My experience has been (I'm 72 years old and a convert to Catholicism in 1970) that not only Scripture but an explanation of history is needed to put all in context. We Americans are poor about history and many non- Catholic denominations are poor in or distorted history.
You are right of course, but the question is how do you know is a sound explanation of history? If you ask Rome, obviously everything agrees with Rome, ask the Eastern Orthodox and you'll hear something different.
@@LeoRegum first of all, certainly go to the historians and hear both sides apologetics on which church is true. There must be plenty on this subject on the internet, youtube, etc. Hear both sides arguments.
I was also a protestant until I read the writings of the ancient Church fathers such St Ignatius of Antioch, St Polycarp etc. ”Protestantism” was just a result of a confused and proud man, the most praised heretic of all ages Martin Luther. In short, protestantism is of the devil. I do not agree with Mr Trent’s all positions(except this presentation) but I think he’s done a very good job. Only the grace of God can make a protestant and of course with his/her cooperation to be drawn near to to God and His Church, the Holy Roman Catholic Church which was founded upon the rock of St Peter and the apostles. Imagine, how much loss would a well known protestant preacher experience( ie Friends, job, fame etc) if he/she converted to the Catholic faith. It also takes humility to find God and His Church.
@@Kitiwake True, Many protestants keep saying "Roman Catholics". Which just shows how misinformed they are about Catholicism. The Catholic church is made of many Eastern churches too, which along with the Roman church is called the Catholic Church
Hmm...I find it interesting that you went from one-"ism" to another...When did you become Christian,and WHO made you Christian, men or Christ? I await your reply...🤔🤔🤔
@@Kitiwake .. We are Roman Catholics...Rome is not for the Roman Empire...the Roman church is because our church was established in Rome, with the chair if Peter.
Thank you Trent Horn for the work you do for the Catholic church! You have been a true blessing, and I believe you will be known as one of the great thinkers of our time!
“I want to go with what the first Christians believe.” Literally. Wow. This was me about a month or so ago. It started with more in depth questions and then me asking well...the Catholics put together all of these books that I have-even though 7 are missing so why not go down the line. Ultimately, I just want to please God to how I was intended to. I want to serve Him.
What stinks is that Catholic Churches do little or no teaching of apologetics themselves. So, you can grow up in a basic (weak) Catholic home, easily be persuaded by Protestant apologetics (and read them) and, after a long journey, have to discover restudy everything again to realize that Catholicism is truly Christian (and the original faith of the church fathers).
This was me a month or two ago. I grew up Methodist and now a month later..I make a morning offering, cross myself and pray before each meal, pray the rosary, the chaplet and read my Bible each day. Major change and I start RCIA next week. I’m so excited!! Thank you Lord for guiding me to the truth!
@@malcolmkirk3343 I`m pretty sure Orthodoxy is a lot closer to the original Church Fathers. Catholicism is a lot like a pendulum that has been swinging back and forth into radical extremes for the last thousand years or so. It also lacks so much of what Orthodoxy has. Catholics just rebelled against the church and went on to do their own thing.
Thank you. Catholic Christian’s are the most Christ centered, 100% original believers in everything Jesus taught and said of all Christians. In the one Holy Catholic and apostolic Church established by Jesus Christ 2,000 years ago, passed on to Peter and the Apostles and preserved by their successors guided to all truth by the Holy Spirit until the end of the age. Catholics worship Jesus Christ everyday everywhere throughout the world in prayer and in the greatest prayer, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as the pure offering, a clean oblation, Malachi 1:11, in the Holy Eucharist, the body, blood, soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. John 6, the bread of life discourse.
"Catholic Christian’s are the most Christ centered, 100% original believers in everything Jesus taught" Where did Christ teach the rosary, praying to Mary, immaculate conception, ascension of Mary, Mary queen of heaven, saying mass, confiscating property, burning people at the stake, forcing people to be catholic. The bread of life is not in the wafer, it is in the "word" of God.
So Charles you won't have a hard time showing us where Christ or the apostles said mass, prayed the rosary, prayed to Mary and dead saints? The whole Roman Catholic structure is based on three false presuppositions: 1. That the text of Matthew 16:16-20 means that Peter was the foundation of the Church; that the Church was built on him; 2. That Peter went to Rome and was the first bishop in Rome; 3. That Peter's successors are the bishops of Rome under the primacy of the Pope. (It is worth mentioning here, that the list of Popes concocted by Rome is a fable. In its humble beginning, the church at Rome was guided by a plurality of elders, and not one single bishop. Then throughout its latter history, as two, even three, concurrent Popes vied for the throne, intrigue and deceit crowned the victor.)
"...love, at last, is always the winning argument." Trent is an effective apologist not because he's knowledgeable and brilliant, not because he speaks truth with confidence, and not because he's very down to earth, but it's because he speaks with love and humility.
Trent is a spokes hole for his father the devil. That is so harsh you say… God be my judge as to righteous judgement versus hypocritical. If I’m wrong then my soul is condemned. I don’t believe by the eternal judgment of my soul with Christ alone as my judge that this is foolishly spoken. No- just truth exposing darkness to light by the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Trent fools no one who knows the word of God and has an intimate personal relationship with Christ by their teacher-the Holy Spirit… He only fools Roman Catholics and her daughters by itching their ears as to what they want to hear…
@@Michael-pw2td no church is without errors in tradition and theological assumptions. Take the plank out of your Roman Catholic eyes before you judge others.
Unbelievable, you are telling another Catholic member may the holy spirit be with you and keep the holy fight. When Catholicism actually rejects the holy spirit. There is not one Catholic church in the world that you can find Catholic members speaking in tongue. The services are literally dead, void of the life. Its just repetitive vain rituals. Catholic churches are not even warm. All that happens in Catholic churches is blaspheme and sacrilege. Jesus Christ is not even in the Eucharist in Catholic churches. The priest lets any one who says he wants to become a Catholic or take mass eat of the The Eucharist. You have no idea of the mortal danger of the person eating the Eucharist if he/she is not sincere and saved by the blood of Jesus Christ, before,, and has live a faithful christian life in the sight of God., alone. Not man. If Jesus was in the in the Eucharist in Catholic mass. Do you know how many people would be dead instantly. They would literally drop dead. In the holy bible Jesus tells us we can not pour new wine in to an old wine skin, or else the the wine skin will tare. Mean that the person who is not saved will most likely die. It's all up to God's mercy.
@feebeedee OK i must admit i was foolish and ignorant to assume that there isn't one Catholic has the gift of speaking in tongues.( I'm still suspicious of catholics speaking in tongues),for three reasons. Can you tell me for certain that when you heard them speak in tongues there was an interpreter present, and was you and whole congregation edified by the holy word of God? Secondly, i don't watch many mass or catholic sermons. Not one person including the priest spoke in tongues. The services were literally dead. Just repetitive readings without any emotions nor understanding of the holy word of God. Which means everyone there was void of the spirit of understanding from God. Even the singing of hymns seems lifeless, as though the congregation didn't understand the words they were singing and had no commitment. Lastly, knowing that the Vatican, Vaticanus, literally means divine serpent. The divine serpent is the god of this world, satan. The catechism originated out of the Vatican. The pope is a man-made fraudulent holy father. (No one but Jesus Christ is holy and is the father of all creation.) The pope is evil he believes he alone has the power and authority over God to change the holy word of God. (the our father prayer.) Why am i wrong as a protestant?
@feebeedee I didn't even mention the fact that Catholic have their own catholic bible for catholics. It is created by man out of the vatican. I mean this sincerely i do not hate one billion catholic, not one. I love you all as my neighbour. I'm no different from you. I was born in sin and shaped in iniquity, and fallen short of the glory of God. I will be honest though i kind of hate the pope. Why? because the pope is the leader of Catholicism. He knows better. Also, he is deliberately deceiving and corrupting many many people. So you see i despise Catholicism, the man-made religion. Which is evidently contrary to the holy word of God.
@@floydknight8895 Brother you’ve been lied for your entire life about the Catholic Church. It’s not your fault. You have been taught this way( lies). And it’s normal you’ve no clue about the Church. Forget everything you’ve been taught and do your own unbiased research. Look for yourself why Catholics do this and that from a catholic source and you may understand a bit. I bet you 99% of the people that taught you all these lies have no clue of what they talking about the CC. All the lies were taught and carried on from generation to generation. It’s like racism, it’s taught and you won’t know how bad it is till you walk off from the circle you were born in and get close to those you were taught to hate and see they’re not different from you. Sometimes it’s not easy to break ties and move on but you have to be willing and try for the TRUTH!! Peace brother
@@Flyreelss I'm being very sincere, i speak from my heart. I personally don't have anything against individual Catholics. I'm completely against Catholicism. Why would you believe,(it's not possible) a man or woman could teach me or show me the truth about how truly corrupt Catholicism really is. I couldn't listen and believe another human being about other human beings. It is just inconceivable to do that. No human being told me the truth of how corrupt Catholicism really is. right from its origins. The living breathing holy word of God revealed the truth to me. 2Tim.3: 5 2 Cor. 4: 2-7.
I m a French Catholic and I am extremely edified by the faith of the Amercicans Catholics. Your knowledge about Catholicism faith is remarkable. I m studying theology at the faculty, its so interessing! I don't understand why is so difficult to Protestantism to believe the Catholic true... Thanks Mister Luther.. There are somes evidences in the history, for example : the church fathers. I note that some protestants distorded a lot of thing like factuals stuff : history, apostolic succession, etc... The human mind is capable of anything for justify his point of view!
FACTS: #1--Christ NEVER taught that Peter is a pope.-(where is the title Pope in the Bible?) #2--Christ NEVER taught that Mary will go to heaven. (Where does the bible say Mary will go/has gone to heaven?) #3--Christ NEVER taught that Mary is a mediator/intercessor. (Where does the bible say Mary is a mediator? #4--Christ NEVER taught that Mary never sinned. (Where in the bible does it state Mary never sinned?) #5--Christ NEVER taught that Mary remained virgin. (Where in the bible does it state Mary remained a virgin?) #6--Christ NEVER Taught that a mere man is head of His church. (Where is the Bible does it state a mere man is head of Christ's church?) #7--Christ NEVER taught about a church named Catholic. (Where in the Bible is a church named Catholic mentioned?) #8--Christ NEVER taught that we can pray to the dead.-(Where is the bible does it state we can pray to the dead?) #9--Christ NEVER taught that the dead can hear our prayers. (Where in the bible does it state the dead can hear our prayers #10--Christ NEVER taught that anyone can change the day of worship . (Where in the Bible does IT STATE GOD changed the day of worship to Sunday?) #11--Christ NEVER taught to confess to a "priest". (Where in the Bible does it state we are to confess our sins to a Priest?) #12--Christ NEVER Taught a priest can forgive your sins. (Where in the Bible does it state a priest can forgive our sins #13--Christ NEVER taught salvation is through a church..(Where is the bible does it state our salvation comes from a church #14--Christ NEVER taught to pray to, or with beads!!! (Where in the bile does it state we are to use/pray to beads?) #15--Christ NEVER started a church named Catholic!!! (Where in the Bible does it mention a church named Catholic?) #16--Christ never said to confess your sins to a priest. The bottom line is, the Messiah kept the Law perfectly, and we are to walk as he walked according to the Scriptures at 1 John 2:4-6. Those who do not follow Messiah’s footsteps are workers of lawlessness according to the Messiah himself. Kindly refute these FACTS with book, chapter and numbered verse FROM the Bible. Answer however many as yoiu want!!! ONLY Book, chapter and number of the verse!!! No need to quote the verse or explain it!!! Isaiah 8:20 To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no light. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Galatians 3:24-25 (NKJV): "Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor." 1 Corinthians 9:21 (NKJV) "To those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law." We are under the law of Christ, it is the law by which we will be judged not the old law. >>>>>> POPE BENEDICT XVI: While Catholic believe the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and that it is true, “one cannot take individual biblical quotes or passages and say each one is literally true.” “It is possible to understand the sacred Scriptures as the word of God only by looking at the Bible as a whole, a totality in which the individual elements enlighten each other and open the way to understanding. It is not possible to apply the criterion of inspiration or of absolute truth in a mechanical way, extrapolating a single phrase or expression.” Catholic News Service, May 2011
Then what is your argument for the reason to still protest the Catholic Church? Imagine being the leader of a group of Christians and bringing them all home to the Bride of Our Lord. The Catholic Church. Think about what you're willing to do to defend your wife. Now imagine how much more that would be magnified for Our Lord towards His Bride.
@@marcuslow1386 Long story short: I started studying Catholic theology for myself (instead of hearing everything second-hand), beginning with Bishop Barron, and just loved Catholic theology! Study it "all the time."
@@riverjao great attitude! Wish mire on both sides can agree to disagree... Minus the hostility! We really need to be more united with so much against the judeo christianity world.
Because they took notice that there's a large numbers of their ministry who's converting to catholicism because of the church fathers, they had to distort it.
@@michaelfarah7735 true indeed. many are fanatically hostile to this day, but keep it mostly among themselves these days, compared to over 40 years ago where it was full blown open in your face hostility, if you lived below the bible belt especially...
I recall my humanities class, senior year, high school. The teacher had finished lecturing on Jesus Christ in the historical context of the Roman Empire at the time. After the bell rang he said "Tomorrow we are going to discuss the early Christian Church and what it believed. Some of you are going to be mighty surprised, I'll tell you that." I liked that particular teacher and respected him but I wondered what he would say. I knew him to be a devout Southern Baptist. I should explain that I was in instructions to become a Catholic. I was in what is now called R.C.I.A. In this class was a young man who aspired to be a Baptist minister. He walked away that day with the smuggest self-assurance I have ever seen. The next day the teacher mentioned the Church Fathers and named some of them. The teacher explained how the early Church had bishops and priests and the Mass. The teacher said that the early Church taught salvation by the seven sacraments, and he named off the sacraments. The teacher concluded by saying that the early Church taught that outside the Church there is no salvation. You could have heard a pin drop. The young fellow who wanted to be a Baptist preacher? You should have seen the shock in his eyes and how low his jaw dropped.
Very informative and knowledgeable talk. Only the Catholic Church could have a show like Catholic Answers! The denominations cannot back up their beliefs thoroughly, especially sola scriptura. It is obviously illogical. Thanks, Trent, and may God continue to bless your work and that of Catholic Answers.
What do you mean illogical? How is it in any way illogical, have you ever read the writing's of polycarp, tertullian or origen or augustine of hippo regarding scriptural authority!! Wow I'm amazed at your absolute ignorance regarding your statement. Your just another blind unintelligent Catholic infant that the life of Christ has been somehow superceded by the papacy. You disgusting heretic
Let’s look at Tertullian... In Prescription 19.1 he opens with: “Our appeal, therefore, must not be made to the Scriptures. . . .” “It remains, then, that we demonstrate whether this doctrine of ours, of which we have not given the rule, has its origin in the tradition of the apostles and whether all other doctrines do not ipso facto proceed from falsehood.”-Tertullian (Prescription 21) “. . . and after first bearing witness to the faith in Jesus Christ throughout Judaea, and founding churches (there), they next went forth into the world and preached the same doctrine of the same faith to the nations. They then in like manner founded churches in every city, from which all the other churches, one after another, derived the tradition of the faith, and the seeds of doctrine, and are every day deriving them, that they may become churches. Indeed, it is on this account only that they will be able to deem themselves apostolic, as being the offspring of apostolic churches.” (Prescription 20.4-6) “But if there be any (heresies) which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst of the apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a manner that [that first bishop of theirs ] bishop shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men,- a man, moreover, who continued steadfast with the apostles.”-Tertullian (Prescription 32) “Error of doctrine in the churches must necessarily have produced various issues. When, however, that which is deposited among many is found to be one and the same, it is not the result of error, but of tradition. Can anyone, then, be reckless enough to say that they were in error who handed on the tradition?”-Tertullian (Prescription 28.2-4) “Where diversity of doctrine is found, there, then, must the corruption both of the Scriptures and the expositions thereof be regarded as existing. On those whose purpose it was to teach differently, lay the necessity of differently arranging the instruments of doctrine.”-Tertullian (Prescription 38.1-2)
@Richie Rich did I claim spiritual succession Ritchie!! That's Catholic dogma, I don't evoke tradition hence solo scriptural, I understand doctrine and philosophy from the church fathers I don't learn scripture. Also you have some balls to challenge me on my attitude when all I read on these threads is anti non Catholic rhetoric, but I wouldn't expect anything less from matt patrons as some of my family knew of him when he lived in Co donegal where he was well known to have anti Protestant sentiments
You also site St Peters warnings of scriptural distortion!! Wow a Catholic judging Protestants scriptural distortion give me a break, you have added more to scripture since the council of trent alone not counting the tons of scriptural distortions prior to the council of trent that brought the western world to its knees in the 16th century. You are unbelievable. And how in any sane man's mind does 2 Peter cpt3 refute personal interpretation? Read it in context
Most important quote from a Church father concerning the Church: “…that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; …which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority… …The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate [of Rome]. Of this Linus…Anacletus…Clement…[and] Eleutherius does now…hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth…” - Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies Book III.3.3 (c. AD 180)
Btw, I think what's more important would be something like this: "[W]e are not entitled to such licence, I mean that of affirming what we please; we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings." St. Gregory of Nyssa
“We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine. For if custom is to avail for proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom; and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs. Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words.” St. Gregory Nyssa On the Holy Trinity
You see, a lineage succession is a neat idea and can be useful, but you can't actually even prove that line anymore for most bishops anyway. Neither can you prove that each Bishop was rightly chosen, as there are Canon laws for how to choose bishops anyway. For example, St. Ambrose, according to your own rules, should not have been elected Bishop, and even admitted he didn't know much about Scriptures prior to being a bishop. He wasn't even baptized yet when he was chosen to be a bishop. St Athanasius didn't hold to the same Canon as Rome does as dogma, yet you are not going to consider him anathema, are you?
@@dave1370 You can prove that basically the only thing that bars a tracing of apostolic lineages is a bishop in the 1700s whose records of appointing bishops has been lost. We are missing the appointees of that one bishop and have all those before him. It is beyond a reasonable doubt that he appointed who it is said he appointed, so your argument really doesn’t hold water. To use Gregory of Nyssa as an argument to depose the papacy is hilarious, read the Commonitorium by St. Vincent of Lerins written in the 300s A.D. and you will see that heretics always had their own interpretation of scripture, so Nyssa surely wouldn’t have assented to a Protestant interpretation of scripture.
St. Faustina was allowed to see Purgatory. This is what she wrote in her diary, " I saw my Guardian Angel, who ordered me to follow him. In a moment I was in a misty place full of fire in which there was a great crowd of suffering souls. They were praying fervently, but to no avail, for themselves; only we can come to their aid. The flames which were burning them did not touch me at all. My Guardian Angel did not leave me for an instant. I asked these souls what their greatest suffering was. They answered me in one voice that their greatest torment was longing for God. I saw Our Lady visiting the souls in PURGATORY. The souls call her “The Star of the Sea.” She brings them refreshment. I wanted to talk with them some more, but my Guardian Angel beckoned me to leave. We went out of that prison of suffering. [I heard an interior voice] which said, My mercy does not want this, but justice demands it. Since that time, I am in closer communion with the suffering souls. (Diary, 20)."
Yeah, so Jesus suffered in vain then. We all need to go suffer again as well for our own sins. How this horrible heresy ever got into the church, only the devil knows?!
@@jacobalexander4167 I know it wasn't a gracious opening statement. The doctrine of purgatory is an upsetting one. It takes away from Jesus' atonement, which was more than sufficient for our sins. All of our sins, though I know you have been taught not to see it that way, which is unfortunate.
@@jacobalexander4167 Yes, of course I do believe God is Holy and no unclean thing can enter the perfection of heaven. Jesus blood does cleanse us from all unrighteousness. We have a lifelong struggle w/ sin in this body of flesh, so we struggle w/ carnal things. When we are perfected, and released from this body of sin and death, that will no longer be an issue. We stand perfected before God by the perfect cleansing of the blood of the lamb.
It shouldn't be about catholicism or protestantism. To me, it should be about seeking the truth otherwise we become like political parties. I was a lukewarm catholic who didn't know anything about catholicism and I wondered in protestant churches and this pandemic I started searching for answers that my protestant friends and pastors were throwing at me. I have found my answers and now, I am a firm catholic and it could have been the other way around if I had found the truth in protestantism. Prace to all, we serve one Master our Almight God so I don't see any point of really not judging each other.
@Dark Angel You are now a firm Catholic, you say? What type of Catholic are you? Charismatic? Progressive? Sedevacantist? RadTrad? Old Catholic? Eastern-Rite? Anglo-Catholic? Molinist? Thomist? Secular? Marionite? You supposedly didn’t find the truth in Protestantism. In how many forms of Protestantism have you sought the truth? I would suggest to you that in however many forms you sought it…it wasn’t enough.
@@hanssvineklev648 You are not the one to define what is the truth. Only God does and the church He founded over 2000 years ago. I didn't find what I was looking for all those churches I said.
@@writegillian James White is very good at public speaking and debating. Doesn't make him correct. Personal opinion, I find his disdain for Catholicism and tactics to be that of a snake. Have you read debate video summaries on his ministry's RU-vid channel? It's always heavily biased like he ko'd the opponent when he really didnt
@@writegillian I’m not at all a fan of James White, but to be fair to him (and other protestants), if I were wholly convinced that the true way to interpret “call no man father” was that you can literally only call God and your earthly dad “father”, I would not disrespect God’s command for a man who claims the title “father” in the way that i believe to be against God.
@@ajamusic7322 Yeah, he makes it seem like he always defeated his opponents in debate. When I watched some of his debates against Catholics, even when I was a fan of his, I never really thought that he totally destroyed his opponents. White made some god points here and there. Although I now realize that some of his arguments that I thought were good or were strong were actually not that great or were poor arguments. Overall, White is great at debating and a great rhetorician, however, he is not undefeated against Catholics, nor are most of his arguments against Catholicism that great.
2 people who are full of grace mentioned in the bible. 👩🦰BL. MOTHER MARY -full of Grace: 📖Luke 1:28 🧔♀️JESUS CHRIST -full of grace 📖JOHN 1:14 My Conclusion : Mary is sinless and blameless.
FACTS: #1--Christ NEVER taught that Peter is a pope.-(where is the title Pope in the Bible?) #2--Christ NEVER taught that Mary will go to heaven. (Where does the bible say Mary will go/has gone to heaven?) #3--Christ NEVER taught that Mary is a mediator/intercessor. (Where does the bible say Mary is a mediator? #4--Christ NEVER taught that Mary never sinned. (Where in the bible does it state Mary never sinned?) #5--Christ NEVER taught that Mary remained virgin. (Where in the bible does it state Mary remained a virgin?) #6--Christ NEVER Taught that a mere man is head of His church. (Where is the Bible does it state a mere man is head of Christ's church?) #7--Christ NEVER taught about a church named Catholic. (Where in the Bible is a church named Catholic mentioned?) #8--Christ NEVER taught that we can pray to the dead.-(Where is the bible does it state we can pray to the dead?) #9--Christ NEVER taught that the dead can hear our prayers. (Where in the bible does it state the dead can hear our prayers #10--Christ NEVER taught that anyone can change the day of worship . (Where in the Bible does IT STATE GOD changed the day of worship to Sunday?) #11--Christ NEVER taught to confess to a "priest". (Where in the Bible does it state we are to confess our sins to a Priest?) #12--Christ NEVER Taught a priest can forgive your sins. (Where in the Bible does it state a priest can forgive our sins #13--Christ NEVER taught salvation is through a church..(Where is the bible does it state our salvation comes from a church #14--Christ NEVER taught to pray to, or with beads!!! (Where in the bile does it state we are to use/pray to beads?) #15--Christ NEVER started a church named Catholic!!! (Where in the Bible does it mention a church named Catholic?) #16--Christ never said to confess your sins to a priest. The bottom line is, the Messiah kept the Law perfectly, and we are to walk as he walked according to the Scriptures at 1 John 2:4-6. Those who do not follow Messiah’s footsteps are workers of lawlessness according to the Messiah himself. Kindly refute these FACTS with book, chapter and numbered verse FROM the Bible. Answer however many as yoiu want!!! ONLY Book, chapter and number of the verse!!! No need to quote the verse or explain it!!! Isaiah 8:20 To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no light. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Galatians 3:24-25 (NKJV): "Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor." 1 Corinthians 9:21 (NKJV) "To those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law." We are under the law of Christ, it is the law by which we will be judged not the old law. >>>>>> POPE BENEDICT XVI: While Catholic believe the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and that it is true, “one cannot take individual biblical quotes or passages and say each one is literally true.” “It is possible to understand the sacred Scriptures as the word of God only by looking at the Bible as a whole, a totality in which the individual elements enlighten each other and open the way to understanding. It is not possible to apply the criterion of inspiration or of absolute truth in a mechanical way, extrapolating a single phrase or expression.” Catholic News Service, May 2011
Foxfamily Rool that’s true but how Protestants don’t take communion. The bread turns into the body of Christ. They don’t celebrate it weekly. There are many other beliefs they don’t get either.
Thank You Lord Jesus Christ for calling me to the Catholic Faith..so very proud of it... God bless everyone in the Name of the Holy Father, the Son and Spirit..Amen
FACTS: #1--Christ NEVER taught that Peter is a pope.-(where is the title Pope in the Bible?) #2--Christ NEVER taught that Mary will go to heaven. (Where does the bible say Mary will go/has gone to heaven?) #3--Christ NEVER taught that Mary is a mediator/intercessor. (Where does the bible say Mary is a mediator? #4--Christ NEVER taught that Mary never sinned. (Where in the bible does it state Mary never sinned?) #5--Christ NEVER taught that Mary remained virgin. (Where in the bible does it state Mary remained a virgin?) #6--Christ NEVER Taught that a mere man is head of His church. (Where is the Bible does it state a mere man is head of Christ's church?) #7--Christ NEVER taught about a church named Catholic. (Where in the Bible is a church named Catholic mentioned?) #8--Christ NEVER taught that we can pray to the dead.-(Where is the bible does it state we can pray to the dead?) #9--Christ NEVER taught that the dead can hear our prayers. (Where in the bible does it state the dead can hear our prayers #10--Christ NEVER taught that anyone can change the day of worship . (Where in the Bible does IT STATE GOD changed the day of worship to Sunday?) #11--Christ NEVER taught to confess to a "priest". (Where in the Bible does it state we are to confess our sins to a Priest?) #12--Christ NEVER Taught a priest can forgive your sins. (Where in the Bible does it state a priest can forgive our sins #13--Christ NEVER taught salvation is through a church..(Where is the bible does it state our salvation comes from a church #14--Christ NEVER taught to pray to, or with beads!!! (Where in the bile does it state we are to use/pray to beads?) #15--Christ NEVER started a church named Catholic!!! (Where in the Bible does it mention a church named Catholic?) #16--Christ never said to confess your sins to a priest. The bottom line is, the Messiah kept the Law perfectly, and we are to walk as he walked according to the Scriptures at 1 John 2:4-6. Those who do not follow Messiah’s footsteps are workers of lawlessness according to the Messiah himself. -----Isaiah 8:20 To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no light. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Galatians 3:24-25 (NKJV): "Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor." 1 Corinthians 9:21 (NKJV) "To those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law." We are under the law of Christ, it is the law by which we will be judged not the old law. >>>>>> POPE BENEDICT XVI: While Catholic believe the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and that it is true, “one cannot take individual biblical quotes or passages and say each one is literally true.” “It is possible to understand the sacred Scriptures as the word of God only by looking at the Bible as a whole, a totality in which the individual elements enlighten each other and open the way to understanding. It is not possible to apply the criterion of inspiration or of absolute truth in a mechanical way, extrapolating a single phrase or expression.” Catholic News Service, May 2011
It wasn't long ago when these protestants, esp the fiercely anti-Catholics born agains, SDA, etc, even heard or if they did, deny the existence of the early fathers of the church. Now that they have become known, thanks to the testimonies of learned protestant converts, some of them claim that these early fathers belong to their cult! Incredible!
prots have been completely lost since the reformation and have been fed lies since. 30k protestant domination's and counting...show much for the unity Christ called for among his followers.
This is all quite interesting. But I would wish for catholic (and other) apologets to win people more by love and humility than by arguing and pride. And, remind you, Trent is still one of the best, that is why I am here.
It’s a strange irony hearing the text to the hymn, “Give Me That Old-Time Religion,” and the part that reads, “It was good for Paul and Silas....” If only the author had known, and those that sing it could read the first and second century Fathers, whose writings we now have. Ignatius’ “Letter to Smyrnaeans” (AD 110) is a good place to start.
That's way too general a claim to make. You shouldn't say that. I used to be Protestant and genuinely did want the truth. Thanks be to God, He gave it to me
Don't you think you're generalizing a bit? Known as "hasty generalization fallacy." You don't know peoples hearts. Only God does. Do you claim to be God? Smh
@FaithHopeGrace Satan does hate the rosary and the Holy Eucharist. Whenever Communists, for instance, conquer new territory they go to the Catholic churches, break into the tabernacles, and urinate on, defecate on, or otherwise show contempt for the Communion Wafers stored there. That Mary and the devil are opposed is shown in Genesis where it is prophesied that the devil will strike at Mary's heel but that she will crush his head.
I been debating with Protestant for more than 8 years the Question is can trace the history of her sect back to the first century Can the Protestante trace back their fake church back to the time of the apostles? To whom did the apostles taught the teaching of CHrist which has the ability to teach other ( 2 tim 2.2)
You cannot trace the Catholic history to the first century. One does not have to trace when their church started, if they follow Christ, the word of God, they belong to the church Christ started.
Rule #1 is suspect to me. If you define certain terms the way you want to, you can "prove" that the church fathers taught whatever you're looking to support. It's like the scriptures themselves... many verses/passages can be manipulated into seeming to say many things, depending on how cleverly you define/re-define words. A word like "sacrifice" is an example... it's vague enough to leave plenty of room for you to shoe-horn anything you want in there...
42:42 - To be clear, the debate in question was not about the wearing of bow ties *in principle*, just over whether or not those who persist in wearing multicoloured bow ties were actively refusing to acknowledge the error of their ways.
Maybe I’m wrong, because I wasn’t given authority to judge one way or another, and I’m not saying that these debates between Catholic and Protestant disagreements are not worthy of debate, but for example, the debate over whether the Eucharist is indeed transformed literary into the Body & Blood of Christ or whether it’s practiced as a symbolic memorial of the last supper, I believe is irrelevant to our Salvation for what saves us, and though it’s important for at least what Christ told us to practice in the reminder of his Sacrifice, and so we should want to if given the opportunity as our duty. But for whatever reason we chose, or perhaps didn’t practice it at all, I don’t consider it detrimental for our Salvation, or even the thief on the cross could not have received it. And so what we believe for what truly saves us, I believe is very simple and what also unites us as members of God’s family, that even a child can understand. And I suspect it grieves the Lord that we argue about these things as children argue when we shouldn’t.
@@isaacleillhikar4566 Satan's seed is a choice by those who love darkness. Coming to the light is a choice by those who love light. Free will is neutral, otherwise it wouldn't be a choice of free will
after 40 years of studying the bible, the following are FACTS: FACTS: #1--Christ NEVER taught that Peter is a pope.-(where is the title Pope in the Bible?) #2--Christ NEVER taught that Mary will go to heaven. (Where does the bible say Mary will go/has gone to heaven?) #3--Christ NEVER taught that Mary is a mediator/intercessor. (Where does the bible say Mary is a mediator? #4--Christ NEVER taught that Mary never sinned. (Where in the bible does it state Mary never sinned?) #5--Christ NEVER taught that Mary remained virgin. (Where in the bible does it state Mary remained a virgin?) #6--Christ NEVER Taught that a mere man is head of His church. (Where is the Bible does it state a mere man is head of Christ's church?) #7--Christ NEVER taught about a church named Catholic. (Where in the Bible is a church named Catholic mentioned?) #8--Christ NEVER taught that we can pray to the dead.-(Where is the bible does it state we can pray to the dead?) #9--Christ NEVER taught that the dead can hear our prayers. (Where in the bible does it state the dead can hear our prayers #10--Christ NEVER taught that anyone can change the day of worship . (Where in the Bible does IT STATE GOD changed the day of worship to Sunday?) #11--Christ NEVER taught to confess to a "priest". (Where in the Bible does it state we are to confess our sins to a Priest?) #12--Christ NEVER Taught a priest can forgive your sins. (Where in the Bible does it state a priest can forgive our sins #13--Christ NEVER taught salvation is through a church..(Where is the bible does it state our salvation comes from a church #14--Christ NEVER taught to pray to, or with beads!!! (Where in the bile does it state we are to use/pray to beads?) #15--Christ NEVER started a church named Catholic!!! (Where in the Bible does it mention a church named Catholic?) #16--Christ never said to confess your sins to a priest. The bottom line is, the Messiah kept the Law perfectly, and we are to walk as he walked according to the Scriptures at 1 John 2:4-6. Those who do not follow Messiah’s footsteps are workers of lawlessness according to the Messiah himself. Kindly refute these FACTS with book, chapter and numbered verse FROM the Bible. Answer however many as yoiu want!!! ONLY Book, chapter and number of the verse!!! No need to quote the verse or explain it!!! Isaiah 8:20 To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no light. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Galatians 3:24-25 (NKJV): "Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor." 1 Corinthians 9:21 (NKJV) "To those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law." We are under the law of Christ, it is the law by which we will be judged not the old law. >>>>>> POPE BENEDICT XVI: While Catholic believe the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and that it is true, “one cannot take individual biblical quotes or passages and say each one is literally true.” “It is possible to understand the sacred Scriptures as the word of God only by looking at the Bible as a whole, a totality in which the individual elements enlighten each other and open the way to understanding. It is not possible to apply the criterion of inspiration or of absolute truth in a mechanical way, extrapolating a single phrase or expression.” Catholic News Service, May 2011
FACTS: #1--Christ NEVER taught that Peter is a pope.-(where is the title Pope in the Bible?) #2--Christ NEVER taught that Mary will go to heaven. (Where does the bible say Mary will go/has gone to heaven?) #3--Christ NEVER taught that Mary is a mediator/intercessor. (Where does the bible say Mary is a mediator? #4--Christ NEVER taught that Mary never sinned. (Where in the bible does it state Mary never sinned?) #5--Christ NEVER taught that Mary remained virgin. (Where in the bible does it state Mary remained a virgin?) #6--Christ NEVER Taught that a mere man is head of His church. (Where is the Bible does it state a mere man is head of Christ's church?) #7--Christ NEVER taught about a church named Catholic. (Where in the Bible is a church named Catholic mentioned?) #8--Christ NEVER taught that we can pray to the dead.-(Where is the bible does it state we can pray to the dead?) #9--Christ NEVER taught that the dead can hear our prayers. (Where in the bible does it state the dead can hear our prayers #10--Christ NEVER taught that anyone can change the day of worship . (Where in the Bible does IT STATE GOD changed the day of worship to Sunday?) #11--Christ NEVER taught to confess to a "priest". (Where in the Bible does it state we are to confess our sins to a Priest?) #12--Christ NEVER Taught a priest can forgive your sins. (Where in the Bible does it state a priest can forgive our sins #13--Christ NEVER taught salvation is through a church..(Where is the bible does it state our salvation comes from a church #14--Christ NEVER taught to pray to, or with beads!!! (Where in the bile does it state we are to use/pray to beads?) #15--Christ NEVER started a church named Catholic!!! (Where in the Bible does it mention a church named Catholic?) #16--Christ never said to confess your sins to a priest. The bottom line is, the Messiah kept the Law perfectly, and we are to walk as he walked according to the Scriptures at 1 John 2:4-6. Those who do not follow Messiah’s footsteps are workers of lawlessness according to the Messiah himself. Kindly refute these FACTS with book, chapter and numbered verse FROM the Bible. Answer however many as yoiu want!!! ONLY Book, chapter and number of the verse!!! No need to quote the verse or explain it!!! Isaiah 8:20 To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no light. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Galatians 3:24-25 (NKJV): "Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor." 1 Corinthians 9:21 (NKJV) "To those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law." We are under the law of Christ, it is the law by which we will be judged not the old law. >>>>>> POPE BENEDICT XVI: While Catholic believe the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and that it is true, “one cannot take individual biblical quotes or passages and say each one is literally true.” “It is possible to understand the sacred Scriptures as the word of God only by looking at the Bible as a whole, a totality in which the individual elements enlighten each other and open the way to understanding. It is not possible to apply the criterion of inspiration or of absolute truth in a mechanical way, extrapolating a single phrase or expression.” Catholic News Service, May 2011
It seems that so many interpretations of scripture is proof of the need for a teaching authority unwavering from the beginning. How can the Bible alone hold sway over our eternal future if there was not an obvious and visible guide to understanding it? The apostolic fathers responsible for the eventual cannon had to teach and uphold the truth the first few centuries before the Bible was fully established and over a millennium before the enlightenment. A loving God would not just give us a book to squabble over for 2000 years with so much at stake. That is why I face ‘Catholic or nothing’ when I consider what a proper understanding and response to Christ should look like. It is a little stressful, I admit.
FACTS: #1--Christ NEVER taught that Peter is a pope.-(where is the title Pope in the Bible?) #2--Christ NEVER taught that Mary will go to heaven. (Where does the bible say Mary will go/has gone to heaven?) #3--Christ NEVER taught that Mary is a mediator/intercessor. (Where does the bible say Mary is a mediator? #4--Christ NEVER taught that Mary never sinned. (Where in the bible does it state Mary never sinned?) #5--Christ NEVER taught that Mary remained virgin. (Where in the bible does it state Mary remained a virgin?) #6--Christ NEVER Taught that a mere man is head of His church. (Where is the Bible does it state a mere man is head of Christ's church?) #7--Christ NEVER taught about a church named Catholic. (Where in the Bible is a church named Catholic mentioned?) #8--Christ NEVER taught that we can pray to the dead.-(Where is the bible does it state we can pray to the dead?) #9--Christ NEVER taught that the dead can hear our prayers. (Where in the bible does it state the dead can hear our prayers #10--Christ NEVER taught that anyone can change the day of worship . (Where in the Bible does IT STATE GOD changed the day of worship to Sunday?) #11--Christ NEVER taught to confess to a "priest". (Where in the Bible does it state we are to confess our sins to a Priest?) #12--Christ NEVER Taught a priest can forgive your sins. (Where in the Bible does it state a priest can forgive our sins #13--Christ NEVER taught salvation is through a church..(Where is the bible does it state our salvation comes from a church #14--Christ NEVER taught to pray to, or with beads!!! (Where in the bile does it state we are to use/pray to beads?) #15--Christ NEVER started a church named Catholic!!! (Where in the Bible does it mention a church named Catholic?) #16--Christ never said to confess your sins to a priest. The bottom line is, the Messiah kept the Law perfectly, and we are to walk as he walked according to the Scriptures at 1 John 2:4-6. Those who do not follow Messiah’s footsteps are workers of lawlessness according to the Messiah himself. Kindly refute these FACTS with book, chapter and numbered verse FROM the Bible. Answer however many as yoiu want!!! ONLY Book, chapter and number of the verse!!! No need to quote the verse or explain it!!! Isaiah 8:20 To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no light. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Galatians 3:24-25 (NKJV): "Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor." 1 Corinthians 9:21 (NKJV) "To those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law." We are under the law of Christ, it is the law by which we will be judged not the old law. >>>>>> POPE BENEDICT XVI: While Catholic believe the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and that it is true, “one cannot take individual biblical quotes or passages and say each one is literally true.” “It is possible to understand the sacred Scriptures as the word of God only by looking at the Bible as a whole, a totality in which the individual elements enlighten each other and open the way to understanding. It is not possible to apply the criterion of inspiration or of absolute truth in a mechanical way, extrapolating a single phrase or expression.” Catholic News Service, May 2011
The Catholic Church does not accept the Book of Enoch, even though it is quoted in the Bible. Just because Jews at the cross quoted Wis. does not mean it is canonical. Your example of Wis. being quoted is selective and disingenuous without mentioning Enoch,
Protestantism has removed Christ from the physical world and locked him in people's minds. Salvation depends on knowledge, not personal holiness. Faith is merely an intellectual assent or acknowledgement of what Christ has gained for us (justification by faith alone). Charity in God's grace doesn't lead to our salvation but is merely a sign of being saved by Christ's merits alone. What protestants hope for is merely a greater allotment of heavenly rewards rather than their salvation which is assured as long as they put their intellectual faith in Christ's external merits which are imputed to them despite their sinfulness. But Paul speaks of salvation in terms of three dimensional time: "have been saved", "being saved", and "our salvation is nearer now". Catholics do not believe that we must "work for" our salvation but rather in what Paul teaches: "We must 'work out' our salvation in fear and trembling." Justification or sanctification is progressive. Faith must be put into action for it to be saving faith. Intellectual assent must be informed by good works done in charity and grace. Otherwise, our faith is "dead" as James puts it.
This is the bottom line: We have to love one another as Christ love the Israelites and Gentiles. Jesus came in this world for the sinners. Repentance is the key to salvation. Love one another for God is love.
Not for the lies and deception of misquoting church fathers and no scripture for Peter with title of Pope or holy father not even in his 2 epistles.for the lie the church was built on him only,he has only 2 epistles and he b Never says he is the Pope or the rock of its foundation.
@@frederickanderson1860 1 Corinthians 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
@@frederickanderson1860 James 1:27 Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
@@frederickanderson1860John 6:53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
Hi does anyone know if the baptism is important for salvation? Can you be saved if you’re not Catholic or different denomination? but listen to God and help others.
I’m not sure if you are sincere, or looking for a debate. In good will I’m addressing the former. There are many Bible verses dealing with the importance of baptism for salvation. Matthew 16:16 rsvce is just one. However, God is not bound by the sacraments. Therefore God can ultimately save anyone He so chooses. Since God is outside of space and time (the eternal now, or the eternal present) your prayers for the deceased can potentially act as a grace which may save the person - by giving them the grace when they most need it. In addition, baptism by water is the normal and surest means. However, there is baptism by desire (example: St. Dismas, who was crucified next to Christ) and baptism by blood (think of the martyrs who died for the faith before receiving a water baptism). Finally, St. Faustina was told by Jesus that every soul at the moment of death is asked three times if he/she loves Him. One need only say yes one of the times and may be saved. [paraphrased] All things are possible with God. But why not join the actual church Christ founded... the Catholic Church, and receive the fullness of the faith and sacraments - the way it is intended? Peace in Christ. Disclaimer: the above explanation is not meant to be a full complete answer for all things related to baptism and salvation. See the Catholic catechism for the full answer.
@@soliderofgod6527 In my opinion as a cradle Catholic, when a person dies there's a Particular Judgment for that person's soul and God will JUDGE that person FAIRLY and JUSTLY.
One needs to define baptism as many think it means only water. We can receive Christ without getting wet and we are baptized with the Holy Spirit. Yes, one can be saved without being Catholics and the odds are actually better. Many other denominations don't pay homage to Mary and other dead saints and pray only to God.
I am a 67 year-old Catholic and go to daily mass a lot. I have noticed many billboards on the highway about religion/Christianity. The strange thing is that the Catholic billboards make me cringe, but when I see a billboard about Jesus (obviously non-Catholic) I get a warm feeling. Why do so many Catholic leaders only speak about "the Church"? Is it that difficult to simply point to Jesus? I think my observation and subsequent feelings are legitimate; yet I fear to tell a priest because my experience is they are not interested in anything that questions the Catholic way. I once brought a very benign question to a Catholic Deacon about why the Church was doing something, and he would not even respond...he just looked straight ahead like a statue. There is a hubris, IMO, in too many of our Catholic leaders, and it does not point to Christ; in fact, it points the other way.
I hope the reason I shared the latter is more obvious than I realize. But basically I was just wanting to show where the ecclesiology in history started to take a different perspective and become more individualistic.
Pray for them brother and take a more active role. Build a relationship with your priest. Lay it down on confession. The Church is the bride of Christ, work it out like you work it out with your wife
Matthew 16:18...and upon this Rock I will build "MY CHURCH"..JESUS SAID "MY CHURCH"..IT'S JESUS' CHURCH..!! EPHESIANS 5:23-30.., EVEN AS CHRIST IS THE "HEAD" OF THE CHURCH (HIS CHURCH): AND HE IS THE "SAVIOUR"OF THE BODY. THEREFORE AS THE CHURCH IS "SUBJECT" UNTO CHRIST (NOT THE POPE),..EVEN AS CHRIST ALSO "LOVED THE CHURCH,AND GAVE HIMSELF FOR IT. THAT HE MIGHT SANCTIFY AND CLEANSE IT WITH THE WASHING OF WATER BY THE WORD.THAT HE MIGHT PRESENT IT TO HIMSELF A "GLORIOUS CHURCH", NOT HAVING SPOT, OR WRINKLE, OR ANY SUCH THING; BUT THAT IT SHOULD BE HOLY AND WITHOUT BLEMISH. FOR WE ARE "MEMBERS" OF HIS BODY, OF HIS FLESH, AND OF HIS BONES. THIS IS A GREAT MYSTERY: BUT I SPEAK CONCERNING CHRIST AND THE CHURCH, "HIS CHURCH". IT'S JESUS' CHURCH AND NOT THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH..! WE READ IN THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES JESUS' CHURCH IS BEING BUILT ON THE ROCK HIMSELF. ACTS 2:46-47..AND THEY, CONTINUING DAILY WITH ONE ACCORD 🤝 IN THE TEMPLE, AND BREAKING BREAD FROM HOUSE TO HOUSE, DID EAT THEIR MEAT WITH GLADNESS AND SINGLENESS OF HEART.PRAISING GOD, AND HAVING FAVOUR WITH ALL THE PEOPLE.AND THE LORD "ADDED TO THE CHURCH" (HIS CHURCH) DAILY SUCH AS SHOULD BE "SAVED". CLEARLY...CLEARLY...AS GOD IS MY WITNESS, BY THE PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES THE HOLY SPIRIT IS CONVICTING THOUSANDS AND BAPTIZING ALL OF THEM INTO THE BODY OF CHRIST WHICH IS HIS CHURCH BUILD ON THE ROCK..!! IT IS ON JESUS HIMSELF THE ROCK THE CHURCH IS BUILT..!! PETER IS STILL PREACHING AND THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS ARE REPENTING AND GETTING SAVED..!! PETER IS NOT BUILDING JESUS 😢 😢 😢 CHURCH ON HIMSELF IN THE BOOK OF ACTS BUT ON JESUS THE ROCK..! PETER DIDN'T LOVED THE CHURCH AND GAVE HIMSELF FOR IT...!! CHRIST DID..!!!! JESUS IS MY ROCK OF MY SALVATION, MY REDEEMER, MY SAVIOUR, MY LORD,MY GOD, MY 👑 KING..!! THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS NOT CHRISTIANITY BUT THE APOSTATE CHURCH..!!
If older arguments are better, then heresies are the best because they came before the New Testament. Many New Testament epistles were written to correct heresies. Of course, the age of an argument only proves its age.
At the end of the video regarding James' double standard That's not a double standard. It's not a double standard because you and James do not share the same standard of authority for your doctrine. James believes in Scripture alone, which means he does not have to find a church father who believes in eternal security in order for his standard to be met. You on the other hand hold other authorities outside of Scripture, such as tradition (or church history as I prefer to call it, I know there are differences in nuances there between the two though), so in critiquing your standard, he uses the early church fathers since that is, if it is tradition, another authority outside of Scripture that determines doctrine. But that's because that's your standard. That isnt James' standard. So it's not a double standard.
A student is given a book by a teacher to read, then a teacher using variety of techniques enables his student to understand the context, my question is, where did he/she get those techniques? My concern here's , our brothers&sisters of those 40,000+ denomination must understand that, before the book(Bible), the teachings were there, and even the Bible confirms, so it's our responsibility to enable them to understand those facts, to help their coming back to the root of A tangible Faith... God bless.
@@oswaldpancras8353 There was no book called the bible but the bible was very much present as what Christ and the apostles taught is what we now have in word. When one practices a jezebel type teaching, they should not worry too much of the other denominations as many of them teach the word of God. Facts are that Christ, and the apostles, didn't say mass, worship a eucharist, pray the rosary, pray to Mary or other dead saints.
This is nonsense. These church fathers have been turned into God's. As Christians, Christ's teachings are what we follow. The teachings of his apostles in the Bible come second. The new testament church practices are also in scriptures. Any church father or individual who comes up with ideas against scriptures even if they lived 100 years after Christ should be discarded
@Prasanth Thomas Father's that lived more than 200 years after Jesus and the apostles. Yeah right. I prefer to hold on to what the real fathers the apostles taught and wrote about in the new testament
This is fascinating. I'm a Baptist who went to seminary and was educated on most of the Protestant arguments (and Catholic answers) he describes here. One very old obstacle to Protestant acceptance of non-scriptural authority is the Jewish acceptance of Rabbinical writings. Protestants are not just distancing themselves from Catholics with sole-scriptura. On the subject of purgatory---it should be mentioned in any discussion that medieval popes sold "get out free" indulgences. So, the Church did at least for a time, portray purgatory as a place one was stuck.
@@sammygomes7381 I suppose that Calvin, Luther, and the Protestant rulers of England burning Catholics and people of other denominations at the stake was also a misunderstanding?
If Mary was sinless did she then not die, for the wages of sin is death. If Mary was caused to be sinless, it HAD to be because of the (future) shed blood of Jesus Christ, right? PAUL spoke of original sin LONG BEFORE AUGUSTINE, when he wrote, "In Adam all are made sinners."
The orthodox church teaches that she fell asleep. The catholic church doesn't teach ether but that she was assumed into heaven body and soul. Ave Maria
Your first question -- Yes -- assumption of Mary. second question -- Jesus was fully man and fully God. Jesus did not pretended to be human, he was fully human. Saying that there is no exception to the rule says that Jesus also had sinned, acdg to your logic.
@@seanfernandolopez9139 Why would Jesus have sin as sin is passed down through the male, Adam. Mary was not impregnated by a man, thus no sin for Christ, sin for Mary
You have taken Malachi1:11 totally out of context. A pure sacrifice is an animal sacrifice that is heathy and without blemish. When you offer blind animals for sacrifice, is it not wrong? And when you present the lame and sick ones, is it not wrong? Try offering them to your governor! Would he be pleased with you or show you favor?” asks the LORD of Hosts. Malachi 1:8 For My name will be great among the nations, from where the sun rises to where it sets. In every place, incense and pure offerings will be presented in My name, because My name will be great among the nations,” says the LORD of Hosts. But you profane it when you say, ‘The table of the Lord is defiled, and as for its fruit, its food is contemptible.’ You also say: ‘Oh, what a nuisance!’ And you turn up your nose at it,” says the LORD of Hosts. “You bring offerings that are stolen, lame, or sick! Should I accept these from your hands?” asks the LORD. “But cursed is the deceiver who has an acceptable male in his flock and vows to give it, but sacrifices a defective animal to the Lord. For I am a great King,” says the LORD of Hosts, “and My name is to be feared among the nations.Malachi 1:11-13 This is not the prophecy of the coming Eucharist but how Israel were treating the animal sacrifices. Check your sources! Mary is without sin? Then why did she die? 12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. Romans 5:12
Appreciate the video but this man is acting a little too smart. Also, the Greek Orthodox Church is the first church. After all, the New Testament was written in old Greek not Latin. So he’s not representing the first church
Trent is being dishonest when he claims the quote from the didache is "regarding the eucharist." There IS a chapter that is "Regarding the Eucharist" namely chapter 9. But the passage he quotes is from chapter 14 which is titled "Christian Assembly on the Lord's Day." In other words: he presumes that the word sacrifice in this section is in reference to the eucharist, but the text does not give us reason to think so. What else could it refer to? Hebrews 13:15-16 "Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. Do not neglect to do good, and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God." Worship itself and sincere praise offered to God IS a sacrifice according to Hebrews. Trent's position does not allow the possibility of this understanding. Nor does it allow an understanding of confession to be unto a brother wronged or to God, but presumes the RCC version of confession.
Sounds somewhat convincing; there are several passages that include the word sacrifice in new and Old Testament, but it’s talking about the lords days break bread give thanks, it goes in order how even Protestants take communion. All the Bible churches I have gone to say you cannot or shouldn’t take it with anger for a brother. Have you had anyone in your church read the Didache , test it out without giving them your theory and ask them see what they think. When I first read it from a Protestant view I didn’t come to your conclusion at all. It’s seems like an overthought to intentionally misinterpret it. I noticed breaking bread lords day, must certainly be an add on to the Eucharist. Again even from a Protestants eyes I remember hearing those Catholics with their bloody sacrifice, only a priest can do a sacrifice was Jesus not our high priest. IRENAEUS “He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, ‘This is my body.’ The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, he confessed to be his blood. He taught the new sacrifice of the new covenant, of which Malachi, one of the twelve [minor] prophets, had signified beforehand: ‘You do not do my will, says the Lord Almighty, and I will not accept a sacrifice at your hands. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure sacrifice; for great is my name among the Gentiles, says the Lord Almighty’ [Mal. 1:10-11]. By these words he makes it plain that the former people will cease to make offerings to God; but that in every place sacrifice will be offered to him, and indeed, a pure one, for his name is glorified among the Gentiles” (Against Heresies 4:17:5 [A.D. 189]). “If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?” (Against Heresies 4:33-32 [A.D. 189]). “He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life-flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” (ibid., 5:2). But I do respect you have taken the time to read the Didache.
@JuanGonzalez-kb3gm I think both catholics and many protestants mistakenly place a catholic filter over their readings of early church fathers, assuming the rcc teachings on these topics and inserting that understanding into the writings, rather than studying the scriptures and trying to discern how the writings of the church fathers might be interpreted by scripture, we use the fathers' writings to interpret scripture. On the one hand, I hold only that the scriptures themselves are infallibly authoritative. This is not to denounce real earthly authority which the church indeed has, but we see in Titus 1:9 what I believe to be a call to elders/overseers (sometimes translated bishops) to hold fast to the gospel as taught by the apostles so as to test any other doctrines against them and denounce any such doctrines which arise. In other words, the authority of the church is to enforce the teachings of the scriptures, and given the sheer quantity of epistles written for corrective purposes, I think it's reasonable to assert that being a part of the early church does not make one's understanding of scripture more reliable and thus all early church fathers ought to have their writings tested against scripture which God ensured to be recorded in such a way that we could understand it when empowered by the holy spirit.
@@JuanGonzalez-kb3gm I would encourage you to thoroughly read through the epistle to the Hebrews and compare it with the statements within the council of Trent. I've heard a priest make the claim that the eucharist isn't a resacrificing but that it is a continuation of the same single sacrifice of Christ on the cross. But that's not what the council of Trent says. It presents it as a continual resacrificing of the body and blood of Chirst, while the book of Hebrews makes plain that the primary way we distinguish between the ineffectual sacrifices of the old testament and the effectual sacrifice of christ in the new is that Christ died once and need never be resacrificed.
@@MCNinjaDJ Hebrews 9:9-10 foreshadows the Eucharist itself showing that those animals being sacrificed were temporary till Jesus sacrifice. (The new order) 9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings-external regulations applying until the time of the new order. No need for additional sacrifice of animals, The difference is Jesus on the cross was once for the act of forgiveness of sins final redemption. The Eucharist is Just reinterpretation of the last supper Touto poieite tan eman anamnasin; Luke 22:19 “Offer this as my memorial offering.” Body and blood of Christ being present. 1410 It is Christ himself, the eternal high priest of the New Covenant who, acting through the ministry of the priests, offers the Eucharistic sacrifice. And it is the same Christ, really present under the species of bread and wine, who is the offering of the Eucharistic sacrifice. CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 1410 Jesus sacrifice was a gift for all , who through obedience participate with his teachings. I don’t see how Trent shows any different but maybe you can point me to where it does. ( not being smart about it) , but like anything even our RU-vid algorithms once we see something that feeds what we like,our mind goes straight for it, we can find imperfections in everything man made if we look for it. Thank you again.
@JuanGonzalez-kb3gm Luke 22:19 says a memorial offering. Memorial offerings are not sin offerings, nor are they offerings of atonement. The council of Trent makes claim that the eucharist is a propitiatory sacrifice in cannon 3 of the section on the sacrifice of the mass. And it anathematizes, in cannon 6, anyone who claims that these cannons contain any errors. Does that include Luke, who said it is a memorial sacrifice rather than a prepitiatory sacrifice? Cannon 1 also declares anathema any who say that "A true and proper sacrifice is not offered to God" in the eucharist. Mind you it does not say "THE true and proper sacrifice," so Trent makes no claim that this is the same sacrifice as Jesus on the cross, except in substance. That is, it's not a continuation nor is it a perpetuation of a single sacrifice, but each mass is its own sacrifice of Jesus body and blood for the propitiation of our sins. Again... Jesus Christ was ONCE sacrificed for all. Not once died for all... once sacrificed. Trent denies a single sacrifice, it denies that it can itself contain any errors, and it claims that the eucharist is the same in category and nature but separate in act from Jesus' death on the cross. I don't know how a Catholic who truly loves and believes the scriptures cannot see that Trent is in violation of them.
PLEASE EXCUSE ME, BUT I'M AT A LOST...... I'M HEARING ABOUT 'SPECULATIONS'... ABOUT HISTORIANS ... ABOUT BOOKS..... About Mary being sinless, about purgatory..... IS THERE ANY "SCRIPTURE EVIDENCE OF ALL THIS?".....…. DOESN'T THE SCRIPTURE WEIGH IN ON ALL THIS? PLEASE, CAN SEE SCRIPTURE ON PURGATORY & ON MARY BEING SINLESS..... PLEASE... PLEASE... PLEASE....!!!!
Keep your eyes on Christ. Mary cannot save you and has nothing to do with your Salvation other than giving birth to Christ. Like all of us Mary was born with sin. There is no purgatory, sort of a "do over". Your destiny is complete at that last breath, you're saved, or you're not saved.
Christ be with you If a Church father contradicts Christ he is wrong. Their ideas supplement and give us an Idea of how Christ meant teaching to be understood. God bless you
@@mimi_j Christ be with you Speaking from the Chair of St Peter a Pope will not contradict anything Christ says. Any other time he can be wrong. God bless you
@@MrKev1664 GBU I’m not familiar with your wording. I’m so sorry 😞 Could you please explain? What do you mean speaking from Peter’s chair a Pope can’t be wrong but other times he can? Thank you for responding!
"but let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned.".....so is the sacrificed profaned when Biden, Pelosi or any other person who publicly supports abortion attends Mass and receives the Eucharist? w/love
I was debating the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist with my Episcopal Priest. In defense of the real presence I quoted one of the Church Fathers. The Priest objected. I pointed out that as Episcopalians we affirm the Apostolic Succession in the Nicene Creed every Sunday. Said Priest automatically started talking about the reformation and how we do not hold to the Catholic Church. It is ludicrous. I am now in OCIA and will likely be Catholic by Christmas.
quote--- we affirm the Apostolic Succession--unquote Noi such term ever used in the bible!! ----What does Scripture say about false doctrine? False doctrine, and those who promote it, should be rejected, rebuked, and exposed. This is demonstrated multiple times in the New Testament (1 Timothy 1:19-20, 2 Timothy 4:14-15, Jude 3 - 4, Matthew 23, Galatians 1:6-9, Galatians 5:12, Titus 1:9, Romans 16:17).
What about salvation outside your church eccluisum Nulla salus. Compare with Isaiah 40: 13-14. Who determines salvation. Your church alone any church or pope's ex Cathedra statements or absolutions or penances. Don't try to work out his ways. That is arrogance and totally unwise despite your apologetics.
The Ascension of Isaiah and Odes of Solomon attest to Mary’s pain free childbirth. These are not Scriptual writers, non inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Catholic Church does say that Mary was free from pains of childbirth. The Catholic Church also says that Mary is the woman clothed with the sun in Revelation 12. Well the woman in Revelation 12 cries out in travail in childbirth. You can’t have it both ways. We need to believe the Holy Scriptures and not some ambiguous writings by church fathers.
