James white sounded so stupid. I reckon before he began talking he was desperately looking for evidence. And as always when a protestant can not refute a passage like matt1618 they would label it "proof text". Also to doubt apostolic succession is to doubt historical fact. I mean you have hundreds of early Christian writings and most are from Saints that profess to apostolic succession. About 90% (under my studies) of early Christian writers profess to apostolic succession through the bishopric.
The more I hear Protestant errors as are espoused in this video, the more I love the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church! Anyone with a clear mind that has not fallen into anti-Catholic bigotry can plainly see that Jesus Christ instituted the Holy Catholic Church in the year 33ad. No man on earth can ever violate the irreversible order mandated by Jesus Christ that His Holy Catholic Church shall retain the office of Peter (the pope) who shall forever teach w/o error on Faith and Morals. AMEN!
I find it interesting that protestants spend so much time trying to debunk Catholic teaching but the opposite does not exist except on rare occasions. There is power in just knowing one belongs to the true church of Jesus. "Thow are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church".
to rmcbride77. You clearly cited II Thes 2:15 in error and what's even more interesting is that you cited the King James Version only. You really ought to examine some other translations as well. First off the "Word" is Jesus (John 1:1-5). Here is what you said "The Word is not scripture only but is also the Apostolic tradition". God's word is Scripture and Tradition is tradition.
I better clarify my first comment also. I was directing Proverbs 3:5 to rmcbride77 because I see it is the highest rated comment. This is nonsense and clearly rmcbride77's opinion and was a philosophical gesture because they cited the government as an example for the pope. So if you wish to be reasonable please cite some scripture verses and for your philosphical statement. Thanks.
part II.... So clearly this is a time of 3 languages within the community so to speak and Jesus would have certainly known all 3. My personal conviction is that of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod but I am not a teacher. I am only a layman and you people really should double check your information before posting it as it would really help the rest of us. I am not into slamming other people either because we all want to learn and I admired the respect between the people debating. Thanks
to missgreeneyes 56... Since Jesus is God manifest in the flesh he certainly knows Greek and Latin too. This argument holds no water. There were plenty of Greek speaking Jews in Jesus day and they were known as Alexandrian Jews, hence Alexandrian Greek which the book of Hebrew is written. Also do some research on the Septuagint. The old testament written in Greek in 300 b.c. (rough date). The superscript that Pilate made for the cross of our Lord Jesus was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek.
to mcbride 77.. now hear what the scriptures say and stop trying to use philosophical reason to explain the R. C's position. Proverbs 3:5 "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding". The question isn't what do we see in the rest of the world but the question is simply "what does God say about this?".
The Aramaic original was what Christ Himself said. He spoke to his apostles in Aramaic. That was their language. What He said was handed down orally by those who were there and the New Testament was then written later in Greek. What's the problem here? Jesus didn't say, "Today I'm going to give you a Greek lesson."
Isn't it curious that the catholic apologist makes the claim that Peter was in the right regarding his dispute with Paul even though the position of the Bible is that Paul [under the influence of God] had corrected Peter as to his error regarding the judiazing of the gentiles. Once again, the papist apologist is interpreting Scripture in such a way as to make it reconcile with catholic tradition instead of making catholic tradition congruous with Scripture.
Where in God's name is part number 10?? Brother White was on a roll. How dare you [knowing that you are a papist] stop him in the middle of his presentation. He was making crucial points which seemed to be leading up to even more evident truths.
The info of this video should read:
"patrissimo takes a shot at silencing a Bible Believer in the middle of a debate".
The Magisterium is the teaching arm of the church, The Holy Father, with the Bishops have guided the church via the various Major Church councils and steered her course through many heresies aimed at destroying the Faith handed down by the Apostles. I would suggest that you get Jurgen's very fine 3 volume set of the Faith of the Early Fathers and read for yourselves what the early church believed and what it continues to believe about the Papacy and Papal succession. Especially the first volume.
i think ur wrong to claim that the faith of our father belief as is was today is the same roman catholic church today? did the early apostle ever mention to gave an accolade to those people who died in christ to built them an a graven images.?? so they can remeber them and revered them? NO
Lets be reasonable, if the founders of our own American system of government, understood that it takes 3 institutions, the executive, legislative and the one with final authority - judicial branches of government to maintain stability in government, why is it strange to think that the King of the universe would not leave his church with a Holy Spirit inspired final Authority? The church was given Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Magisterium. The pattern is in the book of Acts, chapter 15.
Being an ex-Protestant, What I came to understand after becoming Catholic,and what I hope my Protestant brothers come to understand that the Papacy is just another outpouring of God's mercy. Is it so strange to think that God knew that just leaving us with Scripture and tradition without a final authority, would foster divisions? If you look at the state of the Protestants since the Reformation,there are over 33,000 denominations, each claiming the exclusive truth. 500 happened in Luther's time
Thank God for us non-Protestant that were never Part of heresy of the Modern Catholic Church. So you must have found where Peter prayed the Rosary; what book is that in?
The Catholic Church is the Church of Jesus Christ, The Word made flesh. The Word is not scripture only but is also the Apostolic tradition which St Paul tells us to hold to:
2 Thessalonians 2:15 (King James Version) 15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
1 Thes 5:21 - Prove ALL things; hold fast that which is good. Have you proven that Peter was in Rome, as the Bishop of Bishop, reigning infallibly, praying to Mary? If you have, then you've proven something even the Catholic Church doesn't even claim to prove.
It's a question of Jesus' LANGUAGE, of what HE spoke. It's highly unlikely Jesus would speak a language of the Gentiles (Greek) in opposition to the language of the Hebrews (Aramaic) when during his ministry he said he came for the lost children of Israel. the "kepha-kepha" argument is fine in this sense, and the greek supports it. these are both nouns, petros and petras. it's a question of what TYPE. one is common, the other is proper, and since they both mean "rock" they connect equally.
James white sounded so stupid. I reckon before he began talking he was desperately looking for evidence. And as always when a protestant can not refute a passage like matt1618 they would label it "proof text". Also to doubt apostolic succession is to doubt historical fact. I mean you have hundreds of early Christian writings and most are from Saints that profess to apostolic succession. About 90% (under my studies) of early Christian writers profess to apostolic succession through the bishopric.
Zebedex 4 months ago
MREASYGLIDER God says to follow the church!!! Mt. 18;17.......
God started the church and he said it will not fail. i am catholic. James White did much
better than Zinns. but he is still weak
singapore7773 1 year ago
The more I hear Protestant errors as are espoused in this video, the more I love the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church! Anyone with a clear mind that has not fallen into anti-Catholic bigotry can plainly see that Jesus Christ instituted the Holy Catholic Church in the year 33ad. No man on earth can ever violate the irreversible order mandated by Jesus Christ that His Holy Catholic Church shall retain the office of Peter (the pope) who shall forever teach w/o error on Faith and Morals. AMEN!
ChristianFirefighter 1 year ago
James White failed and lost the debate.
LaxDistributors 1 year ago
I find it interesting that protestants spend so much time trying to debunk Catholic teaching but the opposite does not exist except on rare occasions. There is power in just knowing one belongs to the true church of Jesus. "Thow are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church".
LaxDistributors 1 year ago
to patrissimo...I do not see debate 10..?? Thanks for the post.
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
@MREASYGLIDER What debate 10?
patrissimo 1 year ago
@patrissimo This debate does not end in the middle of James White's Talk.. There has to be a DEBATE 10 ...etc... This is INCOMPLETE !!
JDNWF66 10 months ago
Comment removed
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
Comment removed
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
Comment removed
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
to rmcbride77. You clearly cited II Thes 2:15 in error and what's even more interesting is that you cited the King James Version only. You really ought to examine some other translations as well. First off the "Word" is Jesus (John 1:1-5). Here is what you said "The Word is not scripture only but is also the Apostolic tradition". God's word is Scripture and Tradition is tradition.
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
I better clarify my first comment also. I was directing Proverbs 3:5 to rmcbride77 because I see it is the highest rated comment. This is nonsense and clearly rmcbride77's opinion and was a philosophical gesture because they cited the government as an example for the pope. So if you wish to be reasonable please cite some scripture verses and for your philosphical statement. Thanks.
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
part III.. I better clarify the superscipt...Luke 23:38 and John 19:20. Thanks again.
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
part II.... So clearly this is a time of 3 languages within the community so to speak and Jesus would have certainly known all 3. My personal conviction is that of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod but I am not a teacher. I am only a layman and you people really should double check your information before posting it as it would really help the rest of us. I am not into slamming other people either because we all want to learn and I admired the respect between the people debating. Thanks
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
to missgreeneyes 56... Since Jesus is God manifest in the flesh he certainly knows Greek and Latin too. This argument holds no water. There were plenty of Greek speaking Jews in Jesus day and they were known as Alexandrian Jews, hence Alexandrian Greek which the book of Hebrew is written. Also do some research on the Septuagint. The old testament written in Greek in 300 b.c. (rough date). The superscript that Pilate made for the cross of our Lord Jesus was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek.
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
to mcbride 77.. now hear what the scriptures say and stop trying to use philosophical reason to explain the R. C's position. Proverbs 3:5 "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding". The question isn't what do we see in the rest of the world but the question is simply "what does God say about this?".
MREASYGLIDER 1 year ago
@MREASYGLIDER The Catholic position is the scriptural position. It is Protestantism which leans unto its own undestanding.
patrissimo 1 year ago
The Aramaic original was what Christ Himself said. He spoke to his apostles in Aramaic. That was their language. What He said was handed down orally by those who were there and the New Testament was then written later in Greek. What's the problem here? Jesus didn't say, "Today I'm going to give you a Greek lesson."
missgreeneyes56 1 year ago
Comment removed
missgreeneyes56 1 year ago
Isn't it curious that the catholic apologist makes the claim that Peter was in the right regarding his dispute with Paul even though the position of the Bible is that Paul [under the influence of God] had corrected Peter as to his error regarding the judiazing of the gentiles. Once again, the papist apologist is interpreting Scripture in such a way as to make it reconcile with catholic tradition instead of making catholic tradition congruous with Scripture.
WorshipInTruth 2 years ago
Where in God's name is part number 10?? Brother White was on a roll. How dare you [knowing that you are a papist] stop him in the middle of his presentation. He was making crucial points which seemed to be leading up to even more evident truths.
The info of this video should read:
"patrissimo takes a shot at silencing a Bible Believer in the middle of a debate".
WorshipInTruth 2 years ago
Right on, Mr. White!
catholicexodus 2 years ago
/watch?v=fFH0khjgA0U
TheHonestTheist 2 years ago
Where is part 10?
KeithTruth 3 years ago
Ouch...James, Ouch.
Fire.
The giving of the keys bit was crucial.
James is a doberman.
NeoConvert 3 years ago
The Magisterium is the teaching arm of the church, The Holy Father, with the Bishops have guided the church via the various Major Church councils and steered her course through many heresies aimed at destroying the Faith handed down by the Apostles. I would suggest that you get Jurgen's very fine 3 volume set of the Faith of the Early Fathers and read for yourselves what the early church believed and what it continues to believe about the Papacy and Papal succession. Especially the first volume.
rmcbride77 3 years ago 4
i think ur wrong to claim that the faith of our father belief as is was today is the same roman catholic church today? did the early apostle ever mention to gave an accolade to those people who died in christ to built them an a graven images.?? so they can remeber them and revered them? NO
jeslyfirefox 3 years ago
Lets be reasonable, if the founders of our own American system of government, understood that it takes 3 institutions, the executive, legislative and the one with final authority - judicial branches of government to maintain stability in government, why is it strange to think that the King of the universe would not leave his church with a Holy Spirit inspired final Authority? The church was given Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Magisterium. The pattern is in the book of Acts, chapter 15.
rmcbride77 3 years ago 6
Being an ex-Protestant, What I came to understand after becoming Catholic,and what I hope my Protestant brothers come to understand that the Papacy is just another outpouring of God's mercy. Is it so strange to think that God knew that just leaving us with Scripture and tradition without a final authority, would foster divisions? If you look at the state of the Protestants since the Reformation,there are over 33,000 denominations, each claiming the exclusive truth. 500 happened in Luther's time
rmcbride77 3 years ago
Thank God for us non-Protestant that were never Part of heresy of the Modern Catholic Church. So you must have found where Peter prayed the Rosary; what book is that in?
tonyb408 2 years ago
The Catholic Church is the Church of Jesus Christ, The Word made flesh. The Word is not scripture only but is also the Apostolic tradition which St Paul tells us to hold to:
2 Thessalonians 2:15 (King James Version) 15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
rmcbride77 2 years ago
1 Thes 5:21 - Prove ALL things; hold fast that which is good. Have you proven that Peter was in Rome, as the Bishop of Bishop, reigning infallibly, praying to Mary? If you have, then you've proven something even the Catholic Church doesn't even claim to prove.
tonyb408 2 years ago
It's a question of Jesus' LANGUAGE, of what HE spoke. It's highly unlikely Jesus would speak a language of the Gentiles (Greek) in opposition to the language of the Hebrews (Aramaic) when during his ministry he said he came for the lost children of Israel. the "kepha-kepha" argument is fine in this sense, and the greek supports it. these are both nouns, petros and petras. it's a question of what TYPE. one is common, the other is proper, and since they both mean "rock" they connect equally.
k12d14 3 years ago
beautiful job by James White...
SeinUndZeit 3 years ago
these debates have helped me convert.
shanana000 3 years ago
convert to what?
rmcbride77 3 years ago
To the truth of God's free gift of salvation.
shanana000 3 years ago
that's great! What was it in the debate pushed you over the line?
rmcbride77 3 years ago
Well, I'm tired of waiting. Time to look elsewhere. I've already seen all these debates anyway.
Psalm130 3 years ago
Thank you, I was just curious. I like these debates.
nate12387 3 years ago
Yeah, where is the rest of the debate?
Psalm130 3 years ago
Where is the rest of his argument?
nate12387 3 years ago
The dogma is not based on an Aramaic original. The Greek text proves it.
Psalm130 3 years ago