Apologetics for the Masses - Issue #88

This is going to be a relatively short newsletter this week. I just wanted to follow up on what I said in last week’s newsletter about Joe Mizzi not responding to questions or arguments that are put before him, rather he simply ignores them. I put several questions at the end of the last issue, and I pretty much guaranteed you that Dr. Mizzi would not answer them. And, lo and behold…he didn’t surprise me.

Somehow I can’t imagine the Apostle Paul ignoring questions asked of him, can you? The rabbis were very adept at asking difficult questions…just look at some of the stuff they threw at Jesus…and would have questioned Paul extensively every time he went into a synagogue – which was the first place he went to when he came to a new town. If he had ignored their questions in the same way that Joe Mizzi ignores the questions that Catholics put to him, I doubt he would have converted a single Jew, ever! If he wouldn’t, or couldn’t, answer their questions, they would have known he was a fraud, and he would have been! Anyone who touts a religious belief that cannot stand under the weight of even simple questioning, does not tout a religious belief that is of God. This is one of the problems with Islam – questions about Islam are oftentimes answered with threats, rather than real answers. Why do so many Islamic leaders, lay and religious, fear the questioning of their beliefs? Why does Joe Mizzi not answer questions about his beliefs?

Joe Mizzi claims that his mission is to convert Catholics, but I ask you, Joe, how can you claim that you are interested in our salvation, when you won’t answer our questions?! Or is it that you can’t answer our questions?

So, below are the questions that were sent to Dr. Mizzi by a reader of this newsletter, and then we have Dr. Mizzi’s answer, such as it is, and below that are my comments.

Challenge/Response/Strategy

Questions from Last Newsletter for Joe Mizzi

1) Could the Holy Spirit, through the universal Church (which is the Body of Christ), have enabled believers – particularly the Bishops (the successors of the Apostles), in the first few hundred years of the Church, to faithfully and accurately pass along the traditions Paul taught by “word of mouth”? Yes, or no?

2) Are you infallible in your interpretations of Scripture? Was Martin Luther infallible in his? Or John Calvin? Yes, or no?

3) Is the canon of the Bible infallible? In other words, does the Bible contain exactly the number of books, and the correct books, that it should contain? Yes, or no?

4) If you answered, “Yes,” to #3, then by what authority do you believe this to be so? The Bible, or oral tradition?

5) If I were to deny that the Letter of James was inspired Scripture, by what authority would you declare me to be wrong? Does the Bible say James is “God-breathed?” Yes, or no?

6) If Bible-only Christians can get it wrong when it comes to their interpretation of the Bible in regard to traditions, as you stated can be the case, then can they get it wrong when it comes to their interpretations regarding doctrines? Yes, or no?

-————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Dr. Mizzi’s Response:

Hi there, thanks for your series of questions…if you want to reach the conclusion that we, evangelicals, are fallible …well, we admit that from the very beginning. We are fallible, and only by the grace of God do we believe a single truth or do a single good deed. What about you?

Joe

-————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

My Response to Dr. Mizzi

Dr. Joe Mizzi, did exactly as I said he would – he avoided answering simple and direct questions put to him about his beliefs. He avoided answering the arguments that are a direct response to his arguments. By his inability to answer even simple yes or no questions, he shows the weakness not just of his reasoning, but of his beliefs. Any belief that cannot stand up to the scrutiny of simple logic, is not a belief that is of God.

He read the questions put to him, but chose to only partially answer one of them – question #2. Why is that the only one he answers? Because that’s the only one he can answer in such a way as to obfuscate what he is really saying. It’s the only one he can answer in such a way as to hopefully give him a means of escape from the inescapable logic of the questions.

Notice how he seems to answer Question #2, but he doesn’t really answer it. He tries to deftly avoid the main thrust of the question about his infallibility. He admits that he is fallible, but he words it in such a way as to avoid admitting that his interpretations of Scripture are fallible. Joe is basically saying that yes, he’s fallible, but his interpretations of Scripture are infallible.

There is a logical inconsistency here that he simply will not admit to. He cannot know the truth if his knowledge of the truth depends on his fallible interpretation of the Bible. A fallible interpretation could, by definition, be wrong. Since his interpretation could be wrong, his belief about what is and is not truth could be wrong. But, he can’t admit to this and at the same time claim Catholics are absolutely wrong in what they believe. He can’t know we are absolutely wrong in what we believe, if his belief is based on his fallible interpretation of the Bible; which, since it’s fallible, is subject to error.

Do you see the games Dr. Mizzi has to play in order to avoid the questions he is asked? Stop playing games, Joe, and just answer the questions.

Question for Dr. Mizzi: Since you admit that you are fallible, will you admit that your interpretations of Scripture are fallible? In other words, that your interpretations of Scripture could be wrong? Yes or no?

Now, he didn’t even touch the other five questions. Why not? Because the answers thoroughly refute and discredit his arguments.

If he answers, “Yes,” to #1, then it completely contradicts his argument that one must actually hear the Apostle himself teach, in order to consider those Apostolic teachings the “Word of God.” In Joe’s attempted refutation of my arguments against Sola Scriptura, he argued that “Sacred Tradition” – the oral transmission of the teachings of the Apostles from one generation to the next – is impossible because for something to be considered “oral tradition” it has to be heard directly from the mouth of an Apostle. And, succeeding generations didn’t hear it directly from the mouth of an Apostle – because the Apostles were dead – therefore, oral tradition that is passed on after the death of the Apostles cannot be considered Apostolic teaching.

But, if he admits that the Holy Spirit could indeed have enabled the bishops to faithfully and accurately pass along Apostolic teaching by “word of mouth,” then he has demolished the foundation for his argument – that something has to be heard directly from the mouth of an Apostle in order to be considered an Apostolic tradition.

Yet, if he answers, “No,” to Question #1, he denies the power of the Holy Spirit. Hmmm…whatever shall he do. I know…Joe, don’t answer the question!!!!

We’ve already discussed his predicament in relation to Question #2, so let’s look at Question #3. Is the canon of the Bible infallible? In other words, are we absolutely certain that all of the books that are supposed to be in the Bible, and only the books that are supposed to be in the Bible, are actually in the Bible?

Well, if he answers, “Yes,” then he has a problem with Question #4 – by what authority do you believe the canon of the Bible to be infallible, the Bible or tradition? It has to be one or the other. There is no third option. But, Joe knows it can’t be the Bible, because he knows the Bible nowhere contains a list of the books that are supposed to be in the Bible. It’s not found in Mark, in Galatians, in Malachi…it’s not in the Bible. Which means, Joe knows the canon of the Bible is infallible only by tradition. But, that would have to be oral tradition – the same oral tradition that Joe doesn’t believe in.

Yet, if he answers, “No,” to Question #3, then he’s put himself in the position of saying that we can’t be sure we have the right books in the Bible. Which means we can’t be sure about the inerrancy and inspiration of any of the books of the Bible. Hmmm…whatever shall he do? I know…Joe, don’t answer the question!!!!

On to Question 5, Joe confronts yet another problem. If he answers, “Yes,” the Bible does indeed say that the Letter of James is “God-breathed” – that it is inspired of the Holy Spirit – then he would have to tell us where the Bible says that. Which, he of course knows, he wouldn’t be able to do. Because the Bible nowhere says that about the Letter of James. And, since he can’t point to the Bible as the source of his belief that James is indeed the inspired Word of God, then he is only left with the question: Then what is the source of your belief that the Letter of James is the inspired Word of God? Which, back to the analysis of Questions 3 and 4, would mean that his only other option for knowing that the Letter of James is the inspired Word of God would be…tradition. But, he doesn’t believe in tradition. It’s contrary to Scripture he says.

Yet, if he answers, “No,” and admits that the Bible nowhere tells us that the Letter of James is the inspired Word of God, then under his Sola Scriptura theology, what option is he left with if we take away the option of appealing to Scripture? Nothing! He’s left with nothing. Hmmm…whatever shall he do? I know…Joe, don’t answer the question!!!!

Lastly, Joe is faced with one more insurmountable difficulty (at least, for his theology) in Question #6. If Joe says, “Yes,” then he has totally demolished the underpinnings of his dogmatic declarations regarding the truthfulness of Sola Scriptura – that the Bible alone is all we need to come to a sure knowledge of the truth.

Joe has freely admitted, in his attempted refutation of my arguments on Sola Scriptura, that Bible-only Christians could misinterpret the Scriptures in regards to traditions. He freely admitted, although I don’t think he realized it at the time, that Bible-only Christians, guided by the Holy Spirit, could practice traditions that they thought were in the Bible, only to have those traditions later “amended” by the interpretations of other Bible-only Christians; who were subject to having their “amended” interpretations “amended” even further by future generations of Bible-only Christians; who would, of course, have their amendments of amended Bible-only traditions subject to further amending by future generations of Bible-only Christians; and on and on forever. No one could be sure they had ever really gotten it right.

Joe, admitting that this is the case, is then faced with the very logical question: If they can make mistakes in “small” matters – such as non-doctrinal traditions – when it comes to their interpretations of the Bible; how can they be trusted to accurately interpret the serious and weightier doctrinal matters? Doesn’t Jesus say if you can’t be trusted in small matters, then you most certainly cannot be trusted in larger matters? If I can’t trust the interpretations of Bible-only folks in small matters, how can I trust them in larger matters? Joe really put his foot in it when he admitted that Bible-only interpretations are subject to being “amended.”

Yet, if Joe says, “No,” that Bible-only Christians cannot make mistakes when intepreting the Bible regarding doctrinal matters, then he has to reconcile that with his admission that Bible-only Christians are fallible, as well as reconcile that with his admission that they do indeed make mistakes in interpreting the Bible when it comes to tradition. Where is the passage of the Bible that states: “While the Holy Spirit may lead one into a mistake when interpreting Scripture in regards to tradition, He will never lead anyone into a mistake when it comes to interpreting Scripture in regards to doctrine?” If the Holy Spirit is truly guiding you, you won’t make any mistakes – on tradition or doctrine – when it comes to interpreting the Bible. Where does the Bible say to watch out for mistaken interpretations regarding tradition, but not to worry about mistaken interpretations regarding doctrine?

Joe knows those scriptural passages do not exist. Hmmm…whatever shall he do? I know…Joe, don’t answer the question!!!!

So, I would love to have everyone send Dr. Mizzi these questions, and keep sending them until he answers them. They are:

1) Could the Holy Spirit, through the universal Church (which is the Body of Christ), have enabled believers – particularly the Bishops (the successors of the Apostles), in the first few hundred years of the Church, to faithfully and accurately pass along the traditions Paul taught by “word of mouth”? Yes, or no?

2) Are you infallible in your interpretations of Scripture? Was Martin Luther infallible in his? Or John Calvin? Yes, or no? (Note: this question concerns not your personal infallibility, but the infallibility of your scriptural interpretations.)

3) Is the canon of the Bible infallible? In other words, does the Bible contain exactly the number of books, and the correct books, that it should contain? Yes, or no?

4) If you answered, “Yes,” to #3, then by what authority do you believe this to be so? The Bible, or oral tradition?

5) If I were to deny that the Letter of James was inspired Scripture, by what authority would you declare me to be wrong? Does the Bible say James is “God-breathed?” Yes, or no?

6) If Bible-only Christians can get it wrong when it comes to their interpretation of the Bible in regard to traditions, as you stated can be the case, then can they get it wrong when it comes to their interpretations regarding doctrines? Yes, or no?

Dr. Mizzi’s email address is:

Now, Joe gets upset when I publish his private email address in my newsletter. He doesn’t want it out there on the internet where spammers could pick it up, he says. Yet, this is the email address from which he sends out his lies about Catholic teaching. Well, Joe, I got news for you. Your email address will remain on my website until such time as you answer the six questions that have been put before you.

Joe, this is the task set before you. If you truly care about the salvation of Catholics, and about not wanting your email published on my website, then answer questions 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 with simple yes or no answers. Answer question 4 with either: “the Bible” or “oral tradition” or something else that you might come up with, and I assume that answer would be the same for the first half of question 5.

If, after answering the questions, you wish to add explanation below your answers, then by all means feel free to do so. But, again, until I get the yes-no answers to those questions, I will hold your email address hostage on my website.

One last thing: Joe asked a question and, unlike Joe, I am not afraid of directly answering his questions. He said: “We are fallible, and only by the grace of God do we believe a single truth or do a single good deed. What about you?”

I answer, yes, I am fallible. However, I have a guide who can, by the grace of God, with the authority given to him by Jesus Christ, through the Apostles, infallibly decide on matters of faith and morals – which would include all matters related to Scripture. Do you, Joe, have such a guide? Do you have a guide who can infallibly decide on disputes over Scripture? A guide who can infallibly decide such things as what books should and should not be in Scripture? Do you have such a guide, Dr. Mizzi?

In Conclusion

Alright folks, all of you who have ever had contact with Dr. Mizzi, please cut and paste and send along those questions. And, even if you haven’t ever had contact with Dr. Mizzi, please feel free to send them along as well. If 8000 people send him these questions, and keep sending them until they are answered, then maybe he will think twice about spreading his lies about the Catholic Faith. Maybe he’ll change his website to “Just Not for Catholics.”

Hope you have (or had) a great weekend!

How to be added to, or removed from, the list

If this newsletter was forwarded to you by a friend, and you would like to be added to our distribution list, all you have to do is go to www.biblechristiansociety.com and click on the “Newsletter” page to sign up. It will take you about 10 seconds.

$RemovalHTML$

Share this newsletter on: