The Counsel of Trent

How misused: Horn consistently misrepresents this passage, which clearly states salvation is by grace through faith, not by works. He attempts to reconcile Catholic works-based soteriology by arguing it refers only to 'initial salvation' (often tied to infant baptism) or by claiming Protestants 'divorce it from its context' to deny ongoing works. This diminishes the verse's plain meaning that works are excluded from the basis of salvation, making it a gift of God.

Scripture's answer: Ephesians 2:8-9 explicitly states, 'For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.' The passage clarifies that salvation is entirely a gracious act of God, received through faith, and explicitly *not* a result of human works, either initial or ongoing, to ensure no human boasting. Good works are the *fruit* of salvation (Ephesians 2:10), not its cause or an ongoing condition for its maintenance.

How misused: Horn consistently misinterprets James's teaching on faith and works by conflating the *evidence* of justification with the *means* of justification. He uses James 2 to argue that justification before God is by works, failing to distinguish between Paul's teaching of declarative justification (*before God*) by faith alone and James's teaching of demonstrative justification (*before men*) by works as evidence of true faith. He also dismisses distinctions between 'dead faith' and 'true faith' as Protestant attempts to 'smuggle in' ideas.

Scripture's answer: James 2:24 states, 'You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.' This passage, read in context with the entirety of Scripture (especially Romans 3-4, Galatians 2-3), teaches that true faith, which saves, is never alone but is always accompanied by good works. These works demonstrate the reality of one's faith to others, proving it is a 'living' faith rather than a 'dead' one. James is concerned with the *demonstration* of faith, whereas Paul is concerned with the *ground* of faith. Works are the *fruit* and *evidence* of genuine saving faith, not its cause or co-cause.

How misused: Horn consistently interprets this passage as the foundation for the Papacy and Peter's unique, singular authority as the first Pope, with a transferable succession. He downplays the linguistic distinction between 'petros' (Peter's name) and 'petra' (the rock) and dismisses alternative interpretations where 'the rock' refers to Peter's confession of Christ or Christ Himself as the ultimate foundation. This supports the unbiblical concept of papal supremacy.

Scripture's answer: Matthew 16:18-19 states, 'And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.' While Peter was a prominent apostle and given significant authority, especially in being the first to proclaim the Gospel (Acts 2), the 'rock' can be interpreted as Peter's confession of Yeshua as the Messiah, which is the foundational truth of the church, or Yeshua Himself as the ultimate cornerstone (1 Corinthians 3:11). Peter's authority to 'bind and loose' was also extended to all the apostles (Matthew 18:18). There is no explicit scriptural evidence for a perpetual, singular, infallible office of Pope with universal jurisdiction in the New Testament.

How misused: Horn argues that the word 'theopneustos' (God-breathed) in 2 Timothy 3:16 is misinterpreted by Protestants to mean 'God-breathed' (passive, implying unique infallible origin) for Scripture's exclusive claim to authority. He claims it should be understood actively as 'God-breathing' or 'life-giving,' applying to other traditions, thereby undermining Scripture's unique infallible authority and sufficiency. He also claims that Protestants apply this verse without acknowledging 2 Timothy 3:15 refers to the Old Testament, hence undermining its sufficiency for Christians.

Scripture's answer: 2 Timothy 3:16 states, 'All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.' The term 'theopneustos' indeed means 'God-breathed,' emphasizing the divine origin and unique authority of Scripture. While useful for various purposes, its divine origin establishes its truth and infallibility. The context (2 Timothy 3:15-17) speaks to the sufficiency of 'sacred writings' (which include the Old Testament and implicitly the New Testament) to make one 'wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus' and to equip the servant of God 'for every good work.' This passage supports the sufficiency and ultimate authority of Scripture for doctrine and life, not that it is one of several 'life-giving' traditions.

How misused: Horn consistently refutes the misinterpretation of Numbers 5:11-31 as a 'pro-abortion' text. He argues it describes an ordeal of jealousy focusing on fertility and justice, where the bitter water causes a curse leading to infertility or illness, not an abortion. He correctly points out that this passage does not grant humans the moral right to intentionally end innocent human life.

Scripture's answer: Numbers 5:11-31 describes the 'ordeal of the bitter water' for a woman suspected of infidelity. The ritual's outcome for an unfaithful wife is a swollen abdomen and rotting thigh (Hebrew 'yerek' can mean thigh or loin/genitals), leading to infertility, not an abortion. For a faithful wife, nothing happens. This passage is a judicial test within the Mosaic Law concerning marital fidelity and fertility, not a divinely sanctioned abortion procedure. The phrase 'make her womb discharge and her uterus drop' refers to a curse leading to infertility, not the termination of an existing pregnancy.

How misused: Horn consistently defends the traditional interpretation of Romans 1:26-27 as condemning homosexual behavior, regardless of specific nuances. He rejects scholarly interpretations that attempt to limit Paul's condemnation to cultic prostitution, pederasty, or heterosexuals engaging in same-sex acts. His defense asserts that 'unnatural' refers to God's created order and that these verses broadly condemn consensual same-sex acts as a 'disordering of God's created design.'

Scripture's answer: Romans 1:26-27 states, 'For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.' This passage unequivocally condemns same-sex sexual acts as contrary to God's created order ('natural relations'). Paul grounds this condemnation in creation itself (male and female union), not merely cultic practices or specific forms of exploitation. While acknowledging the original intent, the Locked Thesis views all same-sex sexual acts as contrary to Torah.

How misused: Horn consistently interprets 'malakoi' and 'arsenokoitai' as exclusively referring to active and passive partners in consensual same-sex acts, dismissing interpretations that limit these terms to sexual exploitation, pederasty, or cultic prostitution. His view supports a comprehensive condemnation of homosexual behavior.

Scripture's answer: 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 lists various behaviors that prevent one from inheriting the kingdom of God, including 'malakoi' (often translated as 'effeminate' or 'soft men,' sometimes referring to the passive partner in same-sex acts) and 'arsenokoitai' (often translated as 'sodomites' or 'men who practice homosexuality,' referring to the active partner in same-sex acts). While scholarly debate exists on the precise nuances, the traditional and most common understanding among Christians is that these terms condemn homosexual behavior, as does the Locked Thesis.

How misused: Horn interprets Jesus's prayer for Peter ('I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail') as a unique bestowal of universal authority upon Peter to 'strengthen his brethren,' thereby foundational for the Papacy. This overstates the passage's meaning by inferring an enduring monarchical office rather than a specific prayer for Peter in his impending trial, and for his role in confirming the other apostles.

Scripture's answer: Luke 22:31-32 states, 'Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.' This is a specific prayer for Peter in anticipation of his denial of Yeshua and subsequent restoration, and his role in encouraging the other disciples. It highlights Peter's importance and eventual leadership in the early church, but it does not explicitly establish a perpetual, singular, infallible office of Pope with universal jurisdiction. The 'strengthen your brothers' refers to his pastoral role, shared in varying degrees by other apostles and elders.