I Debated @NeedGodnet , This Is How It Went. | The Catholic Voice #11 

Noticed this ages later, 12:53 sounds like I cussed but I promise you that my headphones muffle outside sound. I did say “shoot”, but it sounds odd because again my headphones muffle sound outside.

The parachute saves you but you still have to put it on. It's sad that protestants manipulate the scripture to fit their ideology. You need the faith to believe the parachute can be used to save you, that causes you to put it on.

Great explanation Ryan. God bless you for explaining the simplicity of the gospel to this young man. May God open him up to the truth and make him trust(have faith) our Lord

NeedGodnet reminds me of Ray Comfort. Same analogies and everything.

Wonderful job dealing with his initial talking points on the canon. I find that the vast majority of the reasons he cites to reject the deuterocanon are arbitrarily drawn up and applied (i.e. he doesn't have an objective way of grounding the criteria or of applying it only to the deuterocanon). Ex: He says none of the deuterocanon were cited or alluded to by Jesus or the Apostles (debatable). Yet, when we point out instances we think are alluding to what is written in a deuterocanonical book they say "well just because it's alluded to/cited doesn't mean it's Scripture." Or when we point out that books like Esther are no where cited in the NT, their criteria all of a sudden shifts.

3:29 thats a blatant lie, everyone had different canons, especially about the epistles, some even considerated ester to not be canon (athanasius) which protestants have in their canon, some disregarded hebrews, others disregarded revelations, not to mention that the apocriphal have to be scripture because Jesus quotes them all the time, infact wisdom is the first book to teach imortality of the soul, and heaven, its the first book ever to talk about a holy Spirit. If everyone taught the 66 canon is the correct one than in would be the canon today lol, furthemore did the early christians taught infalliably when its convinient for him? But when its about the eucarist, when its about no salvation outside the church, when its about infant baptism, its like : no bro trust scripture

4:34 Jesus did not cite it but He celebrated Maccabees events , one of the deutricanonical books

13:04. Ryan says, “I see continuing in His kindness is continuing to believe.” Imitating Gods kindness is not described as believing ANYWHERE IN THE BIBLE to my knowledge. Why does he equate charity with faith? They are not the same. 1 Corinthians 13.13- faith, hope, and love are three things that will last forever, AND THAT LOVE IS THE GREATEST OF THE THREE.” Love is greater than faith. Acts of love are greater than acts of faith, I would believe….

Easy believer or Faith alone error... "Faith without work is dead" Keep it up! 🙏 Faith=Obedience + believe.

How's this for an answer to Ryan, asking @16:00 and other places - "What sins are being forgiven at the time of Jesus' crucifixion?". My answer is "Those I have confessed" Therefore, those sins are of my past sins only (even the sin I committed 10 seconds ago are "past"). At the Mass, during the Eucharistic celebration, we are WITH Jesus at the time of His crucifixion, and just before the Eucharistic celebration, we offer up our gifts, along with all our sins that we are willing to confess to. This is in line with the Jewish tradition of the priest offering the lamb - the unblemished one - as a sacrifice for the sins of the people, except Jesus is now the High Priest, the Eternal Priest, and through the mystery we are present with Jesus at the Cross. This highlights some very important points - the need to go to Mass as often as possible, the need for confession and repentance; the need to be in a state of grace to receive communion (or, put another way, to be in communion with Jesus) The validation of a priest (or one of apostolic succession) to be the only ones who can legitimately celebrate Mass (the Eucharist), and why it is a sacrament. It also means we have to continuously ask for forgiveness, to repent, to constantly beg for God's mercy, to live in faith all the time, to do good works (meaning following the commandments, being charitable, repenting, growing in faith, praying, reading scripture, etc - those are the Good works) BECAUSE of the faith and grace we have received from Jesus and because without those works, our faith (alone) would be dead or pointless. Oh, and in reference to the deuterocanonical (the 7 apocrypha) books - show me a Jew that does not believe in Jesus, but does accept the new testament.. :) Using Rom 3:2 is not a sound objection because God did not provide the Jews with an inspired table of contents - and among Jews there are many / have been many disagreements over the canon. And on a more serious note : One of the earliest pieces of evidence comes from a person who, despite his hostility toward Christianity, nevertheless attests to a few truths of Christianity, including the acceptance of the Deuterocanon: Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph (A.D. 37-137). The Deuterocanon books were not added.. they were removed by Protestants. At the Council of Rome in 382, the Church decided upon a canon of 46 Old Testament books and 27 in the New Testament. This decision was ratified by the councils at Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546). In 1546, Martin Luther included them in his first German translation, (published the Council of Trent). They can also be found in the first King James Version (1611) and in the first Bible ever printed, the Gutenberg Bible (a century before Trent).

If Christ is the parachute, I see having faith in it (i.e. in Jesus) as actually putting it on (so trusting in Jesus that He will save you from sin and death, which Protestants do) but then actually _jumping_ from the plane, taking action (living that faith in the real world). Saying you have faith in Christ (merely trusting in the parachute) whilst remaining in the plane that will crash (indulging in the desires of the flesh and putting the things of this world above God) is not going to save you. God is our strength, he is the only one who can save us from sin. Therefore, to be saved is to rely on Him, rely on his grace, rely on his plan for you, and that means taking action. If a man wants to overcome porn, it's not just a mental act, it's surrendering yourself to God because you know he's the only who can set you free, and surrendering looks like actually talking with Him, building your relationship, because if you want to trust in God, you must try to nurture a relationship, because trust only increases with a relationship, and every relationship is based on trust. It means not thinking you will be strong enough on the internet alone in a room, hence, asking God to help you change your lifestyle etc. Sola Fide allows for moral laziness because our actions don't affect our salvation, which is so not true. I can't see that doctrine having divine origin. It's true my actions can't _earn_ me heaven, but they can get me in hell!

Well done, man! Keep up the good work.

The Catholic Church did not outright ban the translation of the Bible into the common vernacular. However, they did restrict and prohibit the possession, reading, and use of certain editions and translations of the Bible. The Church preferred to keep the Latin language as the liturgical language, even when no one else spoke it. They also provided only a few difficult-to-access "chained Bibles" and forbade Bible translations in the vernacular. The modern belief that medieval Catholicism opposed translation of scripture into the vernacular is largely exaggerated and misleading.

The early renditions of the KJV had the Deuterocanon. It was later removed by the Reformers. This is very concerning because the church held those books to be scripture. Luther wanted to remove the Book of Hebrews, James and I believe Revelation but was ultimately talked out of it. Fast forward to our time and there are scholars that are now saying that some of Paul's letters and other epistles are spurious. If Protestants remain consistent, they would have to consider removing those books in question as well. Need God keeps saying "we don't think they are scripture" for X reason. First, I don't know who "we" is but if he just follows his line of reasoning that the scholars take, he will end up siding with them or even Luther.

This "needgod" dude fails the physiognomy test

Good job debating ray comfort.

Regarding the cabin: 1) the text cited if Josephus is written in a polemic against pagans. Obviously he is going to steel man the Jewish position by claiming a uniformity that is clearly not there based on the Sadducees rejection of resurrection and the dead sea scrolls 2) he mentions the "law and the prophets" and says the deuterocannocial does not fit into that. But neither does the mutual history books we accept like kings and chronicles 3) he states that the oracles were received by the Jews. That's all. We all agree that the Jews wrote and received the deuterocannocial. But scripture doesn't say the Jews will DETERMINE or infallibly discern the canon. So therefore the argument assumes this... Unfairly To use a metaphor: St Paul: "the groceries were delivered to the Jews" That doesn't mean Bob put all the groceries in the cupboard. It means all the groceries were given to bob 🤷‍♂️

We can have a moral certainty of salvation. If a person dies in a state of Grace, we can at least expect to receive the purification of soul before entering Heaven. Jesus expects us to obey him, we need to be Baptized for the forgiveness of sins, be his sheep by feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the prisoner. If one just says the sinners prayer and fully believes in his sacrifice that he died for one's forgiveness, then not obey him, one cannot have have any certainty of salvation. Obedience is key to salvation, your faith depends on your obedience.

1.Which Jews is Roman's 3:3? The Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Those that followed Jesus were all Jews and used those books.2. Jesus and the Apostle quoted from the Dueterocanonicals. 3.Their were Prophets around Prophetess Anna, so their were Prophets he stated their were no Prophets for 400 years before Christ, so he is in error. 4 Jews did accept and some didn't. 5 Josephus belonged to the Pharisees. So he accepted only certain books but the Sadducees accepted 5, Essenes accepted the Septuagint, Bereans accepted the Septuagint. AND Timothy accepted the Septuagint too. You did a great bro.

What does it mean to be saved by faith alone? Faith is a trust in revealed truth. The question I may have is how does this trust itself save us? First, what exactly are we trusting in? We put trust in something by assenting to it (that’s at least part of it). Assenting to _what_ exactly? That by Jesus dying for our sins and rising to eternal life and by our coming into communion with him, we can rise to life even if we die. That’s perhaps one precise thing to assent to. Is it now the case that this assent alone is good enough to merit righteousness? Surely trusting in this is more than just intellectual assent? Real trust impacts how you act, so if you don’t act in accord to your assent, it can’t be a meritorious trust. We also must trust that in order to love god we must keep his commandments. After all, we are told that we will be judged according to our works. It is sin which leads to death, and sin is an act, so how do we have good acts to be judged by instead? We are saved by being righteous, the question is how to become righteous? Firstly those sins need to be removed, and then life in righteousness must be lived out. Obviously it can’t be done all on our own apart from grace, because we can’t earn God’s infinite favor no matter how many deeds we may heap up, as if we can boast of our own goodness. Sin is only wiped away and genuine good deeds are done in response to the promptings of God’s grace (not prior to it, but after it). I return to the question of how faith relates to this, which is what I’m curious about. We perhaps know these promptings of grace through faith, ie trust in the claims that sins can be forgiven by a crucified man and that that good deeds are in fact meritorious for life in heaven. Because who in their right mind would feed a hungry man instead of themselves if there was no merit to be gained from it regarding life in heaven? You first have to be moved by grace to do that. I think there’s a sense in which we are righteous by our deeds (in the sense that we’ll be judged by them) and there’s another sense in which we are righteous by grace (in the sense that we cannot be righteous without it). Equivocating is what causes all the disputation. TL;DR me thinking out loud

We don’t have nobody to guide us besides Jesus

Nice first effort if I was you I would watch some of Bob Sungenis debates and read of his books

Can I debate you as well? I am a reformed protestant.

This wasn't a debate, and it was barely a "discussion", which you also say it is. This is you hijacking a Q&A session, trying to steamroll. If you want a debate, arrange it properly with someone who agrees to debate you.

I just started watching it and I unfortunately will have to listen to it in bits and pieces because I’m tied up with several things but this dude from @needGodnet, starting at around 2:26, commits the biggest flaw that Protestants have. They use a crippled bible in the KJB. First of all they deny the inspiration of the Deuterocanonicals as they were removed, if I’m not mistaken in 1825 by some British printing company. Martin Luther didn’t like them however, they were still included in the KJB but not as part of it; just something that made a good read. ML and others didn’t believe they were inspired, that is why they go all over the place with their own interpretations and form their own churches, splitting over and over and over, ad infinitum. He seems to be comparing the CC to the Mormons. He says He goes to the Jewish people, but they deny Jesus, so does he want to follow their footsteps? If so, then he also should deny Jesus. Protestants fail to understand that King James had NO, absolutely NO authority to have a new version of the bible written. The CC canonized the bible WITH THE AUTHORITY given to Her by Jesus Christ. King Jimmy was a secular leader. It’s just like as if there had been a bible authorized by President Obama and calling it the true bible and he removed several books. Luther didn’t think the Letter of James or even Revelations should be part of the bible but they were kept anyway. This dude lacks wisdom as the Book of Wisdom was removed from the True bible and he hasn’t studied it, or maybe he has, but since he has, as I said, a crippled bible, he will not believe anything that is written in them. The CC canonized the bible in 382 AD and approved by Pope Damasus and the CC Bible has remained the same since then. Those that protested didn’t like what was in them as they would have had to remain Catholic. BTW this dude from @needGod.org was spanked in a debate with Alex from voice of reason.

Thought you started off weak but dude I was wrong. Bravo 👏

Ryan’s question at 33:30, basically if you trust in God today but later you sin 5 times and then die, do you still go to heaven? In one sense this severely underestimates the fact that sin offends God and that it leads to death, mortal sin in particular. This question is like asking “today I trust in you God” then tomorrow committing murder, adultery, theft, false witness, and blasphemy all in the same day and still expecting to be saved. That’s obviously insane, because Ezekiel tells us how you can’t be expected to be saved for your righteousness today if tomorrow you turn to wickedness as if your past good deeds compensate for your present evil deeds. The other sense of this question is that you sin venially out of your human weakness but still trying to remain a friend of God. In that sense yes you can still go to heaven (with some cleaning up to do first). But I don’t think Ryan makes that distinction.

Brother as a fellow Catholic I appreciate u defending are beliefs.. but u gotta press em on that whole free will thing God endowed us with. an Jesus himself saying not everyone who says Lord Lord will be in my Kingdom .but those who follow my father's will.. that already right there is action.protestants dance around the world doin works so much an say you gotta do basically the same thing as Catholic doctrine.. but say but acting out ur faith by doin as Christ isn't doin anything jus believing.. I guess all those christiansfor the first 1500 years are wrong

Keep doing what you’re doing. Debating is an acquired skill and, sadly, being right doesn’t mean you’re gonna win. Don’t be fooled by the Protestants who follow a perversion of Christianity which has come forth in the last few hundred years… Keep up the good work. It is hard to undo heresy that a person has built his entire Christian life upon…The entire Protestant view of God, Christianity, salvation, is warped. About a question he asked: “If God has judged you based on how you’ve lived, would you go to heaven or hell?” I see what he’s trying to ask, but is this not just the same question as “are you going to go to heaven or hell?” I say this because God DOES judge off based on how we’ve lived. Needgotdotnet proposes this idea as if it’s a hypothetical 😂 The thing is, while how we’ve lived does include sin, it also includes turning away from that sin and choosing God and staying in Gods grace. God isn’t only judging us based of our sins… If God isn’t judging us based off of our lives, what is He judging us on??? If He sees we have lived a sanctified life, then He will reward us. If He sees that we have lived a life of unrighteousness to the very end, then He will not. Am I missing something? The answer to Ryan’s question in this context would be yes…right?

Heads up, don’t let them call the Deuterocanonical book apocryphal. Apocrypha means hidden and was specific to the “Gnostic” writings. The 7 books they removed were never hidden and not connected at all with Gnostics. Also don’t use Maccabees for purgatory. That was before Jesus’s resurrection so it doesn’t apply to Christians. Keep up the great work

Whole family was Catholic highly recommend looking at the information from read also from the Greek and Hebrew and read the Bible from your perspective and not from you where taught

@Catholic truth. Bryan taught him nicely in their debate. You may listen to their debate.

Ryan explains away James 2 by saying it’s about being justified before man, but I have to ask, who cares about being justified before man?

47:47 the real colour of protestant. Catholic is the fullness of truth.

Good stuff that you went to debate with him, but NeedGod definitely won this, good effort though

The concept of "assurance of salvation" is kind of an highpoint of arrogance. There is a verse that protestants often use and that is 1 John 5:13 "13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life." With this verse, they claim the concept of "assurance of salvation" by only believing in the Son of God. So if we look at verses 1 to 12 (the verses verse 13 is talking about) we get this: 1 Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him. 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome. (already we see that believing and loving is DOING, "OBEYING his commands", " KEEPING his commands", NOT just believing without doing, mere faith, faith alone) 4 For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. (Overcoming the world is a requirement that is obtained by carrying out and keeping God's commands? hmm..). And this is the victory that has overcome the world-our faith. 5 Who is it that overcomes the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God? (so we see that belief and faith go hand in hand with DOING His commands) 6 This is he who came by water and blood-Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree. 9 If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater, for this is the testimony of God that he has borne concerning his Son. 10 Whoever believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son. 11 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life.(how do we HAVE the Son? Simple, let's go back to verse 2 and 3: 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. So if you are sure that you are KEEPING God's commands, by OBEYING His commands, you can know that you have eternal life. (verse 13). It's a pretty bald statement to claim that you are fully obeying God's commands, especially for those who are outside of the Catholic Church of Jesus Christ (which is in itself disobedience to our LORD). Instead of having the arrogance of claiming your "assurance of salvation", I'd rather pray to my LORD and say: LORD Jesus Christ, Son of the living GOD, have mercy on me, a sinner! I trust that you have saved me, that you are saving me right now and that you will keep me safe until my death. All I have is You and without Your finished work all I have is assurance of damnation. Because none of us can keep Your commandments perfectly, I pray that You keep us in Your grace and mercy and that You help us all to keep Your commandments. Help us to pick us our cross and follow You. My LORD and My God, have mercy on us, and on the whole world. Amen.

22:19, 1 John: we love because he first loved us.

45:55 outside the Catholic which denomination is the correct one when they interpret themselves?

Both of you guys dont even know how to enter heaven. Both of yall are just worshipping christ in vain

Such a straw man to say we believe that our actions amount to anything compared to God's mercy. But what they do is express walking in Christ and building a *relationship* with him. To be part of his body

Question: You said "THE Greek Septuagint" talking to this man.... Are you aware that there were at the least 3 different Greek Septuagint's (with differing canon lists) during the first and second century or was that a tactic to avoid what they "Laid Up in the Temple" in order to introduce confusion?

Ex-Catholics For Christ

This Ryan dude is nice but way off on his arguments. Please join an apostolic faith!!!

did you have the blessing of your Bishop to debate him?

Ryan cooked you.