Interesting, well told also. In my opinion and mentioned in 53th minute it is likely the relics would have been divided over different places. That was very common in many countries. That also explains why just a few bones are found., because the other bones would be in different places.
Set my teeth on edge from the get go. 😬 I want to watch this and glean something of interest/value from it but “Christianism” sounds derogatory and set a negative tone/sense of agenda.
The thing that few people understand today is that Peter had a wife and a mother-in-law. It is often said - even in Protestantism - that Peter was unmarried or that his wife had died before he joined Jesus’ group. However, Paul writes that Peter carried his own wife on his travels. So Peter had a wife or he remarried and somewhere there must be a forgotten and lost tomb of Peter's wife. Possibly it is in Asia Minor, which was Peter’s main sphere of influence and pushed Paul to operate further west into Macedonia and Achaia.
nobody says that Peter wasn't married. It says right there in the gospels that he was married. Also Paul says forbid not to marry and that Bishops should have one wife. If you're preaching something different you're going against the Bible.
@@Cthulhu1991 I mean the "Peter is the first Pope of Rome" shit that has made Peter divorced and unmarried. The passage where Peter says that he has forsaken everything to follow Jesus has been used as evidence of it. But this is contrary and against to what Paul says about Peter and his wife.
"What we know by FAITH and what we learn by REASON cannot be in conflict." - St. Augustine of Hippo, Church Father (354AD.) Historically, the Catholic Church has often been a patron of sciences. It has been prolific in the foundation and funding of schools, universities, and hospitals, and many clergy have been active in the sciences. Historians of science such as Pierre Duhem credit medieval Catholic mathematicians and philosophers such as John Buridan, Nicole Oresme, and Roger Bacon as the founders of modern science. Duhem found "the mechanics and physics, of which modern times are justifiably proud, to proceed by an uninterrupted series of scarcely perceptible improvements from doctrines professed in the heart of the medieval schools." Catholic scientists, both religious and lay, have led scientific discovery in many fields. From ancient times, Christian emphasis on practical charity gave rise to the development of systematic nursing and hospitals and the Church remains the single largest private provider of medical care and research facilities in the world. Following the Fall of Rome, monasteries and convents remained bastions of scholarship in Western Europe and clergymen were the leading scholars of the age - studying nature, mathematics, and the motion of the stars. During the Middle Ages, the Church founded Europe's first universities, producing scholars like Robert Grosseteste, Albert the Great, Roger Bacon, and Thomas Aquinas, who helped establish the scientific method. During this period, the Church was also a major patron of engineering for the construction of elaborate cathedrals. Since the Renaissance, Catholic scientists have been credited as fathers of a diverse range of scientific fields: Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543) pioneered heliocentrism, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) prefigured the theory of evolution with Lamarckism, Friar Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) pioneered genetics, and Fr Georges Lemaître (1894-1966) proposed the Big Bang cosmological model, he is the Father of Big Bang Theory. The Jesuits have been particularly active, notably in astronomy. Church patronage of sciences continues through institutions like the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (a successor to the Accademia dei Lincei of 1603) and Vatican Observatory (a successor to the Gregorian Observatory of 1580). As the world's oldest and largest continuously functioning international institution, it has played a prominent role in shaping the history and development of Western civilization we now know today. The Catholic Church is the largest non-government provider of education and medical services in the world. The Catholic Church manages 26% of health care facilities in the world, including tens of thousand hospitals, clinics, orphanages, pharmacies and centers for those with leprosy. The church has always been involved in education, since the founding of the first universities of Europe. It runs and sponsors tens of thousand of primary and secondary schools, colleges and universities throughout the world and operates the world's largest non-governmental school system. In the words of J. L. Heilbron of the University of California, Berkeley, the "Roman Catholic Church gave more financial aid and social support to the study of astronomy over six centuries, from the recovery of ancient learning during the late Middle Ages into the Enlightenment, than any other, and all other institutions." This financial and social support extended also to other branches of scientific inquiry. The Church is patron of Learnings and Social Services for almost 2000 yrs.
when discussing Constantine they were showing pictures of Justinine . Take this documentary with a grain of salt because they can't even get their emperors straight.
Just randomly writing to God .. God I hope that in the future im able to go back to gym and get some of my confidence back and feel as I used to as in my current state I do feel I’m losing “Me” I’ll still read the amount of the bible I’m currently reading daily I’ll just have more of a spring about my step… YaHoVaH I pray you grant me that in Jesus’ name.
Always ask God to guide you and allow him to walk first in your life. Remember the father is within us all. I find that before I pray I tap my chest and speak honestly. People don’t realize that the heart speaks to the brain, the heart is the center of our being. During a prayer I asked my heart to give me a name I could recognize and call upon. I laid still and quiet then a name popped in my mind. Since then I pray and speak to my heart and asked the father for his guidance and to strengthen me in all aspects. There exists a connection to the divine through the center of our being, the heart. Just try it and you’ll see how the father will step in and change your life 🙏🏽
@@mondriaa The word appears in the Urban Dictionary, hardly a 500 year-old source. It is meant to belittle those who practice an orthodox belief system.
@@olainfree905 lol because every word in the urban dictionary was to be new? Christianity is also in the urban dictionary must be 1 of does hip new words. Maybe look further and belittle is not really the case, also not what urban dictionary says, some maybe use it that way, wonder where you get that, calling it Christian extremism would be better and there is no belittling there
I can’t say what I am but it is very interesting and I like religious memorabilia I feel the Bible has some truth but it seems everything leads back to summeria….
I'm not religious at all. But one thing I've come to realize is SCIENCE is the worlds largest cult. All its theories haven't proven shit. The more you look into them yourself instead of just BELIEVING everything you were told in school things fall apart rather quickly... So many things SCIENCE ignores because it has to in order to keep the religion going. One thing I'm certain of, seen with my own eyes, felt with my own senses, there is life after death! Materialism and scientism is nonsense! This place was created, whatever that means I do not know but the proof is everywhere. To think man knows what happened billions of years ago and that every species on earth came from one cell created from nothing has got to be the most religious belief I have ever heard! When have you ever seen a species evolve into a different species? Its absolutely ridiculous! Life is special and this is no accident....
@@nateanthony5142 Look deeper into the Bible. You might just find what you're looking for but, if you think not, you will certainly find some really interesting history.
At 1:29 you said “But beyond the relics the prince of the apostles is also a very mysterious character able to both betray Jesus and yet become the new head of Christianism.” Peter denied knowing Jesus he didn’t betray Him. Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus.
1 Peter 5 verse 13. [1 Peter 5:13 NKJV] "She who is in Babylon, elect together with [you], greets you; and [so does] Mark my son." The "Babylon" that Peter is speaking of is not the historical Babylon as it had been in ruins for centuries but during Peter's life time 'Babylon' was used as a cryptic reference for Rome and when he writes of 'she', he's clearly meaning the church hence, there is evidence written in Peter's own hand that he was in Rome.
yes it is, jesus is and and always will be, he existed before mary because he alwasy existed. mary shoudl absolutey be respected as the morhter of jesus and virgin and sacred. but there is jesus without mary
@@taylorvr2715 hello my friend. We Catholics do not pray TO Mary, we pray WITH Mary TO Jesus. the Bible gives an example, Mary interceded to Jesus for the couple at the Wedding of Cana. She says do all what He says to do.
I've never believed Peter gave himself up nor chose to be crucified upside-down. It always sounded made up to me. If it is true it would have been to mock him.
The only Roman Catholic Church did not use Peter to start the foundation of its Church. The Romans kept intricate details of their buildings the layout of their communities and their history. And it would only make sense that the followers of the early Christian Church would remember where their Martyrs fell.
Why do you guys keep showing a famous mosaic of the Byzantine Emperor Justinian and calling it Emperor Constantine? 40:33 Very sloppy for a history channel.
This documentary completely disregarded a great deal of scientific investigation and that of renowned archeologists. Yes there is conflicting evidence as you’ve portrayed here but you’ve not given due diligence as to from who and why it’s been disputed and the investigations and evidence that led to the acceptance that the relics are indeed authentic.
True Christianity is Not about Peter relics, not about the pope. It is centered on Jesus Christ. Just have faith, and you have no reason to go Worship diseased body parts
Neither of the TWO EARLIEST Roman historians to give any account of Nero's persecution of the first Christians in Rome state that they were executed in Nero' s Circus. Tacitus in fact claimed that "Nero opened HIS GARDENS to the public for the spectacle". These were the Hortae Neronianae situated on the Esquiline Hill adjacent to where the "Colosseum" amphitheater now stands, on the former site of the estate of Gaius Maecenus, the famous "patron" of the "first" emperor Octavianus Augustus. The Gardens were actually begun by HIM and were known as the "Hortae Maecenae" UNTIL Nero inherited the property as "patrimony" of imperial succession and called them after HIMSELF (naturally), as he had wanted to do the WHOLE city when he had it "redesigned" after the so-called "Great Fire". It was in these Gardens that Peter would most likely have been "martyred" along with the REST of the Christians of Rome. The church dedicated on the Hill since the sixteenth century is that of Santa Maria Maggiore and has NOTHING to do with Saint Peter. HOW Peter would have been recognized and TAKEN after his death to be buried by any CHRISTIANS who themselves were being killed as well is one of the great historical mysteries of Christianity. Can't see the Emperor's agents allowing it.
Scholarly footnote: Tacitus' very testimony of the Christian persecution, though HE would have been ALIVE during it as a young boy, is SUSPECT on two counts: first is the question of just HOW the Christians were identified as such at that time since they did not meet in churches, which of course did not exist at that time, and HOW they were apprehended. Secondly is HOW MANY there actually were in Rome at that EARLY time. Tacitus makes it seem like there were hundreds and the executions were a nightly spectacle that went on for years. But the apostle Paul's own epistle to the Roman Christians in the "New Testament" includes greetings at the end of it to various households of them which can be extrapolated to number at MOST a TOTAL of ONE hundred! The Romans liked MASS "entertainments" and would probably NOT have attended the "spectacle at the Gardens" just to watch a FEW Christians crucified, impaled, or burned to death at a time. THEN there is even issue of Tacitus' use of the Latin word "spectaculum" (spectacle) implying just SUCH a MASS "show" of execution punishments; AS IF inspired by the fact that by the time he wrote, the "Colosseum" (then known as the "Flavian Amphitheater" after the Flavian dynasty of emperors who had it built) existed NEARBY to the former site of "Nero's Gardens" (which were by then occupied by the Baths of Titus and the much larger Baths of Trajan); whereas in Nero's time of course it DID NOT!! There WOULD have been such "spectacles" IN THE ARENA, though modern historians claim there were no executions of Christians in the Colosseum. I don't know WHAT they base that assertion upon but it seems IMprobable, especially given the geographical juxtapositioning for Tacitus' siting of the event(s). He NEVER mentions the traditional concept of Christians being "thrown to the lions" (he states rather they were "thrown" to DOGS!), BUT at the time he was writing his history they very well COULD have been!
Forgot to mention one other CRUCIAL (pun INTENDED😁) fact: there is a ? whether the Christian persecution in Rome during Nero's reign ever actually happened because (as ALL Christians at least, should KNOW) it is NOT mentioned in the New Testament's "Acts of the Apostles" in connection with the apostle Paul's fate in Rome; which, curiously, is NOT mentioned either!! SIGNificant??🤔
The Bible not only do not mentioned that "Peter" was ever in Rome but to the contrary, "Paul" said that he met with "Peter" twice at Jerusalem in a 17 years period after "Jesus" resurrection! The "" in the names are because they were never called like that: There is no Peter, Pietro or Pedro! His hebrew name was Simon or Shimon, then "Jesus" called him Kepha! Back to the Bible, "Peter" placed himself on Jerusalem or nearby but he never mentioned that he went to Rome. On the other hand, "Paul" (Shaul) mentioned that he was taken to Rome (he was a prisoner under custody) and his own account, he was there more than two years, and not even once, he mentioned or suggested that Peter was there! On top of all that, Peter identify himself as jew (read the Bible) and if you read carefully his two books: 1 Peter and 2 Peter, he was always referring to the Torah, wrongfully "translate" as "the law". On his two books, "Peter" mentioned Moses, Abraham, Sara, the prophets, the fathers and so on! All of that was on the Hebrew bible, wrongfully "translate" as "Old testament". How can Peter, identifying himself as jew, mentioning the Torah, go to Rome "to start a new religion" that has nothing to do with his hebrew roots???? There are definitely no valid and convincing proofs that Simon Kepha went to Rome! The Bible and the historical context tells you something totally different! Not to mention that the so called "apostolic succession" it's a catholic doctrine that doesn't exist in the Bible! They (catholic) try to justify that "relying" on some verses that are totally out of context and from bibles that were "translated" under a "christian optic" but modifying, distortioning or intentionally ignoring the original Greek words used, not to mention that the truly root is Hebrew! It's absolutely ridiculous that some "catholic traditions" say that Peter and Paul went together to Rome "to start a church" and Paul never mentioned that!! How come????? Time it's running out for lies!! People it's awakening!! Truth it's coming out from different places and forms!!
called church history, why couldnt peter have gone to rome after paul died, theer every posibility for it. should we take your stance on why not, or more trust the church history.
@@Theaddekalk please , please, read the Bible and do your homework. #1: Paul was about 5 years younger than Peter and based on historical data, they both died between 64 and 69 ad. #2: The three missionary trips of Paul are described in the books of acts (never mentioned traveling with Peter and/or seeing him at Rome). #3: Read and pay attention to Galatians 1:18 and Galatians 2:1. 17 years after Paul's conversion, he met Peter again in Jerusalem. At that time Peter was already more than 50 years old. If Peter ever "went to Rome" it was when he was about 54, 55 years old. Now, we have a "huge problem" here (as usual) with all "catholic traditions": according to the Vatican official website, Peter "became Pope" and "bishop o f Rome " in 30 ad, just about the time he was with Jesus. The "tradition" about Peter's and Paul's dead is not in the Bible, neither the so called 'apostolic succession". Now...do you believe and trust the Bible or "church's traditions".
@@amadorafael wow you really agreed and disagreed with your self wihtin the answers XD and i read bible alot and history, apperantly u need to do your home work 1. ye that dosnt change anything, and also what historical data are you talking about? 2.yes paul did, peters travels do not mention rome, two answers to that: A: bible clearly says not everyhting that happend stands written B. Peter would have died after Paul so after Paul wrote his letters. Therefore he could have gone after and no record was made or the records were lost. 3. yes he could have gone to rome when he was 50 thats no probelm and dosnt change anything, actually it goes according to what we believe NOW when you talk about himbeing pope, this is clear you dont understand theology, tradiotions or even have read the bible. YEs the chatolics beleive he became pope when jesus left and he got the keys. Then he is the pope where he will build the church, an dhe became the leader, BUT it dosnt mean he is pope in rome at that time omg, 4. No the tradition is not and so it dosnt have to be either. neither is the birth of the apostels but you still beleive they were born, neither was all the mircales of jesus etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc
"What we know by FAITH and what we learn by REASON cannot be in conflict." - St. Augustine of Hippo, Church Father (354AD.) Historically, the Catholic Church has often been a patron of sciences. It has been prolific in the foundation and funding of schools, universities, and hospitals, and many clergy have been active in the sciences. Historians of science such as Pierre Duhem credit medieval Catholic mathematicians and philosophers such as John Buridan, Nicole Oresme, and Roger Bacon as the founders of modern science. Duhem found "the mechanics and physics, of which modern times are justifiably proud, to proceed by an uninterrupted series of scarcely perceptible improvements from doctrines professed in the heart of the medieval schools." Catholic scientists, both religious and lay, have led scientific discovery in many fields. From ancient times, Christian emphasis on practical charity gave rise to the development of systematic nursing and hospitals and the Church remains the single largest private provider of medical care and research facilities in the world. Following the Fall of Rome, monasteries and convents remained bastions of scholarship in Western Europe and clergymen were the leading scholars of the age - studying nature, mathematics, and the motion of the stars. During the Middle Ages, the Church founded Europe's first universities, producing scholars like Robert Grosseteste, Albert the Great, Roger Bacon, and Thomas Aquinas, who helped establish the scientific method. During this period, the Church was also a major patron of engineering for the construction of elaborate cathedrals. Since the Renaissance, Catholic scientists have been credited as fathers of a diverse range of scientific fields: Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543) pioneered heliocentrism, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) prefigured the theory of evolution with Lamarckism, Friar Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) pioneered genetics, and Fr Georges Lemaître (1894-1966) proposed the Big Bang cosmological model, he is the Father of Big Bang Theory. The Jesuits have been particularly active, notably in astronomy. Church patronage of sciences continues through institutions like the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (a successor to the Accademia dei Lincei of 1603) and Vatican Observatory (a successor to the Gregorian Observatory of 1580). As the world's oldest and largest continuously functioning international institution, it has played a prominent role in shaping the history and development of Western civilization we now know today. The Catholic Church is the largest non-government provider of education and medical services in the world. The Catholic Church manages 26% of health care facilities in the world, including tens of thousand hospitals, clinics, orphanages, pharmacies and centers for those with leprosy. The church has always been involved in education, since the founding of the first universities of Europe. It runs and sponsors tens of thousand of primary and secondary schools, colleges and universities throughout the world and operates the world's largest non-governmental school system. In the words of J. L. Heilbron of the University of California, Berkeley, the "Roman Catholic Church gave more financial aid and social support to the study of astronomy over six centuries, from the recovery of ancient learning during the late Middle Ages into the Enlightenment, than any other, and all other institutions." This financial and social support extended also to other branches of scientific inquiry. The Church is patron of Learnings and Social Services for almost 2000 yrs.
do you really expect that EVERYTHING is written in bible??....LOL...we don't even know in the bible how the other apostles died....You are arguing BASED on Silence which is not a good evidence at all....You obviously need Extra Biblical EARLY Christian testimonies to know how the apostles died and where they eventually died....LOL....
St Peter was martyred, in Rome in 64AD, during Nero's reign. Place, what is now Vatican City. He requested to be hung upside down on the cross as he felt he was not worry enough to die like Jesus did. This information is not found in Holy Scriptures, but in ancient writings that still exist today in the Vatican library.
Rev15 And they sing the song of Moses , the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb , Saying,Great and marvelous art thy works, Lord God Almighty,Just and True are thy ways ,Thou King of Saints . For thou only art holy /rev3 I ser before thee an open door and no man can shut ,rev 1 I am he that liveth and was dead , and behold, I am alive for evermore and have the keys of hell and of death ./ Gen 1 God created image male and female Gen 2 Lord God formed man Living soul Adam and Eve Eve was created from Adams rib this is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh, image and glory , through childbirth, spirit soul body image and glory he was glorified when he returns in his glory we're getting a glorified similar to his as it was in the days of Noah and lot and no one knows the day nor hour but the Father Rev16 and they repented not to give him glory?? The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath therefore the son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath , that they all may be one ,as thou, Father ,art in me and I in thee, that they also may be one in us, that the world may believe that thou hast sent me
I'm sorry to say that I just can't take "Christianism." It is used several times in this video. The word "Christianity" has been in existence for centuries and works very well. There is no need to make up an awkward new word.
@@mondriaa "Christianism" may have been used by a few people here and there in the past, but the standard term in English has been "Christianity." If this video expects to be taken seriously it shouldn't do odd things such as using odd words. I have looked up "Christianism" online and it seems to be something used by people with a particular social and political outlook. But it certainly is not standard usage.
@Matt Stewart Because I care about using words properly. I hate it when people make up a new and usually awkward word for something that already has a perfectly good name. I also hate the attitude of, "It sorts of sounds like the right word, so go ahead and use it." An example I hear all the time is using "incredible" for "incredulous." Or how about "supposably" for "supposedly"? And then there is the whole phrase, "for all intensive purposes," instead of "for all intents and purposes." I could go on, but you have probably already stopped reading.
@@dorothywillis1 just because you are not used to it does not mean that the word is wrong or not used well, I think your reaction is very much over blown given the fact that christianism is correctly used here and the if christianity was used it would be wrong, not the same word not the same meaning but related. Try seeing it as a learning moment instead of a outrage moment
I agree with you Dorothy. They started using “ Christianism” in this video, and like you I immediately thought…what? Does such a word even exist in the English Language? Then I noticed that this is a foreign made ( ie non-Anglophone) video so I thought, maybe it’s a poor translation by the scriptwriters. A bit like the way non-English speakers occasionally mangle the language and use an incorrect or even a made-up word instead of the one in common use. I found this reference to “Christianism” rather off-putting, personally. Makes it sound like we’re talking about some obscure cult instead of one of the worlds’ major religions. As far as I know I’ve never heard this term in common use and I think most Christians would think it’s inappropriate for a documentary of this type.
Peter was in Rome, it is mentioned in the Bible in 1 Peter 5:13 “The Church here in Babylon, united with you by God’s election, sends you her greeting, and so does my son, Mark”. Babylon is a code for Rome (bec. the real city of Babylon by that time was just an inconsequential village and no longer great or relevant) , it is also used as a code for Rome (bec. the real city of Babylon by that time was just an inconsequential village and no longer great or relevant) too in Revelations. it is also written by earliest Christians that Peter was in Rome, Tertullian, Ignatius of Antioch, Ireneaus, Clement of Alexandria, Lactantius. Inscriptions in catacombs by ordinary early Christians also provide evidence for this.
@@anthonypalo8191 nope not once did Peter mention of being in Rome, the reference of Babylon wasn't applied to Rome at that time Rome become a symbol for Babylon after popery
Jesus is and will always be the Rock of the true church. He's actually the cornerstone. He called Peter a pebble. A little rock. Then he pointed to Himself and said "on this Rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it."
When Jesus met Peter in John 1:42 And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas… Why did Jesus call him Cephas. What does Cephas mean?
Why is a mosaic of the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I shown whenever the narrator talks about Constantine? Constantine lived during the 3rd and 4th Centuries A.D. Justinian lived one-hundred years later, during the 5th and 6th Centuries A.D. Didn't anyone check this? Get your facts straight.
I'm not sure rather but I do believe in God I'm also a historian I haven't found one trace of Jesus in the history any where an believe me I've looked for 20yrs now so I really doubt that they have st. Peters bones although he was an historical person
please make a video about the pyramids of Gunung Padang 12 thousand year ago located in Cianjur, west java 80 km from Jakarta...this could change the history of old civilizations in the world Babylonian world 8 thousand year ago.
I like the use of the term "Christianism" because the word "Christianity" is defined in the scriptures and what it describes in no way bears any resemblance to what the Roman Empire did to that religion. Christianism fits because in Christianism, anything goes. Christianity is constrained by the revelation contained in the Received Text. Christianism is a religion dressed up to look Christian but it's really not (it's an imposter) just as Scientism is a forgery of science. I like what they've done here.
If what you say is true then the Bible verse "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it." Matthew 16:18 would be false because the Christian Church fell. which would mean Jesus was a liar. and if He was a liar then all Christianity falls apart. but we all know Jesus wasnt a liar so what you're saying is not true and all just conspiracy theories.
@@anthonypalo8191 - "Upon this rock I will build MY church" not Peter's church. In order for us to discover what Jesus's church looks like we have to read the rest of the New Testament. Have you done that or did you simply stop at Matthew 16? I was raised Roman Catholic but then I started reading the bible - the New Testament - and I had to change my mind about a lot of things. That's called repentance.
@@GizmoFromPizmo and it is exactly what Jesus did, He didn't say I shall build your(Peter's) Church. Peter never claimed it as his Church nor any other in history. it is only you who are interpreting that. if you were raised Catholic then why did you not read the bible when you were catholic, its on you not the Church. even the Bible was brought to you through the Catholic Church. if you think you arethe only one who has read the Bible and is better than other Christians then i think that's pride. but back to the topic Jesus literally meant what He said and His Church in the New Testament onwards is the Catholic Church, maybe you should read it again. Jesus and the Apostles never taught 'Read the Bible' or 'Bible alone' (Im not taking away from it's importance, it is the Church's book to consolidate the faith and is the inspired words of God), He left us a Church, one Church, His Church.
The Church made the Bible. The Church exists forever. The pillar and buttress of Truth is the Church. The Apostles celebrated the sacrifice of the Mass in the Bible. The Bible is a Catholic book inspired by the Holy Spirit.
@@lutherseye5356 - Oy. Okay, people in the church wrote the New Testament (not the whole bible). Roman Catholicism is NOT the church these people were members of. Do you know how I know that? Read the bible for yourself and you'll see what I mean. Even if you have the SLIGHTEST ability to comprehend what you read you will be able to see I'm right. I'm really not trying to be argumentative - just read it and you'll see. It speaks for itself. Where is Transubstantiation? Where is the special priesthood? Where is Mariology? Where is Purgatory? Where is the papacy? Although the doctrine of justification by works is mentioned and only defended by one outlier, it is convincingly denounced as false doctrine in the balance of the literature. Jesus said, "Do this in memory of me." Is that what the mass is? NO! And the Catholic Church freely admits that. It is a resacrificing of Jesus (called the sacrifice of the mass), which is a "little" frowned upon by the New Testament. The doctrine of the priesthood of the saints is taught in the New Testament. That applies to every believer - not a special magician class. Worshiping people or angels is anti-Christ and anti-God. It comes from the Pagan roots of Catholicism and not from anything biblical. Purgatory is a doctrine that specifically nullifies the sacrifice of Jesus as the "once for all" sacrifice that it was designed to be. It improves upon the perfection of that sacrifice by making the person work off his own sins. It's a throwback to paganism, once again. The papacy is just another add-on that is not supported by the New Testament. You cannot string enough unrelated, out of context, passages of scripture together to make the New Testament support it. a super-bishop is a Roman extension. Furthermore, multiple bishops per church is prescribed in the New Testament and not the other way around. I could go on and on but I think I've made my point. Catholicism is more than a simple "departure from the faith". Some aspects are completely foreign to the New Testament and even foreign to Judaism. The problem with denominations is that we want to improve on the "faith once delivered to the saints". We think nothing of taking from or adding to that faith to come up with a "better plan" but this "wing it" form of religion doesn't simply open the door to error it IS the open door of error. And that fully describes the Catholic Church. There were lots of different flavors of things people were believing around the world in the first century and beyond. The New Testament describes one or two of these different forms and neither of them look anything at all like Catholicism. If you don't believe me then read it for yourself like I did. If you went to Catholic schools like I did growing up then you have probably received a better education than our government school peers. Engage your reading comprehension skills and then open up the New Testament and read it. If you're not surprised by what it reveals then you might just be just another internet troll and not a sincere seeker of the truth.
Man said "Christianism" and "Christianization". Don't try to make new words, it sounds ridiculous. "Christianity" and "evangelism" are the proper terms.
Golf expo= explain the 17. 3 trillion structural compound budget figures. 17 Easy- one above the 16th chapel. What does that mean? No one is above God. NO ONE IS ABOVE GOD. but the 16th chapel does not automatically get access to the golf expo- each chair must find purpose if they want the access. And 3- the father, the son, the holy spirit.
When did the word Christianism replace Christianity? It's as bad as that other source of annoyance, when American TV presenters use normalcy instead of normality.
Suppose he would have geen burried in a jewish tratition and those small bone pieces do not make sence, as his bones would have been gathered to his fathers.
The word just like many other words are not found in the Bible, but St. Peter’s primacy is loud and clear in the scriptures. To deny his primacy is completely foolish.
Audits would reveal what a criminal enterprise the Catholic church has become. The audit would flag money used to settle pedophilia coverup scandals by priests and bishops. What a facade. 😏
@Matt Stewart I fully agree with you. If money was the only solution the rich and powerful would have had good hearts to eradicate the poverty. So it makes us believe that more the money, more the greed for it and that's leads to more poverty. I strongly believe that poverty brings best out of us all when riches corrupts us more.
The problem with all of this is that peter never went to Rome, Peter's calling was to preach to the Jews, not the Gentiles, and after an argument with Paul, peter drops off the map. Also Peter was married, he had a wife. For all these reasons and many more, the catholic church didn't want the average person reading the bible, neither did they want the bible translated into the common tongue. Or else the people would clearly see the catholic church was a fraud, as they did during and after the reformation. The Vatican would have been successful in not allowing a successful translating of the bible, thus keeping most people in darkness, had Britain not separated itself out of the control of the Vatican during the reign of King Henry VIII. The Vatican was unable to successfully crush the English translation (KJV), as they had previous translations, because after England split from Rome, they had no power there.
the scholarship and jumped conclusions in this are so cringe lol ps the reason why they efuse carbon14 is because it requires destroying the sample taken...
That's so weird, I'm Catholic , but not strict . And certainly not better than any other religions. Many Catholics tho . Yes. And in all honesty; it's Men & their ideologies.
Wtf is christianism? And when did Peter betray Jesus? And why should that means he cannot be Jesus's favourite apostle? Have the biggest ah on earth assembled to make this documentary?
