be ignored and tossed to the side and which parts are correct and need to be followed?

      2 Timothy 3:16-17 KJVS
      [16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: [17] That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

      Galatians 1:8-9 KJVS
      [8] But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. [9] As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

      Jude 1:3 KJVS
      [3] Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

      Scripture is the word of God and there is no need for further revelation because it was once for all given to the saints. If there was additional information that would contradict scripture above. Who would deliver the additional info? Scripture above says if an apostle or even an angel delivered some that contradicts scripture he was to be accursed. Mormons, 7th Day Adventist , Jehovah Witnesses come to mind.

      Matthew 23:9 KJVS
      [9] And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
      1 Timothy 4:3 KJVS
      [3] Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

      It’s almost like the Holy Spirit knew the lies the Catholic Church would push on the world.

  19. Danica says:

    The Bible did not drop from heaven when Jesus ascended. The Bible was not written by, but was compiled and provided to us by, the Catholic Church. The apostles did not teach from ‘the Bible’ as we have it today – they passed on tradition. The foundations of Christianity, namely the Trinity, the Incarnation, Crucifixion, Resurrection, and Ascension of Christ were given in the first three centuries through tradition. There was no proper bible, not as we know it, until around approximately 400AD. The teachings of Catholicism are not contrary to Biblical teaching – they only appear contrary due to incorrect interpretation of Catholic teaching. The very symbol on the banner of your site is Catholic, given to the Church by Constantine (who, after converting from paganism, became Catholic). While the history of the Christogram is disputed, the most agreed upon origin is with Constantine’s vision prior to his conversion. To pretend to understand Catholic teaching when you are clearly not Catholic nor immersed in Catholic theology, and to call Catholics non-Christian, is of the utmost arrogance – not constituted by insight. I appreciate that your intentions are good, but they are underscored by ignorance. Like any other devout and practicing Catholic, I profess belief in the Christian Trinity and worship the Trinity alone, and partake of the Body and Blood of the Second Person of the Trinity as He commanded us to. That makes me Christian.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *