The Catholic Church believes and teaches that Mary, the mother of Jesus, remained a virgin her whole life. However, many Catholics have experienced the incredulity and shock of their Evangelical friends when they share that idea. It seems preposterous and anti-Biblical to them.
Particularly, it seems to many that Matthew 1:25 is a clean refutation to the idea.
Is it? Let's dive in.
The Catholic Church believes and teaches that Mary (Jesus' mother) had only one child: Jesus.
However, many Catholics have experienced the incredulity and shock of their Evangelical friends upon sharing that idea. The notion seems preposterous to them.
So... where do we get that idea from? Is it just an assumption thrown onto the text out of nowhere? Today I want to go over one piece of evidence for this belief.
Today marks the 6th anniversary of a kidney donation journey I began in August of 2016, which culminated in a surgery on December 14th. Shortly after that journey, I decided to write out some notes about my experience. Enjoy!
Today I wanted to address an argument I've encountered regarding the logic of the Papacy. It has to do with the logic of continuing one office while discontinuing others. Let's dive in.
Dear Apologist, Where do Catholics get the idea for the three theological virtues? Are they in the Bible?
I've often said that the possibility of losing one's salvation is the most-taught doctrine in the New Testament. I cover a large sample of them [here]. And yet, I find that almost every Evangelical I've met believes the opposite.
The doctrine of "Once-Saved-Always-Saved" is supported by a few verses. I covered two of them [here]. Today I want to look at another: John 6:37
These are some notes I'm taking in preparation for a chat I'm going to have with some LDS Missionaries.
In a previous entry I introduced the concept of an new version of Sola Scriptura. It is designed to give the same practical result as the original while being more intellectually defensible. I call it "Sola Scriptura Minor".
This version doesn't make the explicit claims that every Christian doctrine (or practice) is contained within the Bible and that any proposed teaching (or practice) must be proved from within its pages. Thus, it doesn't fall victim to the obvious self-refutation problem which plagues Sola Scriptura Major.
One of the topics which Catholic apologists frequently have to address is the doctrine of "Sola Scriptura". This is a doctrine which has something to do with how Christians derive their teachings and it is somehow opposed to the Catholic faith. But.... what is it?
It seems like lately there has been two answers to that question. So that's what I want to go over today.
The most significant cultural trend today is the increase of youths who are identifying as “trans” - born into the body of the wrong sex, a condition also known as “gender dysphoria”. Between 2017 and 2021 the number of kids being diagnosed with gender dysphoria rose by 300%. Many have gone on to receive permanent, life altering surgeries to treat this psychological condition.
Suppose you were asked to explain what Christians believe to a person with no background information at all. The person is a completely blank slate in regard to the Judeo-Christian worldview.
How would you start?
It's a question I've been mulling over. Here's my attempt:
One of the major concerns present in Protestant culture, particularly among Evangelicals, is having an absolute personal guarantee of one's salvation.
The Catholic Church, in contrast, says that this sort of certainty is off limits. We can have confidence (not absolute certainty) of being heavenbound in the present moment, but regarding our future... we need to be humble and pray for perseverance.
So there is a conflict of visions between Evangelicals and Catholics on this matter.
Into that conflict comes 1John 5:13:
"I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life."
With this verse in hand, Evangelicals will say to Catholics:
"You guys say you can't know where you are going when you die. But here is John the Apostle saying we can KNOW we have eternal life. So why would you say you cannot know you have eternal life?"
So... what do we do with this passage?
Sometimes I see people repeating some slogan and think, "That is so stupid. Is that really going to catch on?" But there comes a point where you have to admit that it did catch on - and now it needs a serious response.
Today I want to look at the common meme: Banning abortion means "forced pregnancy" or "forced birth".
Now, normally one would imagine the phrase "forced pregnancy" to mean some kind of nightmare in which the government kidnaps women and impregnates them. But that's not what's being said here. The logic goes like this: “If a woman is prohibited from getting an abortion, then the government is forcing her to remain pregnant and give birth.”
Now, we know intuitively that this is logically upside down. It is a twisted way of describing the situation... but how do we show that? How do we put that intuition to words?
Here is a story I wrote on the eve of my marriage. It was meant to reflect on the journey which got me there.
