What Do the Scriptures Point To? | Scott Hahn | Eucharist Fulfills Old Testament | Bible Study 

The gate of heaven is wide 😍 ❤️ but only few will enter.

You might want to read about St.Anthanius and how the Church has anathamatized pretty much all his teachings, because he taught scripture was final authority and Jesus was 100% God and 100% man, which at that time considered heresy by the church. Constantine exiled him on threat of death in 339AD. Apparently, you stopped short in your studying! Keep reading and you will find that the Roman Catholic Church has probably killed more Christians than it has ever saved; furthermore, the council of Trent was a total apostasy from the word of God and if you do not see it, you may not be born again and you might want to do more self evaluation as the scripture teaches. Keep studying is my advice for you.

Explain yourself

Read and learn

Catholics do not worship Mary. Protestants do not worship God. Worship is at the Mass.

So, you mean to tell us that the flesh of Jesus Christ "profits nothing"? Wow. You are wholly ignorant of the Christian faith.

@Rbn Mnt The belief of eating the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ and drinking his Blood originates directly from him. Here's just a part of his teaching regarding the necessity for our eternal life and future resurrection of our bodies: JOHN 6:53-55 53. So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have NO life in you; 54. he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has Eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55. For my flesh is FOOD INDEED, and my blood is drink indeed. It is quite evident Jesus was not expressing something symbolic in those clear and unambiguous "truly, truly" words. Those who think that would be "creating", not accepting His true teaching which our Lord continues to emphasize: JOHN 6:56-59 56. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. 58. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.” 59. This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Caper′na-um. How are we supposed to eat his flesh and drink his blood? Our Lord explains it step by step, in: ▪︎MARK 14:22-24 While they were eating, He TOOK some BREAD, and after a blessing He broke it, and gave it to them, and said, "Take it; THIS IS MY BODY." And when He had taken a CUP and given thanks, He gave it to them, and THEY all DRANK from it. And He said to them, "THIS IS MY BLOOD of the covenant, which is poured out for many. Do you see the word "symbol" anywhere? The reason is simple: Because it is real. Just like our Lord clearly says! If you want confirmation, St. Paul a former enemy of the Church, turned Apostle, explains it to you: ▪︎1 CORINTHIANS 11:23-29 23. For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of BREAD, 24. and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “THIS IS MY BODY that is for you. DO THIS in remembrance of me.” 25. In the same way he took THE CUP also, after supper, saying, “THIS CUP is the NEW COVENANT in MY BLOOD. DO THIS, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26. For AS OFTEN as you eat this bread and drink the cup, YOU PROCLAIM THE LORD’s DEATH until he comes. 27. WHOEVER, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an UNWORTHY MANNER will be answerable for the BODY and BLOOD of THE LORD. 28. Examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29. For all who eat and drink WITHOUT DISCERNING THE BODY, eat and drink JUDGMENT AGAINST THEMSELVES. Key: "ANSWERABLE FOR THE BODY and BLOOD of THE LORD". Can you understand that If it was only a symbol it would not refer to the Eucharist as Christ's Body and Blood? DEFINITION OF THE MIRACLE THAT TRANSFORMS BREAD AND WINE INTO THE DIVINE BODY AND BLOOD OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST: ▪︎Transubstantiation is the change that occurs in the sacrament of Holy Communion (Eucharist). Such change involves the whole substance of the bread and wine being turned miraculously into the whole substance of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ himself. Even though the accidents (Bread and wine) remain the same. During the Mass when the Eucharistic elements, which are the bread and the wine being consecrated by the priest, are transformed into the actual body and blood of Jesus while keeping only the appearance of bread and wine. Transubstantiation was defined by our Church at the Council of Trent: "... By the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation." (Session XIII, chapter IV) The term "real presence" refers to Christ's actual presence in the bread and the wine. The underlying essence of the bread and wine are believed to be changed, while they retain only the appearance, taste, odor, and texture of bread and wine. Our Catholic doctrine holds that the Godhead is indivisible, so every particle or drop that is changed is wholly identical in substance with the divinity, body, and blood of the Savior. ● Transubstantiation belief beyond the Apostles: ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH. In the early Church, 10 years after the Apostle John's death, one of his disciples, Ignatius the Bishop of Antioch, clearly believed in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. He so states it in letters written around A.D. 107. ▪︎Letter to Smyrneans A.D. 107 "They [the Docetists, early Christological heretics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the EUCHARIST is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes". ▪︎Letter to the Romans A.D. 110 "I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the FLESH OF JESUS CHRIST, who was of the seed of David; and FOR DRINK I desire HIS BLOOD, which is love incorruptible". Beginnings of Transubstantiation type of language in 145AD: ▪︎JUSTIN MARTYR. Christian apologist, born at Flavia Neapolis, about A.D 100, converted to Christianity about A.D. 130, taught and defended the Christian religion in Asia Minor and at Rome, where he suffered martyrdom about the year 165. ▪︎1st. Apology #66 A. D. 145 For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise HAVE WE BEEN TAUGHT that the food which is blessed by the prayer of his word, and from which our blood and flesh by TRANSMUTATION (Early Church concept, later refined at Trent) are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, said, “This do in remembrance of me, this is my body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, he said, “This is my blood;” and gave it to them alone. May God bless your discernment.

@po18guy text alone displeases the Roman catholic church because it's doctrines and dogmas are not found therein. It's ironic that the church rejects scripture alone yet it says that "sacred tradition" is equal to scripture. Why sacred scripture? Why not the book of Mormon or the Koran? I guess sacred scripture was the ONLY source of divine truth at that time. In trying to disprove sola scriptura the church actually confirms it.

Christ is being literal in John 6 if not Paul would affirm it in 1 Corinthians and saying you are sinning against the body and blood of the Lord if you drink of the cup unworthily. Also people who did died and got sick. It’s right there in scripture. When the disciples say it’s a hard teaching who can accept it. Christ doubles down and some disciples walk away. I’m a former reformed baptist but Martin Luther was man filled with hate, who hated the Jews and wrote the Jews and their lies. He added the word alone to “faith alone” he also took out seven books out of the original cannon of scripture., and if he could of had it his way he’s on record saying if he could he would get rid of the book of James, and he didn’t think revaltions was inspired. We are not saved by faith alone. James makes that very clear. Faith without works is dead, Martin Luther said to sin godly. This is the man the reformers look too. He did not possess good fruit. You will know them by their fruit. The Catholic Church has been around since Christ. Protestants have 1000s of denominations all with different doctrines. The Catholic Church is the church of Christ. And sola scriputa, which is scripture alone, is a reformed doctrine. The faith was passed down by oral tradition for hundreds of years. Nowhere in scripture does it say scripture alone.

SOLA SCRIPTURA is unbiblical. ​@@rbnmnt3341

@Rbn Mnt Scripture clearly points to one single united Church built by Jesus Christ. Nowhere does Scripture teach: 1.- Bible alone 2.- Faith alone 3.- Separate churches 4.- Sects 5.- Self-appointed ministers 6.- "Services" based on preaching, not on Jesus' clear order May God bless your discernment.

@@joecastillo8798 it sure does. But can you show me where that says roman catholic church? You see the scriptures are not a "fill in the blank" bible. If you notice Matthew 16 does not give a particular religion or denomination. "The church" in scripture is the worldwide body of believers, not a particular religion. It's just that your church has taken the liberty of inserting itself into scripture to add credibility. It defies logic that Jesus being Jewish, of a Jewish mother, with Jewish apostles founded a ROMAN catholic church.

@@rbnmnt3341 My friend, You, sadly, have fallen in the trap of "Sola Scriptura", a doctrine invented by Martin Luther in 1521. Search Scripture. Nowhere does Jesus or His Apostles ever teach something must be written explicitly in order to be believed in a future Bible that would only be compiled for the first time in the year 382AD. However, it clearly says the following: ▪︎JOHN 15:26-27 26. But when the Advocate has arrived, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of TRUTH who proceeds from the Father, he will offer testimony about me. 27. And you shall offer testimony, because you are with me from the beginning.” ▪︎JOHN 16:13 13. When the SPIRIT of TRUTH comes, He WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL THE TRUTH; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. ▪︎JOHN 17:17-19 17. Sanctify them in TRUTH. Your word is TRUTH. 18. Just as you have sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. 19. And it is for them that I sanctify myself, so that they, too, may be sanctified in TRUTH. Therefore the Bible clearly affirms in: 1 TIMOTHY 3:15 15. if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is THE CHURCH of the living God, THE PILLAR and FOUNDATION OF THE TRUTH. Such truth will always be present in the one true Church founded by Christ until the end of times. Therefore, we must always listen to Christ's one Church, just like Scripture says: LUKE 10:16 16. “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me. Don't refuse to hear Christ's Church any longer. May God have mercy on you and open your heart and mind to His one Church and one truth.

@@joecastillo8798 you have fallen prey to adding to scripture. Let me ask you. If the bible or Sola scriptura is so wrong why does your church say that "sacred tradition" is equal to scripture? Why compare it to the bible. Could it be that it is the only divine source of truth? Why not make tradition to the book of Mormon or the Koran?

@@rbnmnt3341 Sacred Oral Tradition is as valid as written Tradition. Written Tradition is not sufficient as the complete rule of faith. In fact St. Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the Tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). St. Paul further instructs us the following way in: 2 THESSALONIANS 2:15 15. So then, brethren, stand firm and HOLD TO THE TRADITIONS which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. This oral teaching was accepted by Christians, just as they accepted the written teaching that came to them later. Jesus told his disciples: “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me” (Luke 10:16). The Catholic Church, in the persons of the apostles, was given full authority to teach by Christ; the Church is His representative. He commissioned them, saying, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:19). The question is: How was this supposed to be done, if the majority of population (90%) had no access to books and was illiterate? The answer: By preaching and by oral instruction: “So faith comes from what is HEARD, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ” (Rom. 10:17). Therefore the Church would always be the living teacher. It is a mistake for protestants like you to limit “Christ’s word” to the written word only, or to suggest that all His teachings were reduced to writing. The Bible NOWHERE supports either notion. The question is: What is Apostolic Tradition? We do not refer to legends or mythological accounts, nor transitory human customs or practices which, as you well know, may change, as circumstances warrant, such as styles of priestly dress, particular forms of devotion to saints, or even liturgical rubrics. Sacred or Apostolic Tradition consists of the TEACHINGS that the Apostles passed on ORALLY through their PREACHING. These teachings largely (perhaps entirely) overlap with those contained in Scripture, but the mode of their transmission is different. In the following quote, St. Paul illustrates for you what tradition is: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures. . . . Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed” (1 Cor. 15:3,11). Furthermore, the apostle Paul praised those who followed Tradition: 1 CORINTHIANS 11:2 2. I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the TRADITIONS even as I have delivered them to you. The first Christians “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching” (Acts 2:42) long before there was a New Testament. From the very beginning, the fullness of Christian teaching was found in the Church as the living embodiment of Christ, NOT IN A BOOK. The teaching Church, with its oral, apostolic tradition, was authoritative. Paul himself gives a quotation from Jesus that was handed down orally to him: “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). However, the problem with fundamentalists like you is that you want to equate Apostolic Tradition with "human traditions" condemned by Jesus when He said, “And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” (Matt. 15:3). St.Paul, as well, warned, “See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to "HUMAN TRADITION", according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ” (Col. 2:8). Let me clarify what is actually referred in the Bible as human traditions. It is known that Pharisees observed a rigid and simple mode of life, disdaining all luxurious delicacies, scrupulously following the dictates of their reasoning, and paying their greatest veneration and obedience to the opinions and traditions of their seniors. It is also evident that New Testament verses merely condemn those erroneous HUMAN traditions, NOT TRUTHS which were handed down orally and entrusted to the Church by the Apostles. These latter truths are part of what is known as APOSTOLIC Tradition, which is to be distinguished from human traditions or customs as delineated above. Unfortunately, what Evangelicals often do is see the word “tradition” in Matthew 15:3 or Colossians 2:8 or elsewhere and conclude that anything termed a “tradition” is to be rejected, obviating the fact that Jesus did not condemn all traditions; he condemned only erroneous traditions, whether doctrines or practices, that undermined Christian truths. The rest, as the apostles taught, were to be obeyed. FINALLY: What did the early Church, the inheritor of Apostolic teaching believed? ▪︎A prominent Bishop explains the following: ” ‘So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by Epistle of ours.’ Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition, seek no farther.” The above response was delivered at a Homily during a Mass by a prominent Eastern Catholic Bishop: St. John Chrysostom, Homily on 2nd Thessalonians, 4:2 (A.D. 404). May God bless your discernment.

Welcome back home! God bless!!

qhimset

qhimset,

The title of Keating's book is actually: CATHOLICISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM - THE ATTACK ON "ROMANISM' BY "BIBLE CHRISTIANS" www.amazon.com/Catholicism-Fundamentalism-Karl-Keating-ebook/dp/B0037BVKEE

Oh stop it Brock. As if the quotes around the words makes a bit of difference. Hahn the con can call himself a "Bible Christian" till the day he dies, but he has a passport to hell waiting for him, as well as all Catholics who think that eating the physical anatomy of Christ will save them. WAKE UP THOU FOOL. The gospel was never meant to satisfy our oral fixations! The prophet Job says "I have esteemed his ***WORD*** more than my necessary food", and the con-artist in the video thinks we ought to "eat Jesus" who is the word of God. Both thoughts are polar opposite to each other and only ONE is correct. Should you wish 95 reasons why Transubstantiation is a lie, you may request it at...eucharistangel@aol.com

'Scare quotes, shudder quotes, or sneer quotes are quotation marks placed around a word or phrase to signal that a term is being used in a non-standard, ironic, or otherwise special sense. Scare quotes may express that the author is using someone else's term, similar to preceding a phrase with the expression "so-called"; they may imply skepticism or disagreement, belief that the words are misused, or that the writer intends a meaning opposite to the words enclosed in quotes.' en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes (As in, so-called Romanism and so-called Bible Christians.) I had assumed that this would have been obvious to English speaking adults, but I was mistaken - as you have demonstrated - and for that, I apologize. Here is an anger management article from Focus on the Family that you may find helpful: www.focusonthefamily.com/lifechallenges/emotional-health/changing-an-angry-spirit/winning-the-war-against-anger

Oh Brock....must I put a dunce cap on your head? At the end of the day, Hahn the Con's lip service to the Bible is disingenuous. Catholicism has three EQUAL modes of authority; namely, The Bible, the Magisterium and "Tradition". Hence, to consider oneself a "Bible Christian" is simply trying to impress ignorant Protestants who don't know any better. The truth is, Catholics SHOULD, if they are consistent, label themselves at least on SOME occasions, a "Magisterium Christian", or a "Traditional Christian". But do they ever do this? NO, not EVER. In view of that, to label themselves "Bible Christians" certainly does not impress the Lord Jesus Christ let me assure you. True Christians are those who hold to God's word ALONE as their primary authority, as this very concept is contained from Genesis to Revelation, especially in all 176 verses of Psalm 119, the longest chapter in Holy Writ. Catholic dunderheads like Mr. Hahn who proclaim the magisterium and tradition as being on the same pedestal as Scripture are FRAUDS because God has magnified his word even above his very name (Psalm 138:2), which simply leaves no ROOM for the other two. Moreover, God is most pleased on those who meditate on his word day and night (Joshua 1:8), which of course leaves no TIME to bow our knee before some nebulous and ill-defined concept such as tradition. Catholics cannot even tell us how many traditions there are (!) nor can they tell us how many times the magisterium has spoken infallibly! One would supposedly need to know these things to be saved, but you get different answers from every Catholic you consult. Been there. Done that. Therefore, when one peels back the layer of the Catholic onion, we discover Catholicism to be counterfeit Christianity, an exquisite and very clever deception from the pit of hell that endorses "another jesus and another gospel" according to 2 Cor 11:4. As the apostle Paul said, "we are not deceived by Satan's devices".

You are, quite simply a "genius" and I mean that with all "sincerity". It seems you have your cap on a little too tight... time for you to visit www.j2theson.com/ That should help to loosen it a little.