On January 18, 2017, two top notch apologists debated the subject of “Can a Christian Lose Their Salvation?” The debaters were Catholic apologist Trent Horn and Calvinist apologist James White. James White has had numerous debates with Catholic apologists and rarely loses against them. With the exception of Robert Sungenis, I would say that no Catholic has won over half of their debates against him. He’s good, I’ll say that much.
Trent Horn is an apologist with Catholic Answers. He’s only done a few debates but the few have been quite good. This was his first debate against Calvinism.
This topic is interesting because it is not a Catholic vs Protestant topic. It’s the historic view of Christianity including Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Nestorianism and much of Protestantism against one faction of Protestantism. Trent Horn pointed out in his closing statement the legion of great theologians throughout history who have rejected this doctrine, including Martin Luther. In other words, there are Protestants who believe in Sola Scriptura, treasure the Scriptures and oppose the Catholic Church just as much a Dr. White does, yet they reject this doctrine.
Both opening statements were good. Both came well researched and ready with their scriptural citations. The rebuttals were not much different. Neither side clearly got the upper hand. The cross-examination was where things got interesting. They both got two ten-minute portions to cross-examine the other. Not much happened in the first two cross-examinations, however in White’s second cross-examination he drew first blood. He bombarded Horn with John 6 and overwhelmed him. I’m a little shocked that Horn was not more prepared since he seemed to be prepared for many of his other arguments.
Horn came right back at White during his second cross-examination with Galatians 5:4. At this point he had White on the ropes and things seemed to have turned. He easily made up the ground that he had lost in the previous cross-examination. I was especially happy that he used this verse since I believe that this verse alone is the silver bullet against this doctrine, but it’s rarely ever used. I’m glad that Horn was able to show how effective it can be.
The next portion was the question period. Again, neither side took the upper hand. Toward the end, White seemed to get frustrated. It’s not clear why but I’m going to assume that it’s because he’s usually dominating Catholics by this point of the debate and he wasn’t. He wasn’t losing but he certainly didn’t have the upper hand. The closing statements were similar. Neither took a decisive lead. White had to throw out the Assumption of Mary in his closing statement as he usually does against Catholics but I honestly don’t think it helped.
So who won? I’d like to give this victory to Horn as he argued very well. However, I have to declare it a tie. White and Horn were very even throughout the debate. It’s probably one of the best Catholic vs Protestant debates I’ve ever seen. Two top not apologists brought their A-game and duked it out. Neither of them showed any weakness with the exception of portions of the cross-examination. I can see someone declaring it a slim victory for one or the other but I’ll say it was a tie. Regardless, no honest man can say that either of them won convincingly.
Take the time and watch it. It’s one of the best debates that I’ve seen in a while.
Even though I have had a fall out with White, I still wanted him to win since I take his position. However, Horn shocked and impressed me since he was well prepared. The only time I felt he got discombobulated was in the cross fire in respect to John 6. With that said, it went all up hill for Horn and I felt he actually won decisively. I even scored it 7 to 3 for Horn.
I think the reason why I scored it so high is because as a Protestant I thought White would dominate, which he didn’t, and didn’t think Horn would be that good, which turns out he was. So you came from it as a Catholic and may not realie the impact Horn’s presentation and confidence had on someone viewing it from a Protestant perspective, especially if s/he assumed that this would be a landslide victory for White, which it clearly was not.
White’s frustration was a clear indication to me that he knew he wasn’t doing too good. To further prove this, White had to do a DL show a few days after this debate teaching people how to evaluate the debate so as to see who really won: http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php/2017/01/24/accurately-evaluating-debates/
This is clear proof he knew he didn’t do too good, otherwise why even bother doing such a show? I personally took this as an insult, since this assumes that if anyone thought that Horn won then that meant they really don’t know how to evaluate debates. Really arrogant and condescending if you ask me.
I did see your initial review of you scoring it for Horn. I think it was just too close to be lopsided like 7 to 3. In my opinion it was razor thin.
I do think White was mad at himself that he didn’t at least get a clear victory. This came out during the end of the questions, the closing statement and his DL where he talked about evaluating debates.
While I consider it a tie, I think White considers it a loss because he didn’t get the result he wanted hence the damage control DL on evaluating debates. Horn did mention that they both live in the same city so they could probably do more debates in the future, especially considering that its 2017 – the big 500.
Hi Allan,
Good debate. As you know, it is difficult for one to be truly objective when determining the outcome of debates, but I think you are correct in your assessment that this debate was a draw.
Have you listened to the Matatics/White debate on eternal security? [LINK]
Their debate concerning sola scriptura is quite good (IMO) [LINK]
Grace and peace,
David
To be honest, I haven’t listened to a whole bunch of Matatics debates. I have listened to the Sola Scriptura debates with him and White. I’ve also listened to another one to do with Mary but not any others.
I think the best debates against White are those by Robert Sungenis. The ones on Sola Fide, Purgatory, and Papal Infallibility are my favourites. The two debates on the Mass were good as well. I feel that on his debate about the Assumption of Mary, that Sungenis did quite well and similar to the Horn debate, White didn’t get the victory that he wanted.
I think that White knows that he’s lost most of the Sungenis debates and that is because he never promotes them. He always promotes the Fr. Pacwa debates but to be honest, beating up on a liberal Jesuit is not going to convince many Catholics to jump ship.
Hi there. My name is Craig Neil and I’m a Catholic. I remember this debate well. I thought it was a fairly even debate initially, however, when I listened to a review by How to be a Christian on U tube, I then realised that James had failed to answer the point. The debate was can we lose our salvation but James turned the discussion to can GOD loose us etc. But the debate wasn’t can God fail us, rather can we fail and fall from Gods grace. So everything James said we as catholics would agree on as such. However James side stepped the topic. That being the case I believe now James lost the debate as he didn’t stick to the topic.
I am coming from the catholic perspective and have watched many debates in different topics. Typically, I find the catholic perspective the strongest and I converted to the faith personally after studying the early church fathers and these issues. I state this because my experience has lead me to come into most debates I watch and assume the catholic will have the stronger argument. I must admit, I was surprised by James White strength. He’s a very talented debater.
When I watched it a second time and focused more on substance, I do believe Trent had the upper hand. James needed to offer some interesting explanations of verses and Trent didn’t need to. Further, the point that Trent made near the end when he answered the question about what he thought was strongest with James argument about how James is using a few verses and ignoring / creating clever explanations for all the rest is how I viewed it. The Bible seemed to much more strongly support Trent’s position in my opinion.