So basically the good doctor is claiming that the OT is not authoritative. Which means there's no reason to conclude that the NT is authoritative, either. Which means Matt. 16:18-19 is not authoritative (early churchmen didn't agree on what Jesus meant in that passage, either). Which means the church of Rome doesn't have a leg to stand on. Good job, doctor!

Get to Confession STAT!

Thanks much for this video.

Let' hear the opinion of the Orthodox Church and even the Coptic Church....

The apostolic succession is a gift of God.

Why does the Catholic Church allow child marriage. Before 1917 the church allowed 12-year-old girls and 14-year-old boys to get married to someone no matter how much older. A 12-year-old is only 3 years older than Aisha when she had sex with Muhammad at 53. According to the church, it would been okay if she was 12 with a 53-year-old. Even though Aisha didn't have a period yet she could have had a period at 9. A 9 and 12-year-old are still going through puberty. That is hypocritical to say it's not okay for a 9-year-old but it's okay for a 12-year-old. Even though the church raised the minimum to 14 for girls and 16 for boys they still have no age restriction. Meaning a 14-year-old and a 50-year-old could marry. Even if it doesn't happen often the problem is the church allows it to. Is it because there Christians too that's what makes it okay?

I feel like some of Apostolic churches are a little invisible.... We can see immersion of EOC that is great but not enough... for me....

But the Mass IS in the Bible! You just don’t understand it. Watch Dr Scott Hahn video on conversion to Catholicism. Just bc you don’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

1/ The first religion was founded when the first conman met the first fool. The concept of 'sin' was conceived to keep gullible people under the thumb of a ludicrous clergy. It had to be backed up with absurd threats of eternal torture. No 'loving' 'god' thing or parent, would ever create a torture chamber to fry its own children alive for all eternity. That is absurd. 2/Catholicism has to be one of the most absurd of all the religions mankind ever invented, and I speak as an ex-catholic. It is one of the most successful financial scams ever perpetrated on mankind. As to eating the literal body and blood of the supposed creator of the universe, during mass. That is, demonstrably, an utterly absurd claim, for which the Catholic church has never produced a single piece of verified evidence.

Glory to God an Christ. Amen.

Oh the out of context and taking words to claim it says what it doesn’t. Jesus, Martha and Paul made it very clear: 1 Corinthians 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that 👉SLEPT.👈 26 The LAST enemy that shall be DESTROYED IS DEATH. So people claim immortality immediately after death? But according to the bible ONLY AT THE RESURRECTION: 52 In moment, in the twinkling of an eye, 👉at the LAST trump👈: for the trumpet shall sound, and the DEAD shall be raised INCORRUPTIBLE, and we shall be changed. 53 For this CORRUPTIBLE must put on INCORRUPTION, and this 👉MORTAL👈 must put on 👉IMMORTALITY👈. Martha the sister of Lazarus even knew this: Martha said to Him, “I know that he will rise again 👉in the resurrection👈 👉at the last day👈.” John 11:24 Jesus said the last day himself: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and 👉I will raise him up at the last day.👈” John 6:44 Daniel 12:2 “And many of them that 👉sleep in the dust of the earth👈 shall 👉awake, 👉some to everlasting life, and 👉some to shame and everlasting contempt.” Why “raise again” when they are already alive in heaven? There’s literally no point of going back into our body and raise again when were already raised and immortal according to non soul sleep believers. Paul says otherwise above that we get IMMORTALITY ONLY AT THAT TIME!!

Mormons use to take the exact same blood oath. In fact, it’s rumored that Joseph Smith was murdered by the Freemasons because he copied so many Freemason rituals into the Mormon church.

This is great

Errors. Fr. Pacwa thinks that Freemasonry was founded in 1716. He is wrong. Freemasonry was founded way way before that. In fact the first RECORDED making of a Mason was in October 1646, at a place called Warrington, England and it was a very famous man indeed, one Elias Ashmole. In actual fact, although there are many theories, nobody knows when, where or even why, Freemasonry started. You'd think anyone who had studied a subject enough to have the temerity to criticise it, would be in full posession of the facts. The fact that he does not, should be a clue that he is groping around in the dark. He asserts that Freemasonry advocates "social climbing". In Freemasonry, that is strictly forbidden. No man should expect, ask for or be offered any form of personal advantage by virtue of his membership. He intimates that a Freemason shouldn't be around when trying to educate the family in the Catholic faith. Another mistake. A Freemason is bound to let other people choose their own faith and to respect that choice, whether they agree with that choice or not and not to engage in any form of coercion. It's a real shame, that the same cannot be said for people like Fr. Pacwa! At the end of the clip, Fr. Pacwa uses the familiar emotive language, to shore up his incredibly weak assertion of the physical penalties due, should the obligation be broken. He uses the phrase "blood oath", which is, simply untrue. His assertion, is that on breaking the obligation, physical penalties would be paid, to wit, the cutting of the throat and the removal of the tongue. While these penalties are indeed uttered by the Master of the Lodge, it is stated just after, that these are ancient penalties and no longer apply. This is a familiar tactic used by such people as Fr. Pacwa. It is called being "economical with the truth". Those penalties were indeed employed during ancient times as a punishment for all manner of crimes, in the time of King Solomon. However, in the modern age, such penalties are regarded as barbaric (and rightly so!) and the absolute worst thing that will happen to any Mason, should be break his obligation, would be his expulsion from Freemasonry. Freemasons are not above the law. But please don't take my word for it. Read it for yourself in any ritual book. Simply Google Craft Freemasonry ritual books for sale and buy one! Anyone can own one. No special passwords, no secret sogns. Just buy one and see for yourself. I hope those reading this will do so with an objective, rational and reasonable eye. I welcome any questions that you may have.

It always amazes me that some religious people, nearly always Catholics, consider that Freemasonry is imcompatible with their faith. This is based on a very simple error. One which they refuse to admit that they have made...through arrogance...and that mistake, is that Freemasonry is a religion. An associated reason is that they say Freemasonry refuses to acknowledge that their deity is the one and only true deity. I am puzzled. Why SHOULD Freemasonry say that? Do Catholics rail against golf clubs because they do not state the Cathlic deity is the only one? Do Catholics rail against Movie studios, because they do not insist there is one god and that is the Catholic one? Of course not. It's the same for Freemasonry. We are about as much to do with a given faith, than the golf club or the movie studio. So why do Catholics (and many others) assume we are a religion? It's obvious to me. It's our insistence that a man must have, as the central figure in his life, a single supreme being, responsible for the creation of the universe. THEY assume it is because we follow a religion. Wrong. it is done for the same reason a person may place their hand on a holy book when appeatring as a witness in a trial. The same reason, a member of the armed forces would do the same and the same reason the President of the United States would do the same. Simply to solemnise a promise. To make it as serious as it can be...in the presence of what the person taking the obligation considers to be, the ultimate power in the universe. You have my word, that all Freemasons retain the same religious affilitations that they had before they became Freemasons and that there are no further religious requirements asked of them.

do you think viganos warnings point to them?

Hello You have to understand that people may already know this, they just think at some point errors came in and it went astray I think the problem is not people going around saying “I don’t want to follow apostolic tradition!” Nobody does that The problem people have is that they don’t think Catholic tradition lines up with apostolic tradition Obviously a lot of people didn’t or you wouldn’t have hundreds of years of ecumenical councils For example, there’s no evidence of asking the dead for intercession until 300AD, so people are going to question that and disagree with the practice Claiming unbroken succession doesn’t mean there’s no hesitation of teachings See the Pharisees, who might claim unbroken succession to Moses, yet we know Jesus rebuked their false traditions

When you bowed down to any statue, or when you pray to any statue, or when you pray to any human dead or alive, or when serve or pledge allegiance to objects, symbols, or images, in the likeness of anything in heaven above or in the likeness of anything in the earth below, it is idolatry (Exodus 20:3-5), and ((Deuteronomy (4:15-19). In Jesus name, flee from idolatry (1 Corinthians 10:14).