Тёмный
No video :(

This TikTok Bible Myth Is Downright Laughable 

Gospel Partners Media / Wretched
Подписаться 601 тыс.
Просмотров 59 тыс.
50% 1

Todd addresses and refutes several popular myths about the canonicity of scripture, like the spurious claims that Protestants removed books from the Bible or that the canon of scripture was decided at the Council of Nicea in 325.
--
Wretched TV and Radio are hosted by Todd Friel. On the show, you will see and hear live witnessing encounters, discussions of tough theological issues, and christian commentary on current events. We might even make you laugh.
WATCH FULL WRETCHED TV EPISODES:
wretched.org/tv/
LISTEN TO FULL WRETCHED RADIO SHOWS:
wretched.org/radio/
VISIT OUR WEBSITE:
wretched.org/
SUPPORT WRETCHED:
wretched.org/donate
FACEBOOK:
Wretched: / wretchednetwork
TWITTER:
Wretched: / wretchednetwork
Todd Friel: / toddfriel
INSTAGRAM:
Wretched: / wretched.network

Опубликовано:

 

31 июл 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 522   
@mikehamilton7668
@mikehamilton7668 Год назад
Thank you for this Todd! As an ex-Catholic I really have a heart to reach those who have been programmed with this false doctrine. I'm looking forward to sharing this with those who have not seen the Light.
@HodgePodgeVids1
@HodgePodgeVids1 Год назад
What false doctrine do you think I believe?
@shinsekai7905
@shinsekai7905 Год назад
@@HodgePodgeVids1 you must be dumb the catholic is the one true church. traditions and word of mouth. protestants will deny the people who made the bible. yup was the early christians they cant name them because if they did, these people would've been the catholics. 4th century turned out to be the catholic vulgate of the bible.
@tannerfrancisco8759
@tannerfrancisco8759 Год назад
@@HodgePodgeVids1 regeneration at baptism, infant baptism, the pope, Jesuits, purgatory, repetitive praying, praying to Mary and saints for intercession, immaculate conception of Mary to claim Mary was somehow sinless, transubstantiation of the Eucharist, works of the flesh unto salvation just to name a few. Read 1st Peter--its very short. There's like 38 things that directly contradict official Catholic doctrine. You'd think the Catholics claiming to be the official church descended from Peter would at least do what he says.
@tannerfrancisco8759
@tannerfrancisco8759 Год назад
Take heed, Mike Hamilton, lest you be deceived into the false doctrines of Calvinism which Todd Friel preaches. I thank God He led me away from that false teaching. It is a snare of the devil to draw in the prideful and neuter the fruit of the Spirit in their lives. Many people proudly declare themselves calvinists and don't even understand what it means--don't follow the erroneous thinking out to it's logical conclusions which is that the God of Calvinism is who the devil would be if he were God--not who God actually is. It is a doctrine of demons. Love you, brother. God bless!
@eddiegerwer01
@eddiegerwer01 Год назад
@@tannerfrancisco8759 What about Orthodoxy??? And didn't these Denominations/Sects exist long before Protestantism came into existence???
@Vitamortis.
@Vitamortis. Год назад
enjoying the tendency toward church history in the last few videos!
@janettebiggs4550
@janettebiggs4550 Год назад
I had a class dedicated solely to this in college. I just wish I had the mindset I have 15 years later. Would have learned so much more now.
@josecorpus5767
@josecorpus5767 Год назад
Question: who put together the bible and what year Answer: The Old Testament books were written well before Jesus’ Incarnation, and all of the New Testament books were written by roughly the end of the first century A.D. But the Bible as a whole was not officially compiled until the late fourth century, illustrating that it was the Catholic Church who determined the canon-or list of books-of the Bible under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, the Bible is not a not a self-canonizing collection of books, as there is no table of contents included in any of the books. Although the New Testament canon was not determined until the late 300s, books the Church deemed sacred were early on proclaimed at Mass, and read and preached about otherwise. Early Christian writings outnumbered the 27 books that would become the canon of the New Testament. The shepherds of the Church, by a process of spiritual discernment and investigation into the liturgical traditions of the Church spread throughout the world, had to draw clear lines of distinction between books that are truly inspired by God and originated in the apostolic period, and those which only claimed to have these qualities. The process culminated in 382 as the Council of Rome, which was convened under the leadership of Pope Damasus, promulgated the 73-book scriptural canon. The biblical canon was reaffirmed by the regional councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), and then definitively reaffirmed by the ecumenical Council of Florence in 1442). Finally, the ecumenical Council of Trent solemnly defined this same canon in 1546, after it came under attack by the first Protestant leaders, including Martin Luther.
@eduardsiger1860
@eduardsiger1860 Год назад
@@josecorpus5767 Serious question here, no disrespect but I am confused why in some Catholic Churches they have a “Father” Mathew 23:9 “And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”
@JayaSavannah
@JayaSavannah Год назад
Thanks for getting that all into such a short video! It's very telling how unbelievers cling steadfast to writings such as the Gospel of Thomas yet reject everything said in proven scripture like the Book of John.
@mombeaubob
@mombeaubob Год назад
Thank you. I have already learned this but, glad to see you addressing it.
@stephenewins4220
@stephenewins4220 Год назад
Thank you Todd for uploading this video. God bless your ministry.
@jazzjazz8415
@jazzjazz8415 Год назад
God bless the team at Wretched. It's what the believers need
@marlam8625
@marlam8625 Год назад
Sadly, it’s pulling believers away from the fullness of faith. May the Lord have mercy on them.
@ifeanyichukwu3644
@ifeanyichukwu3644 Год назад
@@marlam8625 No, catholicism is wrong
@marlam8625
@marlam8625 Год назад
@The Pilgrim you are correct, Romanism isn’t but the church Christ established subsists in the Catholic Church today, where the fullness of Christ is present and available to all. Happy to try to answer any questions you have.
@gch8810
@gch8810 Год назад
@The Pilgrim Haha! Nah!
@gch8810
@gch8810 Год назад
@The Pilgrim Peter was a pope and was in Rome. Almost all church historians realize this fact. Only Protestant polemicists deny that Peter was in Rome.
@oh_both3r
@oh_both3r Год назад
haven't watched in a while, this new editing is fantastic
@julesj5853
@julesj5853 Год назад
Thank you for explaining this, now I have some tools to use when someone asks me about it. I get people talking about the books that are not included. I never have anything to say! Thanks!
@stueydoubleyou
@stueydoubleyou Год назад
These videos are so good thank you Todd, your long time listener.
@averyhappywoman
@averyhappywoman Год назад
Thank you for sharing this. We really had struggled with this nugget. 👍
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
Codex Sinaiticus, one of the first substantially complete Bible's we possess (fourth century), contains Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach. If these texts were already in Bibles in the 4th century (cf. the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus), how can Friel claim that the Catholic Church added them in the 16th century? His claim that they were added to justify Catholic doctrines which, he says, were developed between the 5th and 15th centuries falls over. Moreover, the canon was decreed by Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. The Council of Trent only reaffirmed this canonical list.
@SeraphsWitness
@SeraphsWitness Год назад
"Council of Nicaea" is the favorite thing for skeptics to memorize about church history. As soon as they say it, they think they've won the argument.
@jadekoert2375
@jadekoert2375 Год назад
Dude Todd is so funny, can't wait to eat and talk with you and everyone else when the time comes
@dman7668
@dman7668 Год назад
Sit with fools and become one yourself.
@lisahall3572
@lisahall3572 Год назад
Timely, Todd! Thanks!
@montegtaylor
@montegtaylor Год назад
Great stuff thanks for the knowledge.
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
This is knowledge: Codex Sinaiticus, one of the first substantially complete Bible's we possess (fourth century), contains Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach. If these texts were already in Bibles in the 4th century (cf. the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus), how can Friel claim that the Catholic Church added them in the 16th century? His claim that they were added to justify Catholic doctrines which, he says, were developed between the 5th and 15th centuries falls over. Moreover, the canon was decreed by Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. The Council of Trent only reaffirmed this canonical list.
@xpfutube
@xpfutube Год назад
Phase dont jump to those movie scrnes
@PaulDinwiddie
@PaulDinwiddie Год назад
Lov'n it! So spot-on and highly refreshing! Keep up the excellent work for our Lord, God, and King, Jesus!
@adekalduephraim1826
@adekalduephraim1826 Год назад
It's a blessing watching you!
@briant1578
@briant1578 Год назад
Thank you very much so helpful!
@techateacha
@techateacha Год назад
This is a good video! Thank you, sir!
@MaxLeGrand33
@MaxLeGrand33 Год назад
Thanks for this.
@ritastevenson5639
@ritastevenson5639 Год назад
Uff da! Thanks for the Norwegian shout-out. ❤️
@Godislove225
@Godislove225 Год назад
thank you Todd
@BlackWOLFF81
@BlackWOLFF81 Год назад
Great morning to you all! I really love you my brothers and sisters in christ!! God has fixed my heart with his love!!I can love others now unconditionally and forgive!! You all are in my thoughts!! I hope you have a good day today! May God bless with happiness, &peace
@BlackWOLFF81
@BlackWOLFF81 Год назад
Thank you!! Praise God!!
@jaeves007
@jaeves007 Год назад
We never travel back in time without Huey Lewis. NEVER.
@timestealr2967
@timestealr2967 Год назад
Oh yeah? If you had a Delorian you wouldn't be saying that! 🚘
@holyexperience1976
@holyexperience1976 Год назад
Very awesome vid! I never identify as Catholic, but I would here and there have confusion over apocrypha.
@treybarnes5549
@treybarnes5549 Год назад
The latest trend is for new age scholars to remove 1000’s of words from the bible. it’s as crazy
@thomasturner4253
@thomasturner4253 Год назад
Thanks for the History lesson and Education
@theresa42213
@theresa42213 Год назад
Good video! Theres a docu on YT here called ''The God who Speaks''. lt's a little over an hour and it just smashes this myth, and many others. Some good peeps in it too, like RC! :D
@patrickoxley581
@patrickoxley581 Год назад
I think he misspoke at 03:04. There are 27 books in the New Testament NOT 29
@stephenterry9210
@stephenterry9210 Год назад
Good presentation, Todd. That's Drive by Church History at warp speed. Thank you.
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
Unfortunately, drive-by histories are a bit like drive-by shootings, where stray facts kill and injure the truth. Codex Sinaiticus, one of the first substantially complete Bible's we possess (fourth century), contains Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach. If these texts were already in Bibles in the 4th century (cf. the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus), how can Friel claim that the Catholic Church added them in the 16th century? His claim that they were added to justify Catholic doctrines which, he says, were developed between the 5th and 15th centuries falls over. Moreover, the canon was decreed by Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. The Council of Trent only reaffirmed this canonical list.
@loiscarteaux9389
@loiscarteaux9389 Год назад
Thank you for mentioning Jesus Calling
@sharibell71289
@sharibell71289 Год назад
I always thought Todd talked like Johnny Carson! How coincidental 😂
@ElessarofGondor
@ElessarofGondor Год назад
What would have happened in the early church if a community didn't have the holy scriptures since books became much more accessible with the advent of the printing press much later? What did the church look like in the decades before all the new testament writings were finished? It could not have been centered on the Bible alone. It was centered on the Eucharist, Jesus Christ himself. He gave specific authority to his apostles to be handed down as well. Polycarp and Ignatius (both very holy men) described this early on. And what about Church unity? Most protestant groups don't agree on everything. There are thousands of different denominations because everyone feels scripture is telling them something different, they can't all be right. The only answer is an authority structure lead by the Holy Spirit. This also doesn't mention that when Martin Luther started tossing books his followers had to stop him from throwing out James because it mentions faith and works.
@dman7668
@dman7668 Год назад
That logic is beyond most people.
@raedwulf61
@raedwulf61 Год назад
I never knew this. Thanks!
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
He's misleading you. Codex Sinaiticus, one of the first substantially complete Bible's we possess (fourth century), contains Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach. If these texts were already in Bibles in the 4th century (cf. the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus), how can Friel claim that the Catholic Church added them in the 16th century? His claim that they were added to justify Catholic doctrines which, he says, were developed between the 5th and 15th centuries falls over. Moreover, the canon was decreed by Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. The Council of Trent only reaffirmed this canonical list.
@livewireOrourke
@livewireOrourke Год назад
Not only that, but the Roman Catholics are also stealing my socks from the dryer when I'm not looking. I'm kidding. I don't want to pull a Dan Brown and have hundreds of people thinking that they are actually stealing my socks.
@timestealr2967
@timestealr2967 Год назад
I'm sure the RCC is up to no good in the Laundry Room! All of my holey socks have gone missing!🧦🧦🧦
@mikehamilton7668
@mikehamilton7668 Год назад
Steve Martin claimed it was space aliens!
@Pietabotha777
@Pietabotha777 Год назад
Thanks for that information and confirming my faith in God's infallible Word 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻👍🏻
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
He tells comforting lies. Codex Sinaiticus, one of the first substantially complete Bible's we possess (fourth century), contains Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach. If these texts were already in Bibles in the 4th century (cf. the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus), how can Friel claim that the Catholic Church added them in the 16th century? His claim that they were added to justify Catholic doctrines which, he says, were developed between the 5th and 15th centuries falls over. Moreover, the canon was decreed by Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. The Council of Trent only reaffirmed this canonical list.
@robynahgreen1283
@robynahgreen1283 Год назад
What people seem to forget is that whatever is called Scripture are those books, which point to, teach about, and altogether glorify Yahusha Ha'Mashiach (Jesus Christ); the glory and image of the Most High God. And this shows they're all inspired by the Father. Therefore the Scripture is His Word
@ynetsv136
@ynetsv136 Год назад
Good summary! The only thing I have not find any satisfying answer on, is why has our OT not kept the order of the Tanakh? The order of the Tanakh, when you study it, the exact order always points at the coming Messiah. Especially when you see what is written at the start and end of each part, of the Torah, Prophets, and the Writings- while our Christian logic seems more or less chronological, but with that it removed that richness
@JA-zh5xi
@JA-zh5xi Год назад
These historical Biblical Christianity lessons are much needed! They are your most important videos.
@dman7668
@dman7668 Год назад
This is called propaganda not history.
@holyexperience1976
@holyexperience1976 Год назад
I once went to a Lutheran service in late '00s, a time where I went to a few different "denominations" out of curiousity. I noticed service was like going to Mass, but the only difference was no rosary and different Bible version. I have not been to mass since very late '15, as I felt as the Lord led me away. I never identified as Catholic, ( or even Episcopalian when I briefly went there ) , and never believed in purgatory and some other stuff. Did not get caught up in the Mary thing. I had a few times of saying Rosary, but then felt not right about it. For those unfamiliar with "Episcopalians", it is like Catholic only they do not zero in on rosaries like "Catholics". If any do, it is not heard about much. I wrote in quotations as I not believe in denominations. Either you believe in God or you don't. Either you follow or you do not.
@spicyguy4246
@spicyguy4246 Год назад
Couldn’t agree more
@raoularmagnac2037
@raoularmagnac2037 Год назад
As a matter of fact, the Episcopal church is actually the American branch of the Anglican church, AKA the Church of English. Both versions are VERY similar to the Catholic church unfortunately. 😔
@SolidPain6624
@SolidPain6624 Год назад
Ex Catholic here. The label was useless… the word denomination is pointless. You’re right. You either have faith and believe and want to be with Christ or you don’t. The Bible says we will have differences, we will disagree with certain things in scripture but if you don’t know God, you don’t know him. Period. You can be at cathecism and graduate from it, you can confess to a priest, you can accomplish communion, but God knows your heart. We don’t work to get saved but we work because we are saved and the Catholic teachings are unbiblical and produces guilt more than anything.
@HodgePodgeVids1
@HodgePodgeVids1 Год назад
You should come back to the Catholic Church. The sacraments are valid, the priests are ordained by apostolic succession, and it didn’t splinter into a thousand sects like Luther’s rebellion
@eddiesigerexperience9803
@eddiesigerexperience9803 Год назад
@@HodgePodgeVids1 Mathew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
@walkwithchrist4477
@walkwithchrist4477 Год назад
with the experience of going to a catholic school, they taught that the catholic church added 7 books to the bible.
@jerome2642
@jerome2642 Год назад
Rather, it was Protestants who removed seven books from the Bible
@cathyzawatzki8443
@cathyzawatzki8443 Год назад
God takes care of His Word. He is in control and is not at our mercy to do it right.
@be.love.shine.
@be.love.shine. 6 месяцев назад
❤ thank you brother glory to God ALMIGHTY and the Lord Jesus Christ for truth and life!
@fightthegoodfightoffaithmi8676
Genesis 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. Ephesians 6:9 And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.
@markreed2576
@markreed2576 Год назад
Is there a readable transcript of “ Snatch them from the flames” I have a family member entangled in the NAR doctrine. Unless the video is closed caption it doesn’t work for me.
@timadams3979
@timadams3979 Год назад
You have your work cut out for you--NARs are almost impossible to bring to orthodoxy of any kind.
@WretchedNetwork
@WretchedNetwork Год назад
Hi Mark, please email us at support@wretched.org
@marlam8625
@marlam8625 Год назад
Apocrypha are books of the period that are good extra biblical reading, but not inspired. The 7 that Protestants are referring are the deuterocanonical books that Protestants mistakenly call apocryphal. They are not, nor have they ever been the same.
@tatie7604
@tatie7604 Год назад
How can a book that is not inspired be something anyone should read along with the Bible? The Apocrapha distorts the Bible! And your second comment in nonspecific and, therefore, totally useless.
@marlam8625
@marlam8625 Год назад
@@tatie7604 I’m not sure of your point. Of course there are non inspired writings of the time of the early church and after that give cultural context and are helpful in giving us a broader picture of the times. These writings have never been included in the canon of scripture because they are not inspired by God. They could be likened to modern day documentaries of their time.
@tatie7604
@tatie7604 Год назад
@@marlam8625 OK. The 7 books included in Catholic Bible--Protestants say were added much later by Catholics to the orginal number of books and they don't recognize them, that's all. Do you know when Catholics added the 7 extra books?
@nocx4592
@nocx4592 Год назад
Also, the book of Enoch was written way after Jude if we use the dates of any realistic historian or even of most unrealistic ones.
@fnjesusfreak
@fnjesusfreak Год назад
They did find mss. of 1 Enoch in Qumran, so at least what they found there prolly dates to the 2nd century BC. But it's written in Aramaic, not Hebrew.
@TheRealJimW
@TheRealJimW Год назад
Thank you.
@jessebryant9233
@jessebryant9233 Год назад
In my experience, Catholics frequently claim that the Apostles and Jesus often quoted the Apocryphal books. What are they referring to? Where can I find a list of what they are claiming are quotes?
@jerome2642
@jerome2642 Год назад
In Hebrews 11:35, the author describes people in the old testament who were so strong in their faith in God that they were willing to undergo torture and death because they believed in the final resurrection. The ONLY place in the entire old testament that has a narrative that fits this description was in the book of 2 Maccabees chapter 7 where we see 7 sons of the the same woman (they were all Israelites) who refused to break the law of God despite being tortured by pagan soldiers. They insisted that they were willing to die because they believed that God would one day raise them up again. John 10:22 refers to a feast which Jesus attended -- the feast of the dedication of the temple in Jerusalem. This feast is described in the old testament, precisely in the book of 1 Maccabees chapter 4. The famous quote that Jesus gave about doing to others only what you want them to do to you (Matthew 7:12) can be found in the book of Tobit 4:15 But let's get something clear: EVEN IF Jesus and the Apostles never quoted from ANY of the deuterocanonical books of the Bible, that doesn't PROVE that those books are "uninspired" or that they don't belong to the Bible. After all, Jesus and the Apostles didn't quote from EVERY SINGLE book of the old testament. For example, they never quoted from the book of Obadiah . Yet everyone including Protestants accept it as a legitimate book of the old testament
@biblealone9201
@biblealone9201 Год назад
For the first 300 years of Christianity, there was no Bible as we know it today. Christians had the Old Testament Septuagint, and literally hundreds of other books from which to choose. The Catholic Church realized early on that she had to decide which of these books were inspired and which ones weren't. The debates raged between theologians, Bishops, and Church Fathers, for several centuries as to which books were inspired and which ones weren't. In the meantime, several Church Councils or Synods, were convened to deal with the matter, notably, Rome in 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419. The debates sometimes became bitter on both sides. One of the most famous was between St. Jerome, who felt the seven books were not canonical, and St. Augustine who said they were. Protestants who write about this will invariably mention St. Jerome and his opposition, and conveniently omit the support of St. Augustine. I must point out here that Church Father's writings are not infallible statements, and their arguments are merely reflections of their own private opinions. When some say St. Jerome was against the inclusion of the seven books, they are merely showing his personal opinion of them. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. However, A PERSONS PRIVATE OPINION DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH AT ALL. There are always three sides to every story, this side, that side, and the side of truth. Whether Jerome's position, or Augustine's position was the correct position, had to be settled by a third party, and that third party was the Catholic Church. Now the story had a dramatic change, as the Pope stepped in to settle the matter. In concurrence with the opinion of St. Augustine, and being prompted by the Holy Spirit, Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called, "The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. He then asked St. Jerome to use this canon and to write a new Bible translation which included an Old Testament of 46 books, which were all in the Septuagint, and a New Testament of 27 books. ROME HAD SPOKEN, THE ISSUE WAS SETTLED. "THE CHURCH RECOGNIZED ITS IMAGE IN THE INSPIRED BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. THAT IS HOW IT DETERMINED THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE.🤷‍♀🤷‍♀
@Bane_questionmark
@Bane_questionmark Год назад
"THE Septuagint" You don't know what you're talking about. The Septuagint is a general corpus and textual tradition. The various books within it were translated into Greek by different people at different times with varying levels of agreement with various textual traditions in other languages like Hebrew. It's thought that the Septuagint's Pentateuch translation is older than some of the Deuterocanonical books themselves. Each text was still an individual scroll. Collections of large amounts of Septuagint texts which survive have varying contents, one of the oldest called Codex Vaticanus lacks all four Maccabees books for example (yes there are four, though Rome only considers two canonical). A text simply being present in a corpus or tradition in any way does not mean it was considered holy Scripture either. The Qumran sect kept and read from a large collection of texts, some of which contradicted texts or versions of text they seemed to believe were truly Scripture (they had material identified as relating to the Samaritan tradition for example). The early Christians used the Septuagint texts of Scripture because it was by far the most prominent and accessible text of the OT available, and even then writers including the NT writers referred to the Hebrew texts as well as the Greek. There are Septuagint texts which the Roman church does not consider canonical but which some or all of the Eastern churches do, whole books as well as smaller additions and variants. Many of the common (bad) arguments Catholics use against Protestants could be used just as validly by Eastern Orthodox against Catholics (they removed books from the Bible!, Rome rejects books the early Church believed in which we know because they're in THE Septuagint, etc.). Many quotations can further be found of venerable writers from different regions in the early Church having a variety of opinions on what texts exactly were Scripture. I can accept that men are fallible and might believe all sorts of things for different reasons, but this flies in the face of the Catholic position that Roman doctrine and dogma is the universal faith of the entire Church throughout history. Invoking Papal authority doesn't help when Popes contradict each other (not simply in random statements but within the exercise of their teaching office), to say nothing of the fact that Papal primacy and then infallibility are later inventions. If you really want to believe in those things then go ahead, but don't expect Protestants or Orthodox to change their minds simply because "the Pope said so".
@RandomTChance
@RandomTChance Год назад
The warning at the end of Revelation only applies to the BOOK of Revelation. Why do people think of the Bible as a novel? It is composed of 66 individual books complete in themselves written by many under God's direction. 🙏 Prayers
@annemurphy9339
@annemurphy9339 Год назад
You’ve missed a major strength of the Bible. The scripture was penned by 40 different authors under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit which is why it speaks with one cohesive voice. The way the books of the Bible tie one to another, support one another, clarify each other, repeat numerical patterns, etc, is a testament to the inspiration and power of YHVH God.
@rpgfeatures793
@rpgfeatures793 Год назад
@@annemurphy9339 what? I don’t think you read his comment correctly
@timadams3979
@timadams3979 Год назад
Oh really, so Jesus' words that not one part of God's Word will fail only applies to the Gospel it's written in? Altering God's Word brings a lasting curse, take a look at the modern churches in America.
@rpgfeatures793
@rpgfeatures793 Год назад
@@timadams3979 not quite, book translates to scroll. So “whoever changes this scroll….etc”. So John was talking about the scroll he was writing
@annemurphy9339
@annemurphy9339 Год назад
@@timadams3979 True, we see this warning in Deuteronomy 4:2 and again in Revelation,
@stephenadonis3953
@stephenadonis3953 Год назад
This is one of the most amazing videos coming out of this page
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
You think? Codex Sinaiticus, one of the first substantially complete Bible's we possess (fourth century), contains Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach. If these texts were already in Bibles in the 4th century (cf. the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus), how can Friel claim that the Catholic Church added them in the 16th century? His claim that they were added to justify Catholic doctrines which, he says, were developed between the 5th and 15th centuries falls over. Moreover, the canon was decreed by Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. The Council of Trent only reaffirmed this canonical list.
@dman7668
@dman7668 Год назад
Not really Stephen. It's all false.
@fataddict
@fataddict Год назад
Wait, did you just leave us in the 16th century??? I need to get Back to the Future!
@madeleinedevilliers1993
@madeleinedevilliers1993 Год назад
Thank you
@Rom3v23-25
@Rom3v23-25 Год назад
Hello Todd
@christiancolson
@christiancolson Год назад
Keep up the good work of the gospel. Your brothers in the UK. 😊
@duckymomo7935
@duckymomo7935 Год назад
Council of Janina is wrong
@ThethomasJefferson
@ThethomasJefferson Год назад
I wish churches would step up and teach this stuff, I know my relationship would be better when I was younger if I actually had real teaching.
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
You need real teaching. Codex Sinaiticus, one of the first substantially complete Bible's we possess (fourth century), contains Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach. If these texts were already in Bibles in the 4th century (cf. the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus), how can Friel claim that the Catholic Church added them in the 16th century? His claim that they were added to justify Catholic doctrines which, he says, were developed between the 5th and 15th centuries falls over. Moreover, the canon was decreed by Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. The Council of Trent only reaffirmed this canonical list.
@dman7668
@dman7668 Год назад
The protestant Churches love lying about the truth. They have missing books in their old testament
@ThethomasJefferson
@ThethomasJefferson Год назад
@@dman7668 So what do you have to say about ““For there is one God; there is also one mediator between God and humankind, Christ Jesus, himself human,” ‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2‬:‭5‬ ‭NRSV-CI‬‬”
@dman7668
@dman7668 Год назад
@@ThethomasJefferson Protestants have been lobbing that passage at Catholics a long time. Why don't you google how we deal with that attack on us if you really want to know. We know about it and we do have a response but you won't get it from me today.
@ThethomasJefferson
@ThethomasJefferson Год назад
@@dman7668 I see that is your favorite go to thing.
@skilletman16
@skilletman16 Год назад
But with or without Huey Lewis, Todd? It's gotta be with! 😄😉
@normanjefferychester882
@normanjefferychester882 Год назад
Thank you Todd for comforting me about the books of the Bible
@josecorpus5767
@josecorpus5767 Год назад
Todd is lying unfortunately- Christ and his Apostles did NOT provide an inspired list of which should books should be in the Bible ❓🤔 *************** Question: who put together the bible and what year Answer: The Old Testament books were written well before Jesus’ Incarnation, and all of the New Testament books were written by roughly the end of the first century A.D. But the Bible as a whole was not officially compiled until the late fourth century, illustrating that it was the Catholic Church who determined the canon-or list of books-of the Bible under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, the Bible is not a not a self-canonizing collection of books, as there is no table of contents included in any of the books. Although the New Testament canon was not determined until the late 300s, books the Church deemed sacred were early on proclaimed at Mass, and read and preached about otherwise. Early Christian writings outnumbered the 27 books that would become the canon of the New Testament. The shepherds of the Church, by a process of spiritual discernment and investigation into the liturgical traditions of the Church spread throughout the world, had to draw clear lines of distinction between books that are truly inspired by God and originated in the apostolic period, and those which only claimed to have these qualities. The process culminated in 382 as the Council of Rome, which was convened under the leadership of Pope Damasus, promulgated the 73-book scriptural canon. The biblical canon was reaffirmed by the regional councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), and then definitively reaffirmed by the ecumenical Council of Florence in 1442). Finally, the ecumenical Council of Trent solemnly defined this same canon in 1546, after it came under attack by the first Protestant leaders, including Martin Luther.
@dman7668
@dman7668 Год назад
You can be comforted by lies?
@kickpublishing
@kickpublishing Год назад
Enoch is the only book I think you could argue should be in a supplemental apocryphal section. The only real argument against it doing so was the claim it was a modern fake which was disproven in modern times by finding it exact in the Dead Sea scrolls. It is quoted in the New Testament and has some of the most remarkable prophecies that Jesus fulfilled.
@JoshN91
@JoshN91 Год назад
Really interesting overview! If anyone wants to dive deeper into each of these points he brought up I would highly recommend the RU-vid channel Apocrypha Apocalypse. Each episode is dedicated to going deeper into each of these points Todd brought up. 😊
@lostfan5054
@lostfan5054 Год назад
Takes an awful lot of faith to believe these claims without any actual evidence, and indeed, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.
@gregorydotson6776
@gregorydotson6776 Год назад
The Gospels that we have is enough to get you saved. If you are not going to listen to the Gospels that you already have ? Then what make people think if you have more books of the Gospel what makes them think they are going to listen or adhere to those extra books ? Either you believe in the Gospels of what we have ? or you don't believe it ?
@de629
@de629 Год назад
The people are always wanting more from God, and have not even mined what he has revealed and life times could be spent doing so...
@rpgfeatures793
@rpgfeatures793 Год назад
The gospels do not save
@gerardbenjamin8272
@gerardbenjamin8272 Год назад
So right you are.👍
@ariesxxxiled8817
@ariesxxxiled8817 Год назад
a good preacher once said, if you aren't convinced by 66 books, 666 won't.
@keeganlauzon6802
@keeganlauzon6802 Год назад
3:06. Hey Todd, you said that there were 29 bookd of the new Testament, not 27. You might want to edit that out
@my1vice
@my1vice Год назад
These devils would love to get rid of the book of Daniel..... But they can't because Jesus calls it out by name.
@jackfullerton5762
@jackfullerton5762 Год назад
So that's what happened to Joseph. He's never mentioned beyond the nativity. (6:20 Like in the movie from the 80's, he wished him to Cartoonland. Twilight Zone: the movie, segment three, a remake of the episode "It's a Good Life".)
@jrstf
@jrstf Год назад
Luke 2 mentions Joseph when Jesus was 12.
@PrashansaGriho
@PrashansaGriho Год назад
Huge fan of your ministerial work...just one question....were the apocryphal books a part of the Greek septuagint, because the apostles and St Paul quoted from the Greek septuagint frequently? If they weren't, then the Catholic Bible shouldn't have 'em....but if they were a part of the Greek septuagint canon, then why are we debating having them in the Bible which is accepted by the two oldest denominations of Christianity, and was wilfully rejected by Martin Luther 1500 years later????
@bradb2680
@bradb2680 Год назад
The Greek septuigent proper included just the Torah. The old Greek (sometimes also called the septuigent) does include the "apocrypha"/ deuterocannon. The reason for the debate is that the Christian old testamet is just "the Jewish bible" but exactly what that means is different for different people in different places. In Ethiopia for example, the book of Enoch is used in the Christian churches because they were used by the local Jewish communities that the Christian communities grew out of (recall, for example the Ethiopian eunuch). Equally, Jewish groups in Egypt, Greece, Gallilee etc. all had slightly different cannons which has resulted in the Christian communities in those countries also having slightly different cannons. It is worth noting that no Christian group includes clearly non-christian writings (like the gospel of thomas). The argument is about which writings are scripture and which writings are good, but only for background or personal reading. For example Martin Luther still placed the catholic deuterocanon in his bibles but with a note that they are of secondary importance. Later the kjv translators did the same.
@PrashansaGriho
@PrashansaGriho Год назад
@@bradb2680 thanks for the insight but that still doesn't answer the question......the septuagint did contain the apocryphal books totalling to 51 books, compared to 39 in Protestant Bible, implying that Martin Luther did infact take the liberty of removing books from the original canon , possibly to suit his theological stance and political support. ....and we are not even touching Christian era writings here. Lets stay factually correct...
@bradb2680
@bradb2680 Год назад
@@PrashansaGriho Luther didn't consider the septuigent to be the old testamet"he considered the Hebrew masoretic text to be the true old testamet and it does not include the deuterocannon. His Bible still has the deuterocannon, it is just in a separate section. Bibles that do not have the deuterocannon are only a fairly recent invention of maybe the last 100 years. The original kjv included the deuterocannon and there is a standing law in England that all bibles must include the deuterocannon (this law is unenforced). Luther also moved 4 new testamet books into an appendix because he considered them to teach "against the gospel".
@katiepayne2479
@katiepayne2479 Год назад
Do you deliver to Canada yet? I thought I was ordering physical books from you but they were downloads.
@WretchedNetwork
@WretchedNetwork Год назад
Hi Katie, please contact us at support@wretched.org
@lrfpv5292
@lrfpv5292 Год назад
I believe Enoch should be further investigated in particular. Gives a moral justification for the flood and explains demons, fallen angels, nephilim in extraordinary detail
@craigcrawford6595
@craigcrawford6595 Год назад
Gives moral justification for the flood? Umm, the Bible does that FYI. . Explains demons? Fallen angels, nephilim etc? Smh. .
@timestealr2967
@timestealr2967 Год назад
I've read up on that. Interesting, but without the divine footprint of God, it's just another book written by an unknown author about unknown things.
@2besavedcom-7
@2besavedcom-7 Год назад
​@@timestealr2967 - Study further. It turns out that assessing Enoch you will find it it was revered as much as all other Canonical Books by those in Qumran who wrot the Dead Sea Scrolls and not only is it the most quoted Book in the NT, but is the only Text that accounts for Paul's comment: "Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, matters of this life?" (1Cor 6:3)
@timestealr2967
@timestealr2967 Год назад
@@2besavedcom-7 You are incorrect. The book of Enoch was examined and rejected by both archeologists and bible scholars as being authentic. Also, Paul never quotes from that book in the NT since if he did it would be referenced as such in the notes. Paul's words were granted to him by the Holy Spirit, so that's how he knew these things.
@2besavedcom-7
@2besavedcom-7 Год назад
@@timestealr2967 - You're trying to tell me that the Book of Enoch was not found in the Dead Sea Scrolls? You do know that the scrolls they considered sacred were treated differently than other writings? Please account for the quote I gave from Paul (to judge angels) if it's not a direct reference to Enoch.
@Synth-ud3hl
@Synth-ud3hl Год назад
Genuine question (looking for someone who can thoroughly explain): How does Maccabees 9:27 (“So there was great distress in Israel, the worst since the time when prophets ceased to appear among them.”) deny itself as scripture? Should I know the context for it to do so? Because that text on its own doesn’t look like a denial of itself being scripture. What am I missing?
@nickynolfi833
@nickynolfi833 2 месяца назад
It's not a prophetic book. Many of the old testament books are not written by the prophets.
@jgirlLVR
@jgirlLVR Год назад
"Don't make me upset." LOL! Am I bad for wanting to read the gospel of Thomas just for the entertainment value?
@R_Karri
@R_Karri Год назад
If he's going to be snarky...but he's not,lol
@TheSamoanWatchman
@TheSamoanWatchman Год назад
Jesus didn’t say how many books would be in the New Testament
@John_Six_Twenty-Nine
@John_Six_Twenty-Nine Год назад
There's no conflict between ANY churches about how many books are in the new testament. The deuterocanonical books are generally pre-new testament period (or the intertestament period)
@doreencaputo2942
@doreencaputo2942 Год назад
As far as the Book of Enoch, whose prophetic writing was quoted in Jude. I could be wrong but I think this is in Scripture because of it's autobiographical nature, which makes true statements.
@martyshrader661
@martyshrader661 Месяц назад
Protestant here. 1) supposing the Council of Jamnia even happened, why would the church give it authority in church matters? The Jews of Jesus day did not even agree on what was scripture. (Sadducee vs Pharisee vs others?) 2) the Catholic Church did not make declarations for the fun of it, all councils were in response to a heresy, just as the first one was in the book of Acts concerning circumcision. If the Council of Trent added books then why do the Orthodox churches use the same books when they broke off, not recognizing Papal authority since 1054. Todd, you are using an adjustable timeline. I could go on, but the more I think about this, the more Catholic I get. Yeee!
@bonniefranklin6652
@bonniefranklin6652 Год назад
Blessings.
@lavenderflowers1075
@lavenderflowers1075 Год назад
That thumbnail is the best 😂
@fnjesusfreak
@fnjesusfreak Год назад
In fact, Jesus himself affirms the 24/39-book OT canon in Luke in Luke 24.44, using basically the same language used to this day by Jews to describe it.
@Petemoze17
@Petemoze17 Год назад
how does 1 Timothy 5:18 authenticate Luke? it doesn't even mention him... I'm not trying to be critical, but Is this a typo? did he mean to cite a different reference?
@jordanohara8178
@jordanohara8178 Год назад
Not a typo - in 1 Tim 5.18, Paul quotes Deut 25.4 and Luke 10.7 and refers to both as Scripture. 🙂
@bufordghoons9981
@bufordghoons9981 Год назад
I wonder what happened to the Book of Iddo the prophet and the book of Nathan the prophet.
@real.revJosva
@real.revJosva Год назад
If only they would actually look into what the council of Nicea was about
@brendangilmore4297
@brendangilmore4297 Год назад
I'm always amazed by mankind's genius to weave intricate and highly sophisticated diversions away from simple communion with our Creator. Dan Brown, for instance, a man of indubitable talent, had the wit to take the 26 letters of the alphabet and rearrange them into millions and millions of dollars!
@mrfuzzy2954
@mrfuzzy2954 Год назад
Considdering that people took one line out of Genesis to try and convince me that there are secret bunkers filled with giants and little green men based on a book that is not Biblical, should be enough to convince anyone that all the books in the Bible should be studied, to understand why it belongs and why the books that aren't included should not be included even though i would really like to have 77 books in the Bible...
@ThumbKnuckle
@ThumbKnuckle Год назад
yo, I keep hearing from catholics about the council of hippo and Augustine, so how do you factor that in?
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
Don't forget the Council of Rome in 382 AD, which gave the canonical list reaffirmed at Trent.
@DarkMatterBurrito
@DarkMatterBurrito Год назад
For me, it comes down to God is sovereign and will preserve his word ultimately. If he is unable to do something as simple as that, then he is not worthy of worship. But I believe that he has preserved his Word.
@annagriffin2865
@annagriffin2865 Год назад
3:04 NOT, 29 Books of the NT 3:19 YES, 27 Books of the NT.
@lucasfreer2785
@lucasfreer2785 Год назад
Can somebody please explain how 1 Maccabees 9 denies itself being scripture???
@thedogrunner
@thedogrunner Год назад
Wow. This helped a lot. A lot.
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
Sorry to pop your balloon but: Codex Sinaiticus, one of the first substantially complete Bible's we possess (fourth century), contains Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach. If these texts were already in Bibles in the 4th century (cf. the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus), how can Friel claim that the Catholic Church added them in the 16th century? His claim that they were added to justify Catholic doctrines which, he says, were developed between the 5th and 15th centuries falls over. Moreover, the canon was decreed by Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. The Council of Trent only reaffirmed this canonical list.
@thedogrunner
@thedogrunner Год назад
@@thecatholictypologist5009 Even if what you said is true it doesn't change the fact that the catholic church uses unbiblical doctrines and holds and teaches beliefs that will keep people from realizing salvation.
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
@@thedogrunner What is at question here is not what the Catholic Church teaches, but what Todd Friel does. He's telling lies which you were willingly to accept without question, which has me wonder how many other lies you've been told - and believe - about Catholicism. This should cause you to question whether everything you supposedly know about the Church's "unbiblical doctrines and ... beliefs that will keep people from realizing salvation" is true, or just the fruit of sins against the ninth commandment (Ex 20:16).
@rlhicks1
@rlhicks1 Год назад
@@thedogrunner That codex includes books that were never considered Jewish canon and the vast majority of scholars agree to there not being included.
@thedogrunner
@thedogrunner Год назад
@@rlhicks1 100%
@tomassarmiento2199
@tomassarmiento2199 Год назад
Do you have any books that talk about this? Or sources? I need to dig deeper.
@thecatholictypologist5009
@thecatholictypologist5009 Год назад
Codex Sinaiticus, one of the first substantially complete Bible's we possess (fourth century), contains Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach. If these texts were already in Bibles in the 4th century (cf. the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus), how can Friel claim that the Catholic Church added them in the 16th century? His claim that they were added to justify Catholic doctrines which, he says, were developed between the 5th and 15th centuries falls over. Moreover, the canon was decreed by Damasus I at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. The Council of Trent only reaffirmed this canonical list.
@whunt5533
@whunt5533 Год назад
I used to repeat this now I tell people that Jesus quoted Enoch not the book of enoch. However there are differences between different types of the Bible and missing scriptures. Ty for this vid brother.
@philmansfield8825
@philmansfield8825 Год назад
How did Jesus affirm the39 books of the Old Testament ?
@justindtackett
@justindtackett Год назад
I’d love to unpack this even more. I’ve always taken Christianity and the Word of God at complete face value. I’ve served the church in my adult life and have been hurt by it because as you know, people are in the church these days and they aren’t perfect and stuff. It has lead to a sort of rebellious attitude in my heart that I fear. And so I wonder about claims you’ve made so concisely. Was the character of Jesus also represented in the story you told from one of the books not considered as authoritative scripture? 😢. scripture has to be authoritative because we’re dealing with the spiritual. It cannot be just stories, if it were then it would be just like any other book.
@Orange6921
@Orange6921 Год назад
I struggles with those doubts for nearly 40 years, but as I turned 40 I began to seriously study the Bible and the evidence for the Bible and realized just how overwhelmingly strong the evidence for the 66 book text is. Not only do we KNOW the early church saw the 66 books as cannon, there are some 180 thousands letters from the early church fathers that quote over 90% of the NT. And we are talking about church fathers letters from the 1st, 2nd and 3rd centuries, and when you combine that with all the early manuscripts and fragments we have from the 1-2-3rd centuries we know the Bible is the most well preserved, documented and bonafied book from antiquity times 10. Not only do we KNOW we have the same books as the early church as taught by the Apostles and early disciples, we KNOW those books contain the same words as they had.
@Orange6921
@Orange6921 Год назад
On a side note, how can we have faith that God had the power to speak the entire universe into existence but somehow lacked the power to keep His promise and protect His Word for us even into the last days as He said? Would its not be totally absurd to say He can do one but not the latter? Over and over again God tells us in the OT and NT that He will preserve His Word for us, even in the last days.
@timestealr2967
@timestealr2967 Год назад
@@Orange6921 Very true, and a fact that many seem to miss. God can preserve His word over time. He did it when Israel was walking in idolatry for years and then afterwards, they found the Books of Moses. Heaven and earth will pass away, but God's word will never and stands the test of time. It's a living book; one of its kind that no other can match!
@mynameis......23
@mynameis......23 Год назад
3:04 27* books 8:33 mic drop
@tylerbob4853
@tylerbob4853 Год назад
Could someone answer a few questions? If Jesus ok'd the books of the new testament,how did he do it as Revelation and I think others were written after He was crucified. Thanks
@InitialPC
@InitialPC Год назад
They were also written after His resurrection.
@cjgodley1776
@cjgodley1776 Год назад
He did it through His Church. Jesus created a visible Church to continue His life and ministry through. The Church canonized the Bible in 398 A.D. at the Council of Carthage.
@tylerbob4853
@tylerbob4853 Год назад
@@cjgodley1776 thanks
@InitialPC
@InitialPC Год назад
@@cjgodley1776 there are greek codices that contain the new testament that predate the compilation of the bible by over a century
@cjgodley1776
@cjgodley1776 Год назад
@@InitialPC You're going to have to be more specific. Are you referring to fragments of the Septuagint?
@Falconguygaming
@Falconguygaming Год назад
so 1:50 where does he affirm them?
@dman7668
@dman7668 Год назад
It's true, the Protestant Bible is missing books.
Далее
The Most Scandalous Popes
8:21
Просмотров 26 тыс.
Evil. Hell. Slavery: 10 Challenges to Faith
47:00
Просмотров 71 тыс.
Документы для озокомления😂
00:24
These Evangelical Books Should've NEVER BEEN WRITTEN
20:17
How Did We Get The Bible | Michael Kruger
52:40
Просмотров 48 тыс.
How to Live With a Quarrelsome Wife
2:16
Просмотров 2,7 тыс.
10 Woke Progressive Beliefs Refuted With Scripture
13:40
Top Ten Most Evil Books Ever Written
8:09
Просмотров 150 тыс.
Who Are These Brave Christians?
8:33
Просмотров 177
Who is the Holy Spirit  |  John 14-16  |  Gary Hamrick
34:32