You're saying that the Apostles authorized the founder of each Of the tens of thousands of Protestant denominations to set up his own denomination. That is nonsensical and unhistorical.

Matthew 16:18

Wow! What a terrible thing to say (and inaccurate).

This narrator is reading from a teleprompter.

From a Catholic theological perspective, the belief that Apostolic authority is transmitted by institutional decree is indeed supported by Scripture. In Matthew 16:18-19, Jesus tells Peter, "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." This passage is interpreted as Jesus establishing Peter as the leader of the Church, with a unique authority that would be passed on. Moreover, in Acts 1:20-26, we see an example of Apostolic Succession when the Apostles select Matthias to replace Judas. They pray and cast lots to choose a new member, demonstrating that the authority could be transferred. Additionally, in 2 Timothy 2:2, Paul instructs Timothy, "And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others." This shows a model of passing on teachings and authority to subsequent leaders. The Catholic Church believes it is the continuation of the community established by Jesus and the Apostles, led by the bishops in communion with the Pope, who carry the teaching authority (Magisterium) of the Church. In John 20:21-23, Jesus says to the Apostles, "As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." And with that, he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven," conferring spiritual authority on the Apostles and their successors. Furthermore, in 1 Timothy 3:15, Paul refers to the Church as "the pillar and foundation of the truth," implying that the Church has a unique role in preserving and proclaiming the truth of the faith. The roles of the Pope, cardinals, and bishops are seen as a continuation of the leadership established by the Apostles. The Pope, as the Bishop of Rome, is considered the successor of Peter, while the cardinals and bishops are seen as successors of the Apostles, entrusted with teaching, sanctifying, and governing the Church. In Matthew 28:19-20, Jesus commands the Apostles to "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you." This Great Commission includes the authority to teach and govern. Therefore, the belief that Apostolic authority is transmitted through institutional decree is supported by Scripture and early Church practices. The selection of Matthias and the instructions to Timothy indicate a succession of authority. The Catholic Church distinguishes between the personal failings of its leaders and the divine authority vested in their offices. Additionally, the Catholic Church asserts that it has the authority to develop and clarify doctrine, guided by the Holy Spirit. This authority is seen as rooted in the promises and commands of Jesus to the Apostles. Thus, from a Catholic viewpoint, Apostolic authority is divinely instituted, passed down through succession, and maintained by the Church's Magisterium, irrespective of individual failings.

@@joebuckle365 Thank you for your reply. "This passage is interpreted as Jesus establishing Peter as the leader of the Church, with a unique authority that would be passed on." The issue is, is that interpretation conditioned by need to establish the RCC or is it obvious from the text? As such it is an assumption - and the Church is not founded on assumptions. Another more credible interpretation is this ( I quote from a source to save time!) "The word for “Peter,” Petros, means “a small stone” (John 1:42). Jesus used a play on words here with petra (“on this rock”) which means “a foundation boulder,” as in Matthew 7:24, 25 when He described the rock upon which the wise man builds his house. Peter himself uses the same imagery in his first epistle: the church is built of numerous small petros, “living stones,” (1 Peter 2:5) who, like Peter, confess that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, and those confessions of faith are the bedrock of the church." Yes authority (as in the case of Matthias) can be transferred but that does not establish the RCC. When a Pastor resigns and another is appointed there is a transference of authority but that example cannot conceivably be used to establish the RCC. Transference of authority is not disputed. What sort of transference and the conditions of transference - spiritual or institutional, is the issue. The 2 Tim. quote again requires a great leap of imagination to assume it establishes the type of apostolic authority the RCC claims. So assumption follows assumption - and there is nothing definitive. The Church, according to Jesus has to be founded on His Words, and the RCC doesn't have those words. That is why it has been so successfully opposed by those that take scripture as definitive. The John 20 quote says nothing of the RCC. It is an assumption, a huge assumption to maintain it. The 'you' being sent are disciples and those moved by the Holy Spirit. I have received the Holy Spirit, have been led by the Holy Spirit, filled with the Holy Spirit, gifted by the Holy Spirit, changed by the Holy Spirit , as have millions and millions of others, with no Pope, Cardinal, RCC priest involved. Jesus will not go against His Word and so His word is to disciples not Popes etc. The Holy Spirit has demonstrated this. "The Pope, as the Bishop of Rome, is considered the successor of Peter, while the cardinals and bishops are seen as successors of the Apostles, " Yes but that is the assumption of the RCC. It remains an assumption. However if it was true then Protestants and there are millions of us would be fake believers, unsaved, unannointed, unforgiven, etc. The fact that they are saved etc shows that the Holy Spirit doesn't run the Kingdom by the RC belief - and therefore that belief has to be false. The problem RCism has starts with the bible and the attempt to build an eclessiastical edifice on verses that are unrelated to the declared final product. The church is founded on the explicit teachings of the Apostles and Prophets, not on assumptions and forced interpretations. God bless you.

@@jamesmg4694 From a Catholic theological perspective, the interpretation that Jesus established Peter as the leader of the Church, with a unique authority that would be passed on, is not merely an assumption conditioned by the need to establish the Roman Catholic Church (RCC). It is derived from a holistic understanding of the scriptural context and the historical continuity of the Church's teaching. Let's address each point in detail. Firstly, the interpretation of Matthew 16:18-19, where Jesus says to Peter, "You are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my church," is seen as Jesus giving Peter a unique foundational role. The wordplay between "Petros" (small stone) and "petra" (large rock) is understood by Catholics as indicating that Peter himself is the rock on which Jesus builds His Church, given his role as the first among the Apostles. While there are other interpretations, the Catholic view is supported by early Church Fathers and the consistent teaching of the Church. Additionally, the promise to give Peter the "keys of the kingdom of heaven" and the authority to "bind and loose" is seen as conferring a specific leadership role, which Catholics believe is passed on through his successors, the Bishops of Rome (Popes). The selection of Matthias in Acts 1:20-26 to replace Judas is indeed an example of Apostolic Succession. This event illustrates the early Church's understanding that apostolic ministry and authority were to continue through successors. This process was not just a simple transference of a pastoral role but a continuation of the apostolic mission and authority, which Catholics believe is institutional and sacramental. Regarding 2 Timothy 2:2, where Paul instructs Timothy to entrust his teachings to reliable people who will also teach others, the Catholic interpretation sees this as an early reference to the continuation of apostolic teaching authority. This passage, along with others, forms part of the scriptural foundation for the Church's understanding of apostolic succession and the authority vested in the bishops as the successors of the Apostles. In John 20:21-23, Jesus breathes on the Apostles and says, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven." Catholics interpret this as Jesus giving the Apostles the authority to forgive sins, which is seen as part of the sacramental authority passed down through apostolic succession. While the passage does not mention the RCC explicitly, it supports the Catholic understanding of the sacramental authority given to the Apostles and their successors. The Catholic Church does not see its teachings as based on assumptions but on the continuity of the apostolic tradition and the authoritative interpretation of Scripture. The belief in the Pope as the successor of Peter and the bishops as successors of the Apostles is rooted in the historical practice and the writings of the early Church Fathers. This understanding has been consistently taught and upheld throughout the history of the Church. The effectiveness of the Holy Spirit in the lives of Protestants does not negate the Catholic belief in apostolic succession or the authority of the Church. Catholics acknowledge that the Holy Spirit works beyond visible boundaries and that many Christians outside the Catholic Church are genuinely led by the Spirit. However, Catholics believe that the fullness of the means of salvation subsists within the Catholic Church, which includes the sacraments and apostolic authority. The Church, according to Catholic teaching, is indeed founded on the explicit teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. The interpretation of these teachings, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, has led to the development of the Church's doctrines and structure. The Catholic Church views its authority as divinely instituted, based on the words and actions of Jesus and the Apostles, and upheld through apostolic succession and the magisterial teaching authority. In summary, the Catholic Church's understanding of apostolic authority and succession is deeply rooted in Scripture, tradition, and the continuous teaching of the Church. It is not based on assumptions but on a comprehensive interpretation of biblical texts and the historical practices of the early Christian community.

@@joebuckle365 Thank you for your reply. I notice the repetition of 'the Catholic interpretation'. Interpretation is necessary when the text is not explicit. Thus assumption rules the narrative. Sometimes interpretation is warranted because it is very clear what was meant and does no violence to other texts, but with the RC that isn't the case. The Church is founded on the teaching of the Apostles and Prophets, not on assumptions about what they preached. 'Do not go beyond what is written' says Paul in 1 Cors. 4:6. Yet the RCC goes well beyond what is written. If the RCC didn't exist no one reading the NT would ever create it. There is nothing about ecclesiastical institutions, Popes, Cardinals etc. there is certainly nothing about new Apostles creating new doctrines (praying to Mary and the Saints). The Early Church Fathers were men, their writings may be of historical importance but they are not divinely inspired and should not be used to create a church. There is a reason they are not scripture. there is no evidence that Peter created the Papal system. Apostolic authority described not a permanent grace of authority on an individual but of the succession of Apostolic teaching. Those that persistently deviate from Biblical authority should be caste out of the church, they have departed from Apostolic authority in doctrine and morality. Once the authority is given as institutional that discipline becomes difficult without destroying the institution. As to accepting that the Holy Spirit is available to non Catholics, well that means that salvation with all that the Holy Spirit brings (He dwells in us) is available without Popes, Cardinals etc. We have fellowship with the Father through Jesus by the Holy Spirit - and that can't be topped! Incidentally to further press my claim I 'm reminded of: Munificentissimus Deus of Pope Pius XII, issued November 1, 1950; 44. by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory. 45. Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith. 47. It is forbidden to any man to change this, our declaration, pronouncement, and definition or, by rash attempt, to oppose and counter it. If any man should presume to make such an attempt, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul." So the Pope declares Protestants under the wrath of God having completely fallen away from the faith - all because we don't believe something that isn't in the bible! This declaration by Pius X11 is made Ex Cathedra and is therefore binding and infallible, it cannot be undone! Yet it is wrong. So much for Papal infallibility and Institutional Apostolic Succession. When you build your house on the sand it will collapse. It hasn't collapsed institutionally but biblically it has and thus cannot claim to be the true church. God bless you.

You submit to your authority.

Yes there is. "As the Father sent me, so I send you." It's in the gospel of John.

@@eddardgreybeard Jesus isn't an apostle. He is granted all authority over all creation. The apostles never were.

@@Brian-Ahavah Welcome to the point. The Father granted authority to the son. The son granted authority to the Apostles

@@eddardgreybeard And no where in the Bible do apostles have any authority to grant others. All authority comes from the Father, period. Welcome to the point. I'm not a disciple of Peter or anyone you claim he imparted authority to. I'm a follower of Jesus alone. He alone is the LORD and anyone claiming His title is a liar. Your doctrines and dogma are pagan.

@@Brian-Ahavah Timothy got his authority from Paul. And that's just one example. How was the Church going to last longer than the first line of Apostles if the people that the Apostles chose had no authority? That's why Christ instituted the sacrament of holy orders and Apostlic succession became a thing.

Because the Orthodox are heretical... Protestants share a vast majority of doctrine with papists, they simply fixed the corruption and errors

They did attempt it, but they disagree theologically on some parts of scripture and so just became protestant after that.

@jerry : very relevant comment. Thank You.

And Christ absolutely did not expect anyone to figure it out themselves, he expected you to follow his apostles and their successors.

Why would Orthodxy be the truth, when there have been several Schisms inside Orthodxy. Granted there have been many Schisms in the Catholic Church but the Papal Succession is still happening.

Many years ago a learned man, a member of the Roman Catholic Church, came to Utah and spoke from the stand of Salt Lake Tabernacle. I became well-acquainted with him, and we conversed freely and frankly. A great scholar, with perhaps a dozen languages at his tongue's end, he seemed to know all about theology, law, literature, science and philosophy. One day he said to me: _"You Mormons are all ignoramuses. You don't even know the strength of your own position. It is so strong that there is only one other tenable in the whole Christian world, and that is the position of the Catholic Church. The issue is between Catholicism and Mormonism. If we are right, you are wrong; if you are right, we are wrong; and that's all there is to it. The Protestants haven't a leg to stand on. For, if we are wrong, they are wrong with us, since they were a part of us and went out from us; while if we are right, they are apostates whom we cut off long ago. If we have the apostolic succession from St. Peter, as we calim, there is no need of Joseph Smith and Mormonism; but if we have not that succession, then such a man as Joseph Smith was necessary, and Mormonism's attitude is the only consistent one. It is either the perpetuation of the gospel from ancient times, or the restoration of the gospel in latter day."_ In a pamphlet entitled "The Strength of the Mormon Position," the late Elder Orson F. Whitney, of the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, related the preceeding incident under the heading "A Catholic Utterance":

​@@rconger24JWs think they are the truth as well as the Mormons. That quote can apply to JWs as well and even SDAs.

It seems logical though that had Protestantism not become the norm that Joseph Smith would not have claimed to start his own “church” of Christianity like many had done before him.

​@@TruLuan True JW and SDA share with us a rejection of the creeds. They prefer instead The Bible as their sole authority. But, Joseph Smith Junior went further with his claim to authority. Like our Catholic brothers, we claim Apostolic authority from Peter, James and John. Now my good TruLuan, you are likely thinking "hey wait, that's our pony" and I don't blame you for responding as you have been taught. If I understand your position correctly, Peter and the other apostles gave authority (First Century AD) to the early Bishops, Popes and so forth until today. Is that essentially correct? Our claim is that there was corruption breaking that line during several episodes of history. An apostacy. Therefore, our resurrected Lord Jesus brought back Peter James and John from death (1829AD) to physically lay hands on, ordaining Joseph Smith Junior and Oliver Cowdery to the Melchizedek Priesthood. John the Baptist was also sent ordaining them to the lesser, Aaronic or Levitical Priesthood. That is why we are *_not_* Protestant or Catholic or Orthodox. We are fully Restoration. As far as I know, our JW and SDA Brothers make no similar claim about divine messengers returning to ordain with Jesus' authority. So now, if one re-considers "A Catholic Utterance" above, the sucession of authority from the original apostles can be the only claim or the only position of strength. The Protestants with their 42,000 modern variations do not have "a leg to stand on." Either it stayed, as you claim, or it was necessarily restored anew as we assert. Today, from those 1829 events, we have a new sucession, a *_living_* Prophet and a Quorum of Twelve *_living_* Apostles. These are humble men called and sent forth. We cite Ephesians 2: 19-20, 4: 11-14, Hebrews 5:4, Matthew 10: 40 and more. Thankyou.

@@rconger24 Nothing about he Creeds is un-biblical. Do you even know how the creeds were formulated? It was to make sure heresies were addressed such as Arianism. You guys use the Bible and think the Bishops at the councils didn't? You must not know your Bible then, since it's very easy to prove the trinity with context. We use the Bible too. The difference is Catholics have authority, you guys are going off your own private interpretations.

Agreed Joseph Smith Junior should not be grouped with Luther et al. But not for the reasons listed. Smith was *_Restoration_* not Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant.

Luther declared that anyone who did not follow his new theology would go to hell.

They were fooled by the father of lies (John 8:44) and followed him on their own free will.

So sayeth Pope mmbtalk! So sayeth all the popes, including the Pygmy Pope! No one but God has any authority over us! We are all popes and each of us can interpret the Word of God as we see fit! If you don’t like it, go and form your own religion as long as it ain’t from Rome! Long live a billion popes!😉

Thats a good comment. Why do you think there is so many people leaving, ( All different denominations ) for the Catholic faith? Or, is it meant to look like it is? mmmmmm..

@@joevasanu7459 With your Catholic mindset what you are saying makes sense, but surely in the Old Testament God promised to send His Spirit to teach us and it is by His Spirit that we distinguish true servants from wolves (Jeremiah 31:33, 34) and even the Apostle John says we have the anointing who guides(1 John 2:26,27). Unless you are telling me that only your Popes have got the anointing! By the way the term Pope was first used by Alexandrians in Egypt before the Pope of Rome adopted the title for himself and has nothing to do with the Bible! I also can't understand why Catholics keep perpetuating the lie that to seek to understand scripture is arrogance! 2 Peter 1:21,22, here is referring to the fact that when prophets uttered their messages, it was not based on their own private interpretation, let me paste it here for you and you tell me if it has anything to do with interpretation being the prerogative of Popes!! "knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:20,21)

you invent arguments out of thin air, while ignoring the basic realities of the Catholic Church - you should read a history of the Church, or study one of the Church Fathers of the second or third centuries - just to have a basic knowledge of the life of the Church and its beliefs in those times - for instance, you could study Irenaeus of Lyon, a bishop and theologian of the second century

@@silveriorebelo2920 Fortunately, I am a natural reader of both anticene and postnicene; Irrenheus in his polemics against the Heretics is the one who refers to Rome being organised by Paul and Peter, but his statement is historically deficient, as the Church was established by neither, and most likely it was by those who were converted on the day of Pentecost. That's why when Paul concludes the book of Romans, he greets members of so many churches there but there is no mention of Peter. The only thing historians are agreed about is that both Paul and Peter were executed there by Nero! We also read of Polycarp visiting Anecitus, bishop of Rome to try to and harmonise the Easter date but we that see neither had authority over the other. Even Ignatius, the favourite Bishop of the Papists, does not specifically identify a particular Roman Bishop with primary authority. However, the Romish church is a master of extrapolations and just the mention of the power of Bishop in Ignatius' letter is case for papal supremacy! Also Clement writes a letter urging the Corinthians not to depose their Bishops is somewhat an example of him exercising Papal authority! This is typical of how Rome has manipulated its way to the top!

The gross misinformation you speak of, is your own Bible. Since when are costumes with funny hats, a legitimate part of a humble religion? Where is the biblical authority for a trinity or man made Lord's day? Obviously, graven imagery, and trinkets the status quo? The source of misinformation is the catholic church.

The Catholic Church gave them the autholity!

@@NolongeraslaveA n unsubstantiated claim with no historical evidence.

Doesn’t the Scriptures say to contest for the faith so that there is no confusion? That we are to be in one faith, unity. Protesting against the Church and then leaving it is wrong and unauthorized. Setting up shop perse is another form of the heresies that the Church has been fighting and defeating since the early days. The author of this division is Satan. Who relishes in the fact that argumentative moments in history have even resulted in open war between Denominations. We need to be under one faith and I pray this happens because the secular world with demonic values, is looking to devour the current fractured Church. Christ has established the Church. Carried on by the Apostolic Fathers and passed down through succession to the Popes who, with a valid point of primacy in relation to the other Bishoprics, continues to stand against the gates of Hell.

@@genetaylor7713 Really? It's in history that the Church kicked the Reformers out the Church and excommunicated them! In fact, it was God who decided everything in my humble opinion. That Monk guy Luther just wanted to debate the theses. It was not for the purposes of spriting. Not at all. It was the modern printing press that and enterprising publishers who copied and began to print his 95 theses all over Europe! The kings and princes were already discontented and had become a mouthpieces to criticize the Church. It's only Rome's servants who do not realise that the sale of Indulgences had gone way far beyond bingo games or even Girl Scout cookies as a means of raising funds for Holy mother Church which was anything but holy at the time. But they know this history anyway, but look the other way. Well at least the Reformers need places of worship! If the human Vicar of Christ renounces them, there is a higher Vicar of Christ, the Holy Spirit who protected them from the inquistors. Not even the most powerful Rome could extinguish the fire God started.

@@genetaylor7713 The same authority that gave the Latin Church becoming schismatics themselves ~ from the Greek Church. Talk about a pot calling a kettle black.!

Hey, Protestant here, I am on my way to hell, I suppose. Can you give me the gospel the Apostles preach by which we are saved? What's exactly the gospel you preach?

Too much pride they refuse to see

@@paulcapaccio9905 But I want to know the gospel that saves! Do you have it? Isn't that what makes us Christians?

@@Nolongeraslave St John 5:39-40 You search* the scriptures, because you think you have eternal life through them; even they testify on my behalf.c 40 But you do not want to come to me to have life. (Your hearts are burning within you for scripture but you do not want to come to the Son to have life.) St John 6:27-63 Do not work for food that perishes but for the food that endures for eternal life,* which the Son of Man will give you. For on him the Father, God, has set his seal.” So they said to him, “What can we do to accomplish the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in the one he sent.” For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” So they said to him, “What sign can you do, that we may see and believe in you? Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst.q But I told you that although you have seen [me], you do not believe.r 37 Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and I will not reject anyone who comes to me, For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him may have eternal life, and I shall raise him [on] the last day.” No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draw him, and I will raise him on the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets: ‘They shall all be taught by God.’ Everyone who listens to my Father and learns from him comes to me.x Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world. 54 Whoever eats* my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?* 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father.” St John 15:3-14 You are already pruned because of the word that I spoke to you.b 4 Remain in me, as I remain in you. Just as a branch cannot bear fruit on its own unless it remains on the vine, so neither can you unless you remain in me. 5 I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me and I in him will bear much fruit, because without me you can do nothing. 6 * c Anyone who does not remain in me will be thrown out like a branch and wither; people will gather them and throw them into a fire and they will be burned. 7 If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask for whatever you want and it will be done for you.d 8 By this is my Father glorified, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.e 9 As the Father loves me, so I also love you. Remain in my love.f 10 If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and remain in his love.g 11 “I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and your joy may be complete.h 12 This is my commandment: love one another as I love you.i 13 * No one has greater love than this,j to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command you. St John 16:28-30 I came from the Father and have come into the world. Now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father.”p 29 His disciples said, “Now you are talking plainly, and not in any figure of speech. 30 Now we realize that you know everything and that you do not need to have anyone question you. Because of this we believe that you came from God.”* 1 John 2:3-6 The way we may be sure* that we know him is to keep his commandments.c 4 Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him.d 5 But whoever keeps his word, the love of God is truly perfected in him. This is the way we may know that we are in union with him:e 6 whoever claims to abide in him ought to live [just] as he lived. 1 St John 4:7-21 Beloved, let us love one another, because love is of God; everyone who loves is begotten by God and knows God. 8 Whoever is without love does not know God, for God is love. 9 In this way the love of God was revealed to us: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might have life through him.f 10 In this is love: not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as expiation for our sins.g 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also must love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God. Yet, if we love one another, God remains in us, and his love is brought to perfection in us.h 13 * This is how we know that we remain in him and he in us, that he has given us of his Spirit. 14 Moreover, we have seen and testify that the Father sent his Son as savior of the world. 15 Whoever acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God remains in him and he in God. 16 We have come to know and to believe in the love God has for us. God is love, and whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him. 17 In this is love brought to perfection among us, that we have confidence on the day of judgment because as he is, so are we in this world.i 18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment, and so one who fears is not yet perfect in love. 19 We love because he first loved us. 20 If anyone says, “I love God,” but hates his brother, he is a liar; for whoever does not love a brother whom he has seen cannot love God* whom he has not seen.j 21 This is the commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother.k St Matthew 7:21-23 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven,* but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.n 22 Many will say to me on that day,o ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?’p 23 Then I will declare to them solemnly, ‘I never knew you.* Depart from me, you evildoers.’q 1 St John 3:19-24 Now] this is how we shall know that we* belong to the truth and reassure our hearts before him 20 in whatever our hearts condemn, for God is greater than our hearts and knows everything. 21 Beloved, if [our] hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence in God 22 and receive from him whatever we ask, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him.n 23 And his commandment is this: we should believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another just as he commanded us.o 24 Those who keep his commandments remain in him, and he in them, and the way we know that he remains in us is from the Spirit that he gave us.p 1 St John 1:1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we looked upon and touched with our hands concerns the Word of life-a St Luke 24:27-35 Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them what referred to him in all the scriptures.p 28 As they approached the village to which they were going, he gave the impression that he was going on farther. 29 But they urged him, “Stay with us, for it is nearly evening and the day is almost over.” So he went in to stay with them. 30 And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them. 31 With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight. 32 Then they said to each other, “Were not our hearts burning [within us] while he spoke to us on the way and opened the scriptures to us?” 33 So they set out at once and returned to Jerusalem where they found gathered together the eleven and those with them 34 who were saying, “The Lord has truly been raised and has appeared to Simon!”q 35 Then the two recounted what had taken place on the way and how he was made known to them in the breaking of the bread. St Mark 14:22-24 While they were eating,f he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is my body.” 23 Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. 24 He said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed* for many. St John 6:63 It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh* is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life. St Luke 24:39 Look at my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me and see, because a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you can see I have.” And [behold] I am sending the promise of my Father* upon you; Then he led them [out] as far as Bethany, raised his hands, and blessed them. 51 As he blessed them he parted from them and was taken up to heaven. ( For we are not only fed by the word of God but that the word of God is who we feast on. We take his word for it.)

@@Nolongeraslave St John 21:15-17 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter,* “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?”* He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.” 16 He then said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Tend my sheep.” 17 He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, “Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” [Jesus] said to him, “Feed my sheep.i (Notice that Jesus told Peter to feed his sheep twice. This refers to scripture feeding and feeding of his body or word incarnated in the Eucharist. Tending has to do with preaching or homilies or sermons.) ( and Jesus said it in the order of the Mass. feed my lambs, we read scripture. Tend my sheep, the Priest gives his homily. Feed my sheep, then we partake in holy communion which is the body and blood of Jesus Christ.)

Neither Joseph Smith, NOR Muhammad tested the spirit who spoke to them (1 John 4:1). There are eerie parallels between Islam and Mormonism.

@@HAL9000-su1mz and David from Waco also said an angel as a being radiant in all light or as Saint Paul puts it, an angel of light, appeared to him and supposedly gave him knowledge about the Book of Revelation. The devil going around masquerading as good.

@@HAL9000-su1mz this is my opinion but I’m almost certain that a Protestant would acknowledge a Protestant suicidal cult’s claim that they are Christian before they acknowledge the Catholic Church as being Christian. They want to be the ones seen as the only Christians. Reason why they assert that Catholicism isn’t Christianity and add paganism just to keep the Catholic Church as far away from ever being Biblical. It’s dishonest and uncharitable in their part.

@@Catholic33AD Vernon Howell. Read about his tortured childhood and we can understand why the SDA/Branch Davidians allowed children to be burned alive.