You're correct that World War III - that is, Vatican II - was an unmitigated disaster. But you went off the rails by becoming a sedevacantist. I know that sedevacantists are hostile to the SSPX, nevertheless I recommend that you go to the SSPX publishing arm, Angelus Press, and get their book called Sedevacantism: A False Solution to a Real Problem. It might be available online for free if you search.
@Jitpring I'm not a member of the SSPX at all by any means, but I still would like to check out that book. I might be able to use it to minister to my family friend who became a Sedevacantist about 5 years ago. Despite how bad things are going in the church, it will still be our Holy Mother and despite the apostasy our popes have gone into, they're still legit because Christ said so.
@Jitpring Jerusalem was a type of the church. God established it himself and it rebelled against Him regularly. In fact it was no different from what the church is today. Jerusalem got together with heathens and worshipped their idols like today the church wants to dialogue with other nonChristian religions. King David was a murderer who murdered hundreds of people like the church called for inquisitions in the 16-17 centuries.
@Jitpring Many of the chief priests were adulterers like the sex abuse scandal we have in the church today. But despite all that, it was still the bride of God and continued to be until the death of Jesus when the Old Covenant died and the New took her place for eternity. Same thing with the church, no matter how bad things will get it will remain Christ's church forever and in the end, it will be sanctified and God will triumph.
@ Xbleach Grace is a complete gift, an infant can do nothing to merit salvation, giving an infant baptism is a work of God and all his doing, no man can boast.
@Moe3214 if you read the Old testament sir you will see that Baptismis the new circumcision . Lt me explain : The way to bring a child into covenant with God one had to get their child circumcised . When Christ came he made the covenant involving baptism . The way to bring your child into the covenant with Christ is through Baptism .Get it? Good moving on ...
@CAtholic29 No need to explain, I know that. My point was, Many protestants like to say how salvation is a free gift, yet they then tell you , you have to say a certain prayer and have faith, my point was that a baby being baptized for salvation is the epitomy of a freely given gift , the infant merely being who he/she is and doing nothing. All Gods doing.
Infant baptism is pointless. Biblical baptism was always done when someone became a believer. Babies have no consent nor understanding of what's happening. And the Apocraphal books are uninspired.
@XBleach88X In the early church the norm was for adults to be baptized, even though babies were baptized. The Apostles baptized entire families. Through baptism one is joined to the church, one becomes a member of the church, the Body of Christ.
@XBleach88X....Can you refer me exactly what verse in the Bible that prohibits infant baptism? Please read the whole Bible and make sure the Bible you're reading is complete and not lacking 7 books. And if you cant find your answer, check the works of the early fathers.
Well catholics are interesting thats for sure, more interesting than all these other denominational protostants..Luthern hated Jews with a passion,, anyone that hates Jews hates God. this exsposes lutherans as false..ive been a pentocostal a baptist and checked out a few others, I was confused. so know i follow Jesus teaching alone without being swayed to churchs of men..
the catholic chruch is evil its run by the illuminati and their bible contradicts the original christian bible which was written before the catholic bible
@182RG in the original bible there is no purgatory, because when you die you go to heaven or hell there is no in between. and confession is another thing that contradicts the bible because if you commit a sin you should ask god in jesus's name to forgive you not your priest because he didnt die for your sins. also the chruch has been corrupted by the illuminati (a satanic secret society) and for info on that just look some videos about the illuminati and the catholic chruch
The original bible, that the Catholics use, is the same as the Protestant, except that Luther removed 7 books from it - the deuterocanonical books. Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus) ,Baruch, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees.
Note these books appeared in the first ever printed bible - Guttenburg c 1452,
They appear also in Septuagint, and at least partially in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Note that Hebrews 11:35 refers to an event that was recorded 2 Maccabees:
Heb 11:35 "Women received their dead raised to life again. Others were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection."
Mac 2:7 "But the Creator of the world, that formed the nativity of man, and that found out the origin of all, he will restore to you again in his mercy, both breath and life, as now you despise yourselves for the sake of his laws."
You really must learn to read and PROPERLY translate Koine Greek into English... This is a poor video with poor arguments to substantiate these theories.
If you knew any Greek, you would know that "Catholic" in Ignatius' letter does NOT refer to the apostate Church we have today; rather, "Καθολικη" means "UNIVERSAL"! Hence, why even the Orthodox Church referred to itself as a Catholic (Universal) Church! Research, research, research...
@AusPoliticalTruths This is substantiated (as a definition) in your very own video!! Look at your video again - Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures ~3:55 into your video. Very poorly researched and ill-prepared.
>>>"This is substantiated (as a definition) in your very own video!! Look at your video again - ... ~3:55 into your video."
I think YOU should look again.
"And if ever thou art sojourning in cities, inquire not simply where the Lord’s House is (for the other sects of the profane also attempt to call their own dens houses of the Lord), nor merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the peculiar name of His holy church..."
"It is called Catholic then because IT EXTENDS ALL OVER THE WORLD, FROM ONE END OF THE EARTH TO THE OTHER, and because it teaches UNIVERSALLY AND COMPLETELY..." [emphasis mine]
It's stipulated in black and white. You should read your own resources before using them as "evidence".
With his use of "Lord's House", we know he is referring to an actual building - just as the phrase is used in scripture. Did you read the entire clip? In particular "nor merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the peculiar name of His holy church..."
@182RG Indeed, I watched the entire video - I have great attention to detail... Of course, he is referring to a physical building. If you read it in context (the whole text), you will come to the conclusion that his intending meaning is to not simply ask around for "the Lord's House", as this can refer to ANY "Church". Although it's early in Church history, many sects had manifested. He stipulates to ask for the Catholic Church - meaning, the universally recognised and approved Church.
Believe it pple; catholic church is the 1 true church found by jesus christ himself 2000 years ago.pple just don't want to see the truth that catholic is the truth, even his own mother proved it to the world, she followed her son's 1 true church..
@tonganfoilole69 Yes Jesus Christ founded the catholic church(not Latin), but it is the Orthodox Church that has not deviated from the church established 2000 years ago.
I'm talking to u stupid idiot that says catholic are deceitful; 1st yr so dumn ass ignorant ok, 2nd u don't know shit about the catholic faith ok, 3rd stop the hating towards catholic because when u hate catholic, u hate the teaching of jesus christ ok. I know 4 a fact, that catholic is the only true church...T o hell with yr belief.
@february17able that's exactly what people who can't defend their corrupt faith say, martin luther is proud.
"The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding." Athanasian Creed (A.D. 400).
"And the Holy Spirit, according to the Holy Scriptures, is neither of the Father alone, nor of the Son alone, but of both." Augustine, On the Trinity, ,XV:17,27 (A.D. 408). PEACE
@MysticalCity I have the Athanasian Creed. You misquoted again.. Augstine written heresy as you quoted. The Seven Ecumenical Councils never agreed with Filioque which is before, during and after his death. As for Martin Luther, You videos are of slander of Martin Luther which is indicative of the Council Trent and Jesuit Fourth Vow. Now, Augistine does say good things about Psalms and about his confession. His conversion is quite wounderous work of Christ.
@february17able @ proof for the Filioque,AGAIN St.John 15:26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me. "Whom I will send" THIS PROVES THAT THE HOLY GHOST PROCEEDS FROM THE SON AS WELL AS THE FATHER, OTHERWISE HE COULD NOT BE SENT BY THE SON.
The Christian Orthodox Church in the True and Only Church. Not Rome! The Pope of Rome is a fraud and always has been since he declared Universial Sacred and Temperal Power! I like the quotes in the video. I wish the west get rid of their Dagan Fish God hats!
@february17able this video already gave you proof, are you disrespecting Saint Peter the first pope? orthodox don't believe in purgatory, this is contrary to the bible and to the church fathers, orthodox don't believe in the filioque, this is contrary to the Bible and to the church fathers, orthodox don't believe in the Immaculate Conception, this is contrary to the Bible and to the church fathers,orthodox reject the papacy that's why there are over 15 sects of orthodox, which one is right?NONE
@february17able intelligent reply, read The Fathers know best, for what the early church taught(The one and only true Catholic church, before your satanic sect was started by satan in 1054, with its blasphemous beliefs.
@MysticalCity For you own good. The falthers never agreed with the filioque and Romes Heresy. Obvously you been shown that you are wrong, real wrong, that Orthodoxy broke away from Rome in 1054. Rome Broke away from Orthodoxy. Thinking Orthodoxy started by satan is so slanderous and even blasphemous against the Holy Spirit which is a unforgiven sin in the next life. While you still breath their is still hope for you if you choose to repent. If you die with these words, Your soul in danger of Hel
@february17able of course he can, Matthew 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.
"the fathers never agreed on the filioque" did you not read the verse i just gave you from scripture? how many quotes did i give you from the church fathers defending the filioque? wow
@MysticalCity All the quotes you gave me from the Holy Fathers are wrong and/or never addressing procession from son. The bible that rome uses is corrupted and has verses and phrases missing. I cannot beiieve thier bible that is the Jerome Latin Volgate. I never will use it for edifying purposes either. It is horrible.
@february17able exactly what i expected, is martin luther your role model? do you just remove things from scripture to fit your beliefs? you clearly cannot and never will defend your corrupt faith, if you were open minded and intelligent you would change, but satan is clearly holding on to you.
@MysticalCity your work on Martin Luther is slanderous because it is indicative if the Jesuit Fourth Vow and the Council of Trent to demean and Slander the Reformers. They did a lot more good than the Papacy.
@MysticalCity The Lord Jesus Christ is the Rock of the Church not Apostle Peter. That is known through the ages of Christianity. This was started by the last Rome Emperor conferred in the Pope Rome along with Universial Sacred Supremecy, which the East always knew that was blasphemy against the true church. The Bishops are concillarity not one bishop claiming universial Sacred Supremecy.
Respond to this video... Through the son does not mean procesion from the Son. This wrong interpretation Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. Through is different from Procession. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the father only, that God the Father only.
@february17able "The Holy Spirit also, when He proceeds from the Father and the Son, is not separated from the Father nor separated from the Son. For how could He be separated from the Father Who is the Spirit of His mouth? Which is certainly both a proof of His eternity, and expresses the Unity of this Godhead." Ambrose, The Holy Spirit, 1:11:120 (A.D. 381).
i can't help but find this hilarious, you disagreeing with like 50 church fathers.
@MysticalCity This is misquoted. In essence the Son and the Father of one essence. I look this up and you misquoted because the Roman sources are usually mistranslated.
@february17able "The Spirit is also the Paraclete, who is himself neither the Father and the Son, but proceeding from from the Father and the Son. Therefore the Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Paraclete is not begotten, but proceeding from the Father and the Son." Council of Toledo II (A.D. 447).
@february17able here is proof for the Filioque cause i know your ignorant of scripture, St.John 15:26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me. "Whom I will send" THIS PROVES THAT THE HOLY GHOST PROCEEDS FROM THE SON AS WELL AS THE FATHER, OTHERWISE HE COULD NOT BE SENT BY THE SON.
@MysticalCity Peter was never the First Pope of Rome. He was Martyed in Rome, but never the first Pope of Rome. His requilary was found in the Holy Land broken into. Peter was bishop of Antioch.
@february17able protestants are real good at changing subjects, "I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul...My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross." Jerome, To Pope Damasus, Epistle 15 (A.D. 377).
Saint Peter died in Rome, which is why the Vatican is there, he was CLEARLY the leader of the apostles.
@february17able "You cannot deny that you know that in the city of Rome the Chair was first conferred on Peter, in which the prince of all the Apostles, Peter, sat…in which Chair unity should be preserved by all, so that he should now be a schismatic and a sinner who should set up another Chair against that unique one." Optatus of Mileve, The Schism of Donatists, 2:2-3 (c. A.D. 367).
@february17able "I am held in the communion of the Catholic Church by...and by the succession of bishops from the very seat of Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection commended His sheep to be fed up to the present episcopate." Augustine, Against the Letter of Mani, 5 (A.D. 395).
@MysticalCity Peter did not have authority over the Apostles. For St. James presided over the Synods in Jerusalem. Pope St,. Gregory the Great states," that the blessed Peter has established three Petrine Sees of equal authority-Rome, Alexandria and Antioch." Rome is not exclusive to the "Chair".
@trueorthodoxfaith yes,St Peter was bishop in many places, but the difference is he died in Rome, and the Bishop of Rome ALWAYS had the final authority, which is the pope. There is a book called Upon This Rock, where even orthodox, and protestants say Saint Peter was the first Pope, etc.. read it, and yes it is exclusive to the Chair, what you think they chose the Vatican to be there because of the weather? Saint Peter 1st Pope died in Rome, the keys continue
@trueorthodoxfaith "[D]uring the days of that Anicetus, bishop of Rome, who succeeded Pius and his predecessors, For, in Rome, Peter and Paul were the first both apostles and bishops; then came Linus, then Cletus ... However the succession of the bishops in Rome was in the following order. Peter and Paul, and Cletus, Clement..." Epiphanius, Panarion, 27:6 (A.D. 377).
@trueorthodoxfaith "Number the bishops from the See of Peter itself. And in that order of Fathers see who has succeeded whom. That is the rock against which the gates of hell do not prevail" Augustine, Psalm against the Party of Donatus, 18 (A.D. 393).
"The chair of the Roman Church, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today." Augustine, Against the Letters of Petillian, 2:51 (A.D. 402).
@trueorthodoxfaith "Peter in his successors has delivered what he received." Pope Sixtus III [regn. A.D. 432-440], To John of Antioch, Epistle 6 (A.D. 433).
"The blessed apostle Peter, in his successors, has handed down what he received. Who would be willing to separate himself from the doctrine of whom the Master himself instructed first among the apostles?" Pope Sixtus III, [regn A.D. 432-440], To John of Antioch (A.D. 433).
@MysticalCity All your posts are stating, is the case for Apostolic Succession in Rome. Peter was first amongst the Apostles, but in Scriptures it is clear that all the Apostles had equal standing. All twelve received the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. Christ reassured them that during His Second Coming, that all twelve of them would be seated on twelve thrones.
@trueorthodoxfaith did they all receive name changes? Saint Peter was chosen by God The Father, (remember when Jesus said to him, "blessed are you Simon" etc..? Saint Peter received the keys from the kingdom of Heaven to bind and loose, he was first among the apostles, to deny this is just nonsense, there is One leader in the church, and that's The Bishop of Rome, AKA The Pope.
@february17able here is proof for the Filioque cause i know your ignorant of scripture, St.John 15:26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me. "Whom I will send" THIS PROVES THAT THE HOLY GHOST PROCEEDS FROM THE SON AS WELL AS THE FATHER, OTHERWISE HE COULD NOT BE SENT BY THE SON.
Antioch was not in Judea, it was Greek. Paul was a Roman apostate. The historic Christian faith are the Nazarenes, Jesus own sect, who were of Jerusalem nor Greco Roman apostates in Rome. Catholicism is a trick to make G-d believers believe in Caesar or Pontificus Maximus which is the latin name of the Pope. Catholicism is apostasy.
Ps.115:17 says: the dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence.
Ecl.9:5 "But the dead know not anything." Is.38:18: "For the grave cannot praise thee, death cannot celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth." Rev.14:13 "And i heard a voice from heaven saying.....blessed are the dead which die in the Lord...that they may REST from their labors; & their works do follow them." accord. to scripts, the dead are resting; can't do nothing.
he did not deny that he was one of the saints of God. (Read Eph.3:8) In Act 9:13-15, Ananias had said to the Lord, concerning Paul: "Lord, i have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem: and here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name, but the Lord said to him "Go thy way: for he is a choosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the gentiles, &..." Accord. to Eph.2:19, we r citizens w/ the saints in the house of God
In conclusion: As believers who have made a covenant with God, sanctified in Christ, and have kept the commandments of God by FAITH, we r all saints of God.
we may not appear as such, but many r walking toward that goal, for God "calleth those things which be not as though they were." (Ro.4:17) The Apostle Paul had persecuted the church of Jesus before he became the great apostle, though he was conscious of his wrongdoings in pastime; referring to himself as the "least of the saints"
Where r the saints according to the bible? in the earth: they r either alive or dead. (Ps.16:3, Act 9:32, Act 26:10, Paul was speaking to the people that were alive; referring to them & addressing them as saints. Ro.1:7, 2Cor.1:1, Eph.1:1, Phil.4:22, Col.1:2. What r the saints commanded to do? 2Chr.6:41, Ps.30:4, Ps.31:23, Ps.132:9, Ps.89:5, Ps.149:5, What does the Lord do for his saints? 1Sam.2:9, 2Sam.22:37, Ps.66:9, Ps.37:28, Ps.97:10, Prov.2:8, Eph.4:11-13, Col.1:26, 1Cor.6:1,2, Eph.3:17,18
Who r the Saints according to the bible? 1--Saints r the people who have made a covenant with God by sacrifice. (Ps.50:5) (the covenant of the Old Testament is the circumcision of the flesh, & the cov. of the New Testament is of the blood of Jesus Christ which was shed for many, and which now stands) 2--Saints are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus Christ. (Rev.14:12) 3--Saints are sanctified in Christ, (1Cor.1:2) He.8:13, He.13:20, Mt.26:28, Rev.1:5, 1John 1:7,
BTW to the guy who complained about Catholics praying to the saints. The saints are already saved. God demonstrates this by performing some miracle in their name. When "you" pray FOR them, their place in Heaven is elevated. When you pray TO them You are asking to emulate some particular virtue or other quality they exemplify. So you can do that or maybe some other person, place or, thing may be more saatisfying to you.
Believe what ever you like & good day to you. Our Lady of Fatima is defender of the Catholic Church, it's Bishops & it's faithful. The spirit of Anti-Christ Has been it's accuser since the beginning. And not only with Christ but also with Caine & Able & long before that too. If your Curch is of God it will oulast the pyramids; if not it will crumble into the dustbins of history. God wants you to pray for your brother who may be in error, NOT constanly finnd fault
THIS FACT! The Catholic Church has always tried to keep the European as dumb possible. An example of this hiding of truth can be seen in the coverup of the Pedophile Priest and Gays that run the Catholic Church. The Spanish Inquisition, The Crusades, WWI, and WWII, all involve the Catholic Church manipulating, lying to, stealing from, and murdering the people of Europe. WWII is nothing but the Catholic Church and Rothschild using Ashkenazi Khazars(non-Semites/Zionist) for another Crusade.
A wicked man cannot undestand a good man. He cannot understand how he feels or thinks about things. He simply cannot relate. The more we trust Jesus by doing what he says the more we will understand how he thinks and feels about things. Character is the key to understanding; hermeneutics is important, but not as important as character. If Hitler followed the correct hermeneutical procedure would he rightly understand the Bible? No. "Justice" by George MacDonald. Godliness is the opener of eyes.
the gospel is very simple, "all have sinned and have come short of the glory of God" therefore we need to repent and believe the gospel "If we confess with our mouth and believe with our heart,... we shall be saved" when we believe and obey the gospel, God gives us his Holy spirit.. the bible says without his spirit, we don't belong to him, Jesus said: the flesh profits nothing, it is the spirit that quickens, Jesus said: "we must be born again, or we can't see and enter into the kingdom of God.
@kbelfort77 Catholisism is idioltry. There is only One True and Living God. God means what he says that we should not put anything or anyone above Him. I said that to say this, Why should you pray to people who also needed the Salvation that only Jesus the son of God gives? That Is Idoiltry. If you don't wake up on this side of life you will find yourself in hell with my mother. At her death she was screaming out in terror and fear. You've been warned and have no excuse. Let this not be you!
@michelle01forJesusdear sister in Christ: i am a born again, blood washed child of God, I am not confined to any form of denomination. i believe in the father, and the son and the Holy Spirit, I praise and worship only God the father and Jesus the son. I love to search and study the word of God (The Holy Bible) & my prayer is to live by the word of God so as to set good example for others. (Mt.4:4) however, it is not God's will that we should fight amongst ourselves.
@michelle01forJesus every thing that i write & post is either quoted from the bible or based on it. i even refrain from using my opinion. i try my best to share the word with people, if i see that they r not receiving, i leave them alone: the bible says: it is the goodness of God that leads to repentance. ( Ro.3:23, 5:12, Mark 1:15, Ro.10:9, Ro.10:10, John chapter 3, John 6:63, these scripts were used from first post) it's all about Jesus who came to save us from sins & to give eternal life Amen
Jesus is: the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the ending, he is the rose of Sharon, the Lily of the valley, the prince of peace, Lord of Lords, the word of God, the living bread, the manna from heaven, the author and the finisher of our faith, he is the way, the truth and the life, he is awesome, magnificent, omnipotent, He came to save sinners from sins, he loves the world so much... he forgives us no matter what we've done. "Today if u hear his voice, harden not your heart" (He.3:13-15)
This really does explain the danger of mixing religious exclusivism with political power! From the explanation in this video, one can understand that when this belief in self is so paramount, as expressed here, if it is combined with political power, it can become an instrument of prejudice and persecution, as amply demonstrated in its past history. When the church believes in itself, instead of in Christ, it is on a slippery slope. Here the speaker believes in Catholic above Christ!
It is very sad (and unChrist like) for Roman Catholics to have this exclusive view of themselves dismissing other churches, in the 21 century. So much has been done to understand the faith across churches, but if this video is right, then the RC church regards itself as exclusively Christian. But this is definitely not the faith which Christ taught in the gospels. Where Catholics and some others go wrong is that they esteem tradition above God's word and this is dangerous.
Apostle John said 'how can a man love God if he does not love his brother?' For RCatholicism to have the view they have towards those who are not in their church, is not the Love of God, for they see themselves as superior, even though they are not in the eyes of God.
Meanwhile, the church of Rome was not the only church by any standards. Whilst it is true that there were heretical groups, like Montanists, Marcionites, Ebionites, Valentinians, Gnostics, etc, there were also some of the earliest Christian churches in Syria, Egypt and India, not to mention the Eastern Orthodox Church, who had its own 'popes'. For RCatholicism, to view other churches as heresies and false, is contrary to scripture. Christ said 'he who is not against me is with me'.
Interesting view, but I do not think it is correct at all. A lot of play is being made of the word "Catholic", the meaning of which is simply 'universal'. Even in some of the quotes, used, we begin to see the straying of the church of Rome, away from the true faith that Christ and the early apostles taught. Instead of the simple child like faith that Christ taught, it appears from these quotes, that the church of Rome, turned away instead to 'religion' as a substitute.
Every person has the duty to know their faith to avoid those who teach error. When JP2 kissed the Koran, that was not Catholic. When he braught members of false religions to Assisi and gave them rooms to worship their false gods in, that was not Catholic. When B16 gave communion.to Bro. Roger ( a protestant "monk") that was not catholic, when B16 prayed with female protestant ministers, that was not Catholic. All of these things have been condemned by the Catholic church
@OneTrueChurch Good points. If those actions show JPII and B16 are not true popes, where is the true Pope or has the "Gates of Hell Prevailed Against it"? And if you showed me the "true pope" how would that differ from other protestants who claim they are the true leader?
I don't believe that there is a true pope right now but this does not mean that the gates of hell have prevailed against the church. As long as there are true beleivers holding to authentic catholic teaching and validly ordained priests and bishops administering the sacraments then the gates of hell have not prevailed. But what is interesting is that if JP2 and B16 were true popes, then the gates of hell have prevailed because it would mean that the Papacy has taught error
@OneTrueChurch While I acknowledge the sinfulness and weakness of so many of our bishops, that is not an excuse to leave. Did St. Athanasius leave when so many of his brother bishops subscribed to the Arian heresy? Did St. Catherine of Sienna or St. Vincent Ferrer leave the Church even when the papacy was divided? NO! Rather, they buckled down, stayed in union with the Church and did what they could through prayer and work to promote authentic unity in the Church. Follow them, not Luther.
@redtailhawkbuteo Catholisism is idioltry. There is only One True and Living God. God means what he says that we should not put anything or anyone above Him. I said that to say this, Why should you pray to people who also needed the Salvation that only Jesus the son of God gives? That Is Idoiltry. If you don't wake up on this side of life you will find yourself in hell with my mother. At her death she was screaming out in terror and fear. You've been warned and have no excuse.
@redtailhawkbuteo Catholisism is idioltry. There is only One True and Living God. God means what he says that we should not put anything or anyone above Him. I said that to say this, Why should you pray to people who also needed the Salvation that only Jesus the son of God gives? That Is Idoiltry. If you don't wake up on this side of life you will find yourself in hell with my mother. At her death she was screaming out in terror and fear. You've been warned and have no excuse.
@redtailhawkbuteo Catholisism is idioltry. There is only One True and Living God. God means what he says that we should not put anything or anyone above Him. I said that to say this, Why should you pray to people who also needed the Salvation that only Jesus the son of God gives? That Is Idoiltry. If you don't wake up on this side of life you will find yourself in hell with my mother. At her death she was screaming out in terror and fear. You've been warned and have no excuse.
Why does the RC Church still take us for fools? If your "church" is so true, how is it so very very false? How us it so pagan?, so idolatrous?, so satanic? Why does it baptise babies? Whose tradition is this? Why does it glorify Mary? Why does it call her co-saviour? Why does it continue to deceive the world? What apostolc traditions? Calling heresy truth, and truth heresy-this is not a church. Straaten
Why does the RC Church still take us for fools? If your "church" is so true, how is it so very very false? How us it so pagan?, so idolatrous?, so satanic? Why does it baptise babies? Whose tradiction is this? Why does it glorify Mary? Why does it call her co-saviour? Why does it continue to deceive the world? What apostolc traditions? Calling heresy truth, and truth heresy-this is not a church. Straaten
The penalty in abeyance for a priest for molesting 15-year old Yesterday 06-07-11 A year and four months suspended prison Wejherowo Poland ,Court sentenced on Tuesday 48-year-old priest, catholic pastor of a small parish near Gdynia, accused of persuading the 15-year-olds to drink alcohol, and then her sexual harassment.
Christians are out of law , they can do anything they want . Poland is one of those places where catholicks never go to prison/jail for sexual harassment .
The Illuminati, who sold their souls for Lucifer, have an obligation to teach the world the wrong names of the Trinity. The purpose of this is so you condemn yourself upon judgment. When Christ asks "Who do you say that I am?" make sure and tell others to answer, :"You are God."
If you give their wrong answer, "You are the son of a talking fire (the Lord)," you will quickly find out what Freemasonry has done to you and you will have an eternity to think about it. FATIMAMOVEMENT d o t c o m
Define Catholic Church..... Even the Pope will tell you that all that profess & is baptized is part of the Church.. Catholic = Universal...They may reject us but we are not to reject them..I have a gut feeling you are not Roman Catholic cause you do not sound like one of us....If you reject the Catechism you are rejecting the teachings of the Church.
@325nicaea The Orthodox Church is not "outside" of the catholic church. Pope Eugene IV made that statement in hope that the Eastern Churches would somehow be brought back into unity with Rome. His strong language failed his efforts.
For your info, the Orthodox claim Rome is both schismatic and heretical.
@325nicaea 847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.
@10WiseVirgins This video is misleading and not factual. If you read about the Franks conquering Rome, you would see that they gained control and used the Latin church for their political means, and wanted control over the entire church.
There always existed a balance of power in the East, and even when Constantinople tried to exert power, the other Patriarchates refused to give in. Stop misleading people with your propaganda.
@vasilyjc1955 Are you talking about Charlemagne who gave ABSOLUTE power /land ownership to Pope Leo III , who crowned him as an Emperor ? Listen you, a provocateur , this is not KGB Russia, go and play your games elsewhere
there is only one church, the church of Jesus Christ. he is building the church, not on Peter, but on himself being the foundation of the church. ("..and that rock was Christ," spiritual) he is the head, we are the divided body/ church, that needs to stop arguing and come together as one: we sing it: "One bread, one body, one spirit, one accord, one Lord. When 2 or 3 are gathered in his name, he is in our midst If we lift him up, he will draw all souls to himself, he'll add to the church. amen
Actually the Orthodox Church is the original and 1st Church of Christ! Your argument is based on the fact that the word catholic is used in many of the early church writings, however, that word is based on a greek word meaning universal. There is a difference between catholic-universal, and Roman Catholic-the faith you are speaking of. What is known as the Orthodoxy has existed since 33 ad, where the Roman Catholic Church has existed since 1054, when it split from the 4 other Patriarchates.
I shall never declare more than one spirit, by giving a response 'And with your spirit'. Never shall I. It would hurt Jesus. One body, one Spirit in Him. Amen
@doctorbasslayer Jesus' church were Nazarene Jews in Jerusalem not Antioch. What has come to be called "Christianity" was of Greco Roman origin in Antioch, Epiphis, Rome etc. not Judean origin. It is apostasy.
0:25 - "If one really wants to hold to the traditions of the early Christians, they should follow the Catholic Church."
Wrong. They should follow the teachings of Yeshua and the apostles. Constantine and the Ecumenical councils combined Christianity with the Mystery Traditions (i.e. sun worship, etc.) to form what became the ROMAN Catholic Church. So, to suggest Catholicism represents Christianity in its purest form is absolute nonsense. It is a hybrid.
Records are only as official as you want them to be. Come on. You can't use todays terms to define official. What we have are writings and records from the church fathers that date back to the first century AD. Some of these writings were compiled to form the New Testament. Do you doubt the New Testament? I bet not. Aren't they also church documents?Why then do you doubt Church History? The Epistles of the Bible are just a few of many. We have the Bible, we have writings and from there, history.
At first: Roman Catholicism is not the real apostolic Catholicism.
2nd: Roman-System and Evangelical-System dont fit togheter. Jesus is jewish Culture and not roman.
3rd: When Jesus gave the order to his followers: "And don't address anyone here on earth as 'Father', 'Pope', 'Abba', 'Baba', for only God in heaven is your spiritual holy Father." Then this is an order. No discusion about it. It is an order, by Jesus Christ himself. Amen.
Apostololikon Catholikon has nothing to do with Roman Catholic church, priests not being married is not biblical, neither is the Pope, neither are the Statues you have in your churches, neither is all the child molestation plaguing your church, please dont prostitute the word Catholikon (which means united in Greek) with Roman Catholic, please learn to read and speak Greek which is what this was written in and then come back to us and stop prostituting the term Catholikon.
This is bullcrap. The original Christians were the Gnostics and Coptics. They didn't have churches, or Bibles... They didn't run around burning people alive either. This is historical fact. The Roman Catholic Church is a false brand of Christianity.
@ericzum you clearly have detoured somewhere. Read about the Gnostics. They were false prophets. And the early church was Catholic. Ever heard about the Nicene Creed? Today Roman Catholics and Orthodox Catholics are the only people with genuine claim to that early catholic church. The Coptics are a branch of Orthodox Catholics. The Orthodox Catholics split from the Roman Catholics because they were pressured by the Muslims.
Mary is a filthy whore, and if I could I would get a whole heap of fetuses, crucify her on a cross but this time backwards, and kick the fetuses up into her calloused dry-rot vagina while Cher sings "if I could turn back time". Anyone with me??
It's hilarious how many "TRUE" churches that this planet has. Are there many truths out there? The Catholic Church is the first TRUE CORRUPT church! Since they claim to be the first church, then they were the first to distort Christianity as well, right from the get go of claiming that Peter is the first Pope when Galatians states that Peter was ordained to the Jews, Paul to the Gentiles! And Peter was in Babylon, not Rome. Matthew 18:1=disciples, not apostles, not "the TWELVE" either.
@a2j93 I am not so sure that Peter is buried in Rome. In any case, according to the Bible, Paul was the one ordained by God to LIVE in Rome, to Preach to the Gentiles, and Paul's custom was to Preach to the Jews first, before Preaching to the Gentiles. Peter, according to the Bible, had the responsibility to Preach to the Jews. According to the Bible, Peters Epistles were directed to the Jews, and not only that, he said he was in Babylon. You don't believe that, replacing Babylon to Rome.
@chapmaned Peter is buried in Rome; in the Vatican. Research that. I get what you are saying, Peter preached to other people apart from the Romans. Indeed he was also the first Patriach of Antioch. But it was in Rome he spent the last years of his life. You base your history on the Bible. The Bible is not a history book. History reveals that Peter went to Rome. That is fact.
@a2j93 There was no need for Peter to even be in Rome, as Paul had the Jurisdiction of the Gospel in Rome already. But, I think what you mean is Catholic History shows Peter in Rome. How about NON PARTISAN History that has nothing to do with Catholicism? Peter was NOT the first in Antioc. Paul was according to Acts chapter 11. Acts 6 is the first mention of Antioc, however, NO MENTION OF PETER being there. Catholics tracing things back to Peter is a conspiracy. You have no EYE WITNESSES!
@chapmaned Now that's daft. How can there be eye witnesses for something that happened two millenia ago? If you mean witnesses in history, we do have plenty of them. Protestantism is an attempt of applying democratic principles to the church, in a wrong manner. You clearly do not know your history and keep quoting verses the Bible which do not apply to the argument. Go & read more. There is no conspiracy, all the old churches trace their lineage back to the apostles. Called apostolic succession.
@a2j93 You asked how there could be ey witnesses for something that happened 2000 years ago? Are you kidding? Jesus had eye witnesses, and it was written. I know my history very well. THE BIBLE states that for anything to be believed that you need the word of two or three witnesses. You can't provide them in history, therefore, your Catholic word cannot be believed by Bible standards. You need those witnesses, otherwise, it is just UNVERIFIED revised history.
@chapmaned Even Protestants agree that Peter spent his last days in Rome. I don't know why you are disputing that. There are records by witnesses who lived at that time. The history's verified. Ask your pastor where Peter died. He'll tell you Rome. That cannot be a basis for your argument because it is fact. You should argue based on something else, because Peter did die in Rome and not everything is in the Bible. Catholic Bishops through the Holy Spirit chose what to include in the Bible.
@a2j93 I dispute it because of the false claims that Catholics make about Peter, which is easily disputed by Bible standards. Peter had no business being in Rome. What was he there for? The Bible states that his responsibilities were to make disciples of Jews. What would his purpose be in setting up residence in Rome? My pastor is not an eye witness of Peter in Rome. Give me names of those who saw him in Rome residing there as a permanent resident. Paul was a Roman Citizen. Peter wasn't.
@chapmaned The Bible does not say everything. It doesn't talk about Peter's death. It doesn't talk about Paul's death. In fact the only apostle who died in the bible was Judas Iscariot. The Acts of the Apostles talks about what happened a few decades after Jesus' resurrection and that is it. You are right that Paul went to Rome. What Peter was there for? Peter went there later in his life and was subsequently executed by Emperor Nero. This happens after the events that are recorded in the Bible.
@a2j93 The Bible does talk about the responsibilities of Peter and Paul, and a timeline of their locations are in the Bible. Peters responsibilities were to JEWS, not Gentiles. Pauls responsibility was to Gentiles because Paul was a Roman citizen, and Peter was not. Peter had no business being in Rome. What was he there for? What was his business in Rome? Are there official records of Nero's reign that PROVES that Nero killed Peter? There is supposed to be. Who identified Peter's body?
@chapmaned How do we know how the Apostles died? It's not in the Bible, but it's in other equally early writings. Surely you can't say the Church fathers were biased. Peter was crucified upside down. paul was beheaded and so on. We know this because it was recorded. The Bible is not a history book. Even non-Catholic historians agree with to varying degrees with the Church's assertions.
@a2j93 There is still no "eyewitness" accounts of Peter being the first Pope in Rome. There is only eyewitness accounts of Peter being crucified upside down. The Bible states that for any word to be believed, you need at least 2 or 3 witnesses.
@chapmaned Jesus built His church upon Peter (Petra) conferring upon him the Keys of the Kingdom. You think he was the janitor. Try reading a book without pictures.
@kingsmen711 Jesus built His Church on the faith of Peter. The "rock" which the Church was built was always understood to mean the faith in Jesus Christ or the profession of faith in Christ. All twelve Apostles had the power of the keys. The "keys" are that path to salvation through our faith in Christ. This is evident on Pentecost when all twelve received the Holy Spirit.
@vasilyjc1955 Not sure that the word "faith" was used by Jesus when he chose Peter. Peter's faith was evident. "You are Peter (Petras) and upon this rock (Peter) I will build my church. And the gates of Hell shall not prevail" Just not understanding your meaning. Christ spoke plainly about this and without conjecture.
@kingsmen711 The 'rock" is the faith in Christ. Psalm:18:2- The Lord is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer, my God, my strength, in whom I trust. Psalm:18:31- For who is God besides the Lord? And who is the Rock except our God? God is called the Rock in the Old Testament and Paul confirmed that Christ is the Rock. I Cor.10:4. Peter himself testifies that Jesus is the foundation stone against whom hell did not prevail. 1 Peter 2:9, Matth. 21:42-44.
@vasilyjc1955 YOU ALSO GOT IT CORRECT...THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT IS A LOT OF HELP!!I THINK CATHOLIC SHOULD START STUDYING GREEK SO THEY WILL UNDERSTAND IT.
@kingsmen711 Jesus built his church upon himself, w/Peter's "declaration" that Jesus is the Christ. Everything I have read in the Bible about Peter is that his "commission" was to the Jews, just as Paul said in Galatians. Paul's epistles were addressed to Jewish Believers, not Gentiles Believers. Read Matthew 18:1, then the rest of Matthew 18, you will see that "disciples" have the same keys that you claim only Peter has.Jesus is the ONLY Petra (1 Cor 10:4). Peters name is Petros, not Petra.
@chapmaned AMEN TO YOU BROTHER!Jesus is the ONLY Petra (1 Cor 10:4). Peter's name is Petros, not Petra.YOU WILL ONLY GET THIS CORRECT INTERPRETATION WHEN YOU READ THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT..KEEP IT UP..LET THEM UNDERSTAND..GOD BLESS YOU.
@357archangel Catholics ignore New Test Greek. In regards to Peter, they want to speak Aramaic, BUT, Jesus gave Cephas a Greek name (Peter), clarifying what KIND of rock Cephas is (a stone or pebble). The New Test is penned in Greek ON PURPOSE. Matthew thru John knew exactly what they were penning, & the definitions, otherwise, they would have penned all of the New Test in Aramaic. God chose Greek for a reason. Greek definitions are PRECISE in meaning so as not to confuse Aramaic definitions.
@chapmaned YEAH THAT'S SO SAD...THEY HAVE TO IMPROVISE ALIBIS SO THEY WON'T BE CAUGHT IN THE ACT OF TWISTING THE SCRIPTURES..WELL ANYWAY THANKS FOR THE REPLY..LET'S JUST KEEP ON PRAYING FOR THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE BOUND BY LIES AND DECEPTIONS.
@chapmaned Protestant critics of the Catholic Church used to, and some still do make a great deal of the difference between Petros (m) and Petra (f); ignoring the fact that our Lord did not speak Latin or Greek to St Peter. It is interesting that John retains the Aramaic 'Kaypha'(John 1:42), and St Paul uses it by preference.
@assasincomedy With all due respect, the criticism is necessary, as Greek was the International Language of the day, just as English is the international language of today. This is why it is extremely important that when translating the New Testament, the original Language that it was penned in is more important than the language it was spoken in. The sign above Jesus was written in Hebrew, Latin, & Greek, not Aramaic. Hebrew=Jews, Latin=Romans, Greek=everyone else. Aramaic=Babylon Captivity.
Respond to this video... As to eyewitnesses, I can give you names. There's emperor Nero, there's Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch. . . Of these people only Clement is mentioned in the Bible, in Philippians 4:3. Interestingly, Clement is regarded by Catholics as the third bishop of Rome, or third Pope.
Respond to this video... Saying there was no need for Peter to be in Rome doesn't change the fact that Peter lived and died in Rome--- It already happened. In fact, only the Orthodox Catholics can truly argue with Roman Catholics. The first churches were catholic in nature, who celebrated mass on the Lord's day; Sunday. Read Corinthians 11. The Bible contains some records, not all. The remaining records of early church history can be found in early churches: present day Catholicism.
@a2j93 You said that it is a FACT that Peter lived and died in Rome. You have no proof that he lived in Rome. You have writings that were made many years later, but no eye witness accounts. You have a set of bones that you claim is Peter, but who verified that was Peter's body? Who identified the body? What was your purpose of providing me 1 Cor 11? Protestant churches are the church as well as the Catholic Church. Christians are the church, not a church name.
Respond to this video... The Greek, Eastern and Roman Catholic Churches existed before the Bible was put together that is why they can rightfully trace their lineage to the apostles and can cite sources other than the Bible to prove it. Remember the Bible came over three hundred years after Christianity. Who put the Bible together? Catholics.
catholic worship idol a real christian won't worship idol almighty god YHWH gave commandments one of the commandment is do make any idols that's means human cannot worship man made idols and any man made images jesus is the be-gotten son of god and he is the only way of salvation if people worship lord jesus people must not use any idols and any images of face like lord jesus in this generation no one have seen the jesus but he is the true messiah know the truth and come to the truth
No, Vatican II in itself was heretical. the people who put together the documents of Vatican II were modernist theologians who had a clear goal of revamping the church. Documents like Dignatatis Humane, and Gaudium et Spes are almost word for word contradictions of Pope Pius IX syllabus of errors which even Ratzinger himself admits in his Book "Principles of Catholic Theology". Fr. Barron himself is a modernist who says that hell might be empty
@OneTrueChurch Vatican II is not heretical. Christ promised the Church that the gates of hell would not prevail. Being a tradtional Catholic means that you have lost your belief in those words. Anyway, it still beats being Protestant.
I do want to bring up one more thing on verbatim quote from the Bible of what it actually says. Hmm I could not find anywhere verbatim that the books in the Bible are actually right and exactly which books belong in the Bible. I can find this info in the ECFs writings as I can about which church is mentioned as the one Christ started but again nothing on the table of contents for the Bible. Wonder why that was forgotten if it too is so important and needed to be shown verbatim.
Historian4ever2 also asked where in the Bible Jesus stated He started the Catholic Church verbatim quoted from the Bible exactly as it is written.So if you use this logic the Protestants can't believe in the Trinity because it was not stated in the Bible verbatim and you would have to believe the true presence because it is verbatim stated. (but the ECFs who were taught by the Apostles did name this church and called it Catholic)
As you can see below I did not go to Catholic sites to make my case because I knew you would try to use that so I got most of my info from Stanford U. I also used a Protestant translation of the ECFs for some of that info. The CC started the universities so they were not against advancing intellectual knowledge and this is part of history but they did not like when they went against church teachings like Jesus is God and God made all things.
if b16 is the anti pope than where is the real pope? everytime we did have a anti pope there always was the real pope somewhere.
krunkmasterj 1 day ago
You're correct that World War III - that is, Vatican II - was an unmitigated disaster. But you went off the rails by becoming a sedevacantist. I know that sedevacantists are hostile to the SSPX, nevertheless I recommend that you go to the SSPX publishing arm, Angelus Press, and get their book called Sedevacantism: A False Solution to a Real Problem. It might be available online for free if you search.
Jitpring 3 weeks ago
@Jitpring I'm not a member of the SSPX at all by any means, but I still would like to check out that book. I might be able to use it to minister to my family friend who became a Sedevacantist about 5 years ago. Despite how bad things are going in the church, it will still be our Holy Mother and despite the apostasy our popes have gone into, they're still legit because Christ said so.
HomeSkillet489 1 week ago
@Jitpring Jerusalem was a type of the church. God established it himself and it rebelled against Him regularly. In fact it was no different from what the church is today. Jerusalem got together with heathens and worshipped their idols like today the church wants to dialogue with other nonChristian religions. King David was a murderer who murdered hundreds of people like the church called for inquisitions in the 16-17 centuries.
HomeSkillet489 1 week ago
@Jitpring Many of the chief priests were adulterers like the sex abuse scandal we have in the church today. But despite all that, it was still the bride of God and continued to be until the death of Jesus when the Old Covenant died and the New took her place for eternity. Same thing with the church, no matter how bad things will get it will remain Christ's church forever and in the end, it will be sanctified and God will triumph.
HomeSkillet489 1 week ago
I believe the Holy Catholic Church the communion of Saints the forgiveness of sins and life everlasting.......
The17treb 1 month ago
@ Xbleach Grace is a complete gift, an infant can do nothing to merit salvation, giving an infant baptism is a work of God and all his doing, no man can boast.
Moe3214 2 months ago
@Moe3214 if you read the Old testament sir you will see that Baptismis the new circumcision . Lt me explain : The way to bring a child into covenant with God one had to get their child circumcised . When Christ came he made the covenant involving baptism . The way to bring your child into the covenant with Christ is through Baptism .Get it? Good moving on ...
CAtholic29 1 month ago
@CAtholic29 No need to explain, I know that. My point was, Many protestants like to say how salvation is a free gift, yet they then tell you , you have to say a certain prayer and have faith, my point was that a baby being baptized for salvation is the epitomy of a freely given gift , the infant merely being who he/she is and doing nothing. All Gods doing.
Moe3214 1 month ago
@Moe3214 Good then ! Well DONE
CAtholic29 1 month ago
Infant baptism is pointless. Biblical baptism was always done when someone became a believer. Babies have no consent nor understanding of what's happening. And the Apocraphal books are uninspired.
XBleach88X 3 months ago
@XBleach88X In the early church the norm was for adults to be baptized, even though babies were baptized. The Apostles baptized entire families. Through baptism one is joined to the church, one becomes a member of the church, the Body of Christ.
trueorthodoxfaith 3 months ago
Have you read Acts? They didn't baptise babies, require Eucharist, do confirmation, require heretical sacraments.
The Roman Catholic Church is an apostate heretical hellhole.
XBleach88X 3 months ago
@XBleach88X....Can you refer me exactly what verse in the Bible that prohibits infant baptism? Please read the whole Bible and make sure the Bible you're reading is complete and not lacking 7 books. And if you cant find your answer, check the works of the early fathers.
76nonoy 3 months ago
Well catholics are interesting thats for sure, more interesting than all these other denominational protostants..Luthern hated Jews with a passion,, anyone that hates Jews hates God. this exsposes lutherans as false..ive been a pentocostal a baptist and checked out a few others, I was confused. so know i follow Jesus teaching alone without being swayed to churchs of men..
rustydusty40 4 months ago
the catholic chruch is evil its run by the illuminati and their bible contradicts the original christian bible which was written before the catholic bible
headlesscorpse666 4 months ago
@headlesscorpse666
Tell me about the differences in the "Catholic bible" and "the original Christian bible" please.
182RG 4 months ago
@182RG in the original bible there is no purgatory, because when you die you go to heaven or hell there is no in between. and confession is another thing that contradicts the bible because if you commit a sin you should ask god in jesus's name to forgive you not your priest because he didnt die for your sins. also the chruch has been corrupted by the illuminati (a satanic secret society) and for info on that just look some videos about the illuminati and the catholic chruch
headlesscorpse666 4 months ago
@headlesscorpse666
Thanks. I do have to disagree though.
The original bible, that the Catholics use, is the same as the Protestant, except that Luther removed 7 books from it - the deuterocanonical books. Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus) ,Baruch, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees.
Note these books appeared in the first ever printed bible - Guttenburg c 1452,
They appear also in Septuagint, and at least partially in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
cont
182RG 4 months ago
@headless
cont:
Note that Hebrews 11:35 refers to an event that was recorded 2 Maccabees:
Heb 11:35 "Women received their dead raised to life again. Others were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection."
Mac 2:7 "But the Creator of the world, that formed the nativity of man, and that found out the origin of all, he will restore to you again in his mercy, both breath and life, as now you despise yourselves for the sake of his laws."
182RG 4 months ago
Comment removed
182RG 4 months ago
Comment removed
182RG 4 months ago
Comment removed
182RG 4 months ago
Comment removed
182RG 4 months ago
You really must learn to read and PROPERLY translate Koine Greek into English... This is a poor video with poor arguments to substantiate these theories.
AusPoliticalTruths 4 months ago
If you knew any Greek, you would know that "Catholic" in Ignatius' letter does NOT refer to the apostate Church we have today; rather, "Καθολικη" means "UNIVERSAL"! Hence, why even the Orthodox Church referred to itself as a Catholic (Universal) Church! Research, research, research...
AusPoliticalTruths 4 months ago
@AusPoliticalTruths This is substantiated (as a definition) in your very own video!! Look at your video again - Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures ~3:55 into your video. Very poorly researched and ill-prepared.
AusPoliticalTruths 4 months ago
@AusPoliticalTruths
>>>"This is substantiated (as a definition) in your very own video!! Look at your video again - ... ~3:55 into your video."
I think YOU should look again.
"And if ever thou art sojourning in cities, inquire not simply where the Lord’s House is (for the other sects of the profane also attempt to call their own dens houses of the Lord), nor merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the peculiar name of His holy church..."
182RG 4 months ago
@182RG Perhaps YOU should look again!!
"It is called Catholic then because IT EXTENDS ALL OVER THE WORLD, FROM ONE END OF THE EARTH TO THE OTHER, and because it teaches UNIVERSALLY AND COMPLETELY..." [emphasis mine]
It's stipulated in black and white. You should read your own resources before using them as "evidence".
Lord bless you.
AusPoliticalTruths 4 months ago
@AusPoliticalTruths
Indeed, I don't dispute the origin of the name.
With his use of "Lord's House", we know he is referring to an actual building - just as the phrase is used in scripture. Did you read the entire clip? In particular "nor merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the peculiar name of His holy church..."
"peculiar" as:
2 (peculiar to) belonging exclusively to.
3 particular; special
(1st is "odd", we know that's not what's meant)
182RG 4 months ago
@182RG Indeed, I watched the entire video - I have great attention to detail... Of course, he is referring to a physical building. If you read it in context (the whole text), you will come to the conclusion that his intending meaning is to not simply ask around for "the Lord's House", as this can refer to ANY "Church". Although it's early in Church history, many sects had manifested. He stipulates to ask for the Catholic Church - meaning, the universally recognised and approved Church.
Peace.
AusPoliticalTruths 4 months ago
Believe it pple; catholic church is the 1 true church found by jesus christ himself 2000 years ago.pple just don't want to see the truth that catholic is the truth, even his own mother proved it to the world, she followed her son's 1 true church..
tonganfoilole69 5 months ago
@tonganfoilole69 Yes Jesus Christ founded the catholic church(not Latin), but it is the Orthodox Church that has not deviated from the church established 2000 years ago.
trueorthodoxfaith 5 months ago
Comment removed
february17able 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Repent Fool. Do not follow the Pope and his Jesuit orders heresy. Leave the Papacy. The Pope cannot forgive you for your sins.
february17able 5 months ago
I'm talking to u stupid idiot that says catholic are deceitful; 1st yr so dumn ass ignorant ok, 2nd u don't know shit about the catholic faith ok, 3rd stop the hating towards catholic because when u hate catholic, u hate the teaching of jesus christ ok. I know 4 a fact, that catholic is the only true church...T o hell with yr belief.
tonganfoilole69 5 months ago
@tonganfoilole69 More slander and garbage.
february17able 5 months ago
@tonganfoilole69 You are crazy and need saving.
february17able 5 months ago
@february17able that's exactly what people who can't defend their corrupt faith say, martin luther is proud.
"The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding." Athanasian Creed (A.D. 400).
"And the Holy Spirit, according to the Holy Scriptures, is neither of the Father alone, nor of the Son alone, but of both." Augustine, On the Trinity, ,XV:17,27 (A.D. 408). PEACE
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@MysticalCity I have the Athanasian Creed. You misquoted again.. Augstine written heresy as you quoted. The Seven Ecumenical Councils never agreed with Filioque which is before, during and after his death. As for Martin Luther, You videos are of slander of Martin Luther which is indicative of the Council Trent and Jesuit Fourth Vow. Now, Augistine does say good things about Psalms and about his confession. His conversion is quite wounderous work of Christ.
february17able 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@february17able @ proof for the Filioque,AGAIN St.John 15:26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me. "Whom I will send" THIS PROVES THAT THE HOLY GHOST PROCEEDS FROM THE SON AS WELL AS THE FATHER, OTHERWISE HE COULD NOT BE SENT BY THE SON.
MysticalCity 5 months ago
The Christian Orthodox Church in the True and Only Church. Not Rome! The Pope of Rome is a fraud and always has been since he declared Universial Sacred and Temperal Power! I like the quotes in the video. I wish the west get rid of their Dagan Fish God hats!
february17able 6 months ago
@february17able this video already gave you proof, are you disrespecting Saint Peter the first pope? orthodox don't believe in purgatory, this is contrary to the bible and to the church fathers, orthodox don't believe in the filioque, this is contrary to the Bible and to the church fathers, orthodox don't believe in the Immaculate Conception, this is contrary to the Bible and to the church fathers,orthodox reject the papacy that's why there are over 15 sects of orthodox, which one is right?NONE
MysticalCity 5 months ago 2
@MysticalCity Your wrong just totally wrong. The comment you send is so absurb and beyond stupitity and downright blasphemous.
february17able 5 months ago
@february17able intelligent reply, read The Fathers know best, for what the early church taught(The one and only true Catholic church, before your satanic sect was started by satan in 1054, with its blasphemous beliefs.
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@MysticalCity For you own good. The falthers never agreed with the filioque and Romes Heresy. Obvously you been shown that you are wrong, real wrong, that Orthodoxy broke away from Rome in 1054. Rome Broke away from Orthodoxy. Thinking Orthodoxy started by satan is so slanderous and even blasphemous against the Holy Spirit which is a unforgiven sin in the next life. While you still breath their is still hope for you if you choose to repent. If you die with these words, Your soul in danger of Hel
february17able 5 months ago
@MysticalCity Repent Fool. Do not follow the Pope and his Jesuit orders heresy. Leave the Papacy. The Pope cannot forgive you for your sins.
february17able 5 months ago
@february17able of course he can, Matthew 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.
"the fathers never agreed on the filioque" did you not read the verse i just gave you from scripture? how many quotes did i give you from the church fathers defending the filioque? wow
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@MysticalCity You verse you quoted never agreed with the filioque. Your way off.
february17able 5 months ago
@MysticalCity All the quotes you gave me from the Holy Fathers are wrong and/or never addressing procession from son. The bible that rome uses is corrupted and has verses and phrases missing. I cannot beiieve thier bible that is the Jerome Latin Volgate. I never will use it for edifying purposes either. It is horrible.
february17able 5 months ago
@february17able exactly what i expected, is martin luther your role model? do you just remove things from scripture to fit your beliefs? you clearly cannot and never will defend your corrupt faith, if you were open minded and intelligent you would change, but satan is clearly holding on to you.
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@MysticalCity your work on Martin Luther is slanderous because it is indicative if the Jesuit Fourth Vow and the Council of Trent to demean and Slander the Reformers. They did a lot more good than the Papacy.
february17able 5 months ago
@MysticalCity The Lord Jesus Christ is the Rock of the Church not Apostle Peter. That is known through the ages of Christianity. This was started by the last Rome Emperor conferred in the Pope Rome along with Universial Sacred Supremecy, which the East always knew that was blasphemy against the true church. The Bishops are concillarity not one bishop claiming universial Sacred Supremecy.
february17able 5 months ago
Respond to this video... Through the son does not mean procesion from the Son. This wrong interpretation Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. Through is different from Procession. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the father only, that God the Father only.
february17able 5 months ago
@february17able "The Holy Spirit also, when He proceeds from the Father and the Son, is not separated from the Father nor separated from the Son. For how could He be separated from the Father Who is the Spirit of His mouth? Which is certainly both a proof of His eternity, and expresses the Unity of this Godhead." Ambrose, The Holy Spirit, 1:11:120 (A.D. 381).
i can't help but find this hilarious, you disagreeing with like 50 church fathers.
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@MysticalCity This is misquoted. In essence the Son and the Father of one essence. I look this up and you misquoted because the Roman sources are usually mistranslated.
february17able 5 months ago
@february17able according to you, the entire bible is "misquoted" and "mistranslated"
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@february17able "The Spirit is also the Paraclete, who is himself neither the Father and the Son, but proceeding from from the Father and the Son. Therefore the Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Paraclete is not begotten, but proceeding from the Father and the Son." Council of Toledo II (A.D. 447).
MysticalCity 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@february17able here is proof for the Filioque cause i know your ignorant of scripture, St.John 15:26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me. "Whom I will send" THIS PROVES THAT THE HOLY GHOST PROCEEDS FROM THE SON AS WELL AS THE FATHER, OTHERWISE HE COULD NOT BE SENT BY THE SON.
???????
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@MysticalCity Peter was never the First Pope of Rome. He was Martyed in Rome, but never the first Pope of Rome. His requilary was found in the Holy Land broken into. Peter was bishop of Antioch.
february17able 5 months ago
@february17able protestants are real good at changing subjects, "I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul...My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross." Jerome, To Pope Damasus, Epistle 15 (A.D. 377).
Saint Peter died in Rome, which is why the Vatican is there, he was CLEARLY the leader of the apostles.
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@february17able "You cannot deny that you know that in the city of Rome the Chair was first conferred on Peter, in which the prince of all the Apostles, Peter, sat…in which Chair unity should be preserved by all, so that he should now be a schismatic and a sinner who should set up another Chair against that unique one." Optatus of Mileve, The Schism of Donatists, 2:2-3 (c. A.D. 367).
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@february17able "I am held in the communion of the Catholic Church by...and by the succession of bishops from the very seat of Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection commended His sheep to be fed up to the present episcopate." Augustine, Against the Letter of Mani, 5 (A.D. 395).
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@MysticalCity Peter did not have authority over the Apostles. For St. James presided over the Synods in Jerusalem. Pope St,. Gregory the Great states," that the blessed Peter has established three Petrine Sees of equal authority-Rome, Alexandria and Antioch." Rome is not exclusive to the "Chair".
trueorthodoxfaith 5 months ago
@trueorthodoxfaith yes,St Peter was bishop in many places, but the difference is he died in Rome, and the Bishop of Rome ALWAYS had the final authority, which is the pope. There is a book called Upon This Rock, where even orthodox, and protestants say Saint Peter was the first Pope, etc.. read it, and yes it is exclusive to the Chair, what you think they chose the Vatican to be there because of the weather? Saint Peter 1st Pope died in Rome, the keys continue
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@trueorthodoxfaith "[D]uring the days of that Anicetus, bishop of Rome, who succeeded Pius and his predecessors, For, in Rome, Peter and Paul were the first both apostles and bishops; then came Linus, then Cletus ... However the succession of the bishops in Rome was in the following order. Peter and Paul, and Cletus, Clement..." Epiphanius, Panarion, 27:6 (A.D. 377).
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@trueorthodoxfaith "Number the bishops from the See of Peter itself. And in that order of Fathers see who has succeeded whom. That is the rock against which the gates of hell do not prevail" Augustine, Psalm against the Party of Donatus, 18 (A.D. 393).
"The chair of the Roman Church, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today." Augustine, Against the Letters of Petillian, 2:51 (A.D. 402).
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@trueorthodoxfaith "Peter in his successors has delivered what he received." Pope Sixtus III [regn. A.D. 432-440], To John of Antioch, Epistle 6 (A.D. 433).
"The blessed apostle Peter, in his successors, has handed down what he received. Who would be willing to separate himself from the doctrine of whom the Master himself instructed first among the apostles?" Pope Sixtus III, [regn A.D. 432-440], To John of Antioch (A.D. 433).
MysticalCity 5 months ago
@MysticalCity All your posts are stating, is the case for Apostolic Succession in Rome. Peter was first amongst the Apostles, but in Scriptures it is clear that all the Apostles had equal standing. All twelve received the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. Christ reassured them that during His Second Coming, that all twelve of them would be seated on twelve thrones.
trueorthodoxfaith 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@trueorthodoxfaith did they all receive name changes? Saint Peter was chosen by God The Father, (remember when Jesus said to him, "blessed are you Simon" etc..? Saint Peter received the keys from the kingdom of Heaven to bind and loose, he was first among the apostles, to deny this is just nonsense, there is One leader in the church, and that's The Bishop of Rome, AKA The Pope.
MysticalCity 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@february17able here is proof for the Filioque cause i know your ignorant of scripture, St.John 15:26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me. "Whom I will send" THIS PROVES THAT THE HOLY GHOST PROCEEDS FROM THE SON AS WELL AS THE FATHER, OTHERWISE HE COULD NOT BE SENT BY THE SON.
there you go.
MysticalCity 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The orginal church is not Roman Catholic.
february17able 6 months ago
Antioch was not in Judea, it was Greek. Paul was a Roman apostate. The historic Christian faith are the Nazarenes, Jesus own sect, who were of Jerusalem nor Greco Roman apostates in Rome. Catholicism is a trick to make G-d believers believe in Caesar or Pontificus Maximus which is the latin name of the Pope. Catholicism is apostasy.
clarkewi 6 months ago
Ps.115:17 says: the dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence.
Ecl.9:5 "But the dead know not anything." Is.38:18: "For the grave cannot praise thee, death cannot celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth." Rev.14:13 "And i heard a voice from heaven saying.....blessed are the dead which die in the Lord...that they may REST from their labors; & their works do follow them." accord. to scripts, the dead are resting; can't do nothing.
kbelfort77 6 months ago
he did not deny that he was one of the saints of God. (Read Eph.3:8) In Act 9:13-15, Ananias had said to the Lord, concerning Paul: "Lord, i have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem: and here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name, but the Lord said to him "Go thy way: for he is a choosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the gentiles, &..." Accord. to Eph.2:19, we r citizens w/ the saints in the house of God
kbelfort77 6 months ago
In conclusion: As believers who have made a covenant with God, sanctified in Christ, and have kept the commandments of God by FAITH, we r all saints of God.
we may not appear as such, but many r walking toward that goal, for God "calleth those things which be not as though they were." (Ro.4:17) The Apostle Paul had persecuted the church of Jesus before he became the great apostle, though he was conscious of his wrongdoings in pastime; referring to himself as the "least of the saints"
kbelfort77 6 months ago
Where r the saints according to the bible? in the earth: they r either alive or dead. (Ps.16:3, Act 9:32, Act 26:10, Paul was speaking to the people that were alive; referring to them & addressing them as saints. Ro.1:7, 2Cor.1:1, Eph.1:1, Phil.4:22, Col.1:2. What r the saints commanded to do? 2Chr.6:41, Ps.30:4, Ps.31:23, Ps.132:9, Ps.89:5, Ps.149:5, What does the Lord do for his saints? 1Sam.2:9, 2Sam.22:37, Ps.66:9, Ps.37:28, Ps.97:10, Prov.2:8, Eph.4:11-13, Col.1:26, 1Cor.6:1,2, Eph.3:17,18
kbelfort77 6 months ago
Who r the Saints according to the bible? 1--Saints r the people who have made a covenant with God by sacrifice. (Ps.50:5) (the covenant of the Old Testament is the circumcision of the flesh, & the cov. of the New Testament is of the blood of Jesus Christ which was shed for many, and which now stands) 2--Saints are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus Christ. (Rev.14:12) 3--Saints are sanctified in Christ, (1Cor.1:2) He.8:13, He.13:20, Mt.26:28, Rev.1:5, 1John 1:7,
kbelfort77 6 months ago
BTW to the guy who complained about Catholics praying to the saints. The saints are already saved. God demonstrates this by performing some miracle in their name. When "you" pray FOR them, their place in Heaven is elevated. When you pray TO them You are asking to emulate some particular virtue or other quality they exemplify. So you can do that or maybe some other person, place or, thing may be more saatisfying to you.
chimay131 7 months ago
Believe what ever you like & good day to you. Our Lady of Fatima is defender of the Catholic Church, it's Bishops & it's faithful. The spirit of Anti-Christ Has been it's accuser since the beginning. And not only with Christ but also with Caine & Able & long before that too. If your Curch is of God it will oulast the pyramids; if not it will crumble into the dustbins of history. God wants you to pray for your brother who may be in error, NOT constanly finnd fault
chimay131 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THIS FACT! The Catholic Church has always tried to keep the European as dumb possible. An example of this hiding of truth can be seen in the coverup of the Pedophile Priest and Gays that run the Catholic Church. The Spanish Inquisition, The Crusades, WWI, and WWII, all involve the Catholic Church manipulating, lying to, stealing from, and murdering the people of Europe. WWII is nothing but the Catholic Church and Rothschild using Ashkenazi Khazars(non-Semites/Zionist) for another Crusade.
Born2Flesh 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A wicked man cannot undestand a good man. He cannot understand how he feels or thinks about things. He simply cannot relate. The more we trust Jesus by doing what he says the more we will understand how he thinks and feels about things. Character is the key to understanding; hermeneutics is important, but not as important as character. If Hitler followed the correct hermeneutical procedure would he rightly understand the Bible? No. "Justice" by George MacDonald. Godliness is the opener of eyes.
BBBradH 7 months ago
the gospel is very simple, "all have sinned and have come short of the glory of God" therefore we need to repent and believe the gospel "If we confess with our mouth and believe with our heart,... we shall be saved" when we believe and obey the gospel, God gives us his Holy spirit.. the bible says without his spirit, we don't belong to him, Jesus said: the flesh profits nothing, it is the spirit that quickens, Jesus said: "we must be born again, or we can't see and enter into the kingdom of God.
kbelfort77 7 months ago
@kbelfort77 Catholisism is idioltry. There is only One True and Living God. God means what he says that we should not put anything or anyone above Him. I said that to say this, Why should you pray to people who also needed the Salvation that only Jesus the son of God gives? That Is Idoiltry. If you don't wake up on this side of life you will find yourself in hell with my mother. At her death she was screaming out in terror and fear. You've been warned and have no excuse. Let this not be you!
michelle01forJesus 7 months ago
@michelle01forJesusdear sister in Christ: i am a born again, blood washed child of God, I am not confined to any form of denomination. i believe in the father, and the son and the Holy Spirit, I praise and worship only God the father and Jesus the son. I love to search and study the word of God (The Holy Bible) & my prayer is to live by the word of God so as to set good example for others. (Mt.4:4) however, it is not God's will that we should fight amongst ourselves.
kbelfort77 7 months ago
@michelle01forJesus every thing that i write & post is either quoted from the bible or based on it. i even refrain from using my opinion. i try my best to share the word with people, if i see that they r not receiving, i leave them alone: the bible says: it is the goodness of God that leads to repentance. ( Ro.3:23, 5:12, Mark 1:15, Ro.10:9, Ro.10:10, John chapter 3, John 6:63, these scripts were used from first post) it's all about Jesus who came to save us from sins & to give eternal life Amen
kbelfort77 7 months ago
Jesus is: the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the ending, he is the rose of Sharon, the Lily of the valley, the prince of peace, Lord of Lords, the word of God, the living bread, the manna from heaven, the author and the finisher of our faith, he is the way, the truth and the life, he is awesome, magnificent, omnipotent, He came to save sinners from sins, he loves the world so much... he forgives us no matter what we've done. "Today if u hear his voice, harden not your heart" (He.3:13-15)
kbelfort77 7 months ago
This really does explain the danger of mixing religious exclusivism with political power! From the explanation in this video, one can understand that when this belief in self is so paramount, as expressed here, if it is combined with political power, it can become an instrument of prejudice and persecution, as amply demonstrated in its past history. When the church believes in itself, instead of in Christ, it is on a slippery slope. Here the speaker believes in Catholic above Christ!
faithbyloving 7 months ago
It is very sad (and unChrist like) for Roman Catholics to have this exclusive view of themselves dismissing other churches, in the 21 century. So much has been done to understand the faith across churches, but if this video is right, then the RC church regards itself as exclusively Christian. But this is definitely not the faith which Christ taught in the gospels. Where Catholics and some others go wrong is that they esteem tradition above God's word and this is dangerous.
faithbyloving 7 months ago
Apostle John said 'how can a man love God if he does not love his brother?' For RCatholicism to have the view they have towards those who are not in their church, is not the Love of God, for they see themselves as superior, even though they are not in the eyes of God.
faithbyloving 7 months ago
Meanwhile, the church of Rome was not the only church by any standards. Whilst it is true that there were heretical groups, like Montanists, Marcionites, Ebionites, Valentinians, Gnostics, etc, there were also some of the earliest Christian churches in Syria, Egypt and India, not to mention the Eastern Orthodox Church, who had its own 'popes'. For RCatholicism, to view other churches as heresies and false, is contrary to scripture. Christ said 'he who is not against me is with me'.
faithbyloving 7 months ago
Interesting view, but I do not think it is correct at all. A lot of play is being made of the word "Catholic", the meaning of which is simply 'universal'. Even in some of the quotes, used, we begin to see the straying of the church of Rome, away from the true faith that Christ and the early apostles taught. Instead of the simple child like faith that Christ taught, it appears from these quotes, that the church of Rome, turned away instead to 'religion' as a substitute.
faithbyloving 7 months ago
@RalphPST
Every person has the duty to know their faith to avoid those who teach error. When JP2 kissed the Koran, that was not Catholic. When he braught members of false religions to Assisi and gave them rooms to worship their false gods in, that was not Catholic. When B16 gave communion.to Bro. Roger ( a protestant "monk") that was not catholic, when B16 prayed with female protestant ministers, that was not Catholic. All of these things have been condemned by the Catholic church
OneTrueChurch 7 months ago
@OneTrueChurch Good points. If those actions show JPII and B16 are not true popes, where is the true Pope or has the "Gates of Hell Prevailed Against it"? And if you showed me the "true pope" how would that differ from other protestants who claim they are the true leader?
RalphPST 7 months ago
@RalphPST
I don't believe that there is a true pope right now but this does not mean that the gates of hell have prevailed against the church. As long as there are true beleivers holding to authentic catholic teaching and validly ordained priests and bishops administering the sacraments then the gates of hell have not prevailed. But what is interesting is that if JP2 and B16 were true popes, then the gates of hell have prevailed because it would mean that the Papacy has taught error
OneTrueChurch 7 months ago
Glenn,how are you different than Martin Luther he thought the church was wrong..come back home to the rock
redtailhawkbuteo 7 months ago
Glenn your wrong, follow the Bishops even now. don't defect from the true church
redtailhawkbuteo 7 months ago
@redtailhawkbuteo
So we should follow the "bishops" who are teaching heresy and engaging in false worship. i dont think so.
OneTrueChurch 7 months ago
@OneTrueChurch So it is you who decide which bishops or "bishops" to follow?
RalphPST 7 months ago
@OneTrueChurch While I acknowledge the sinfulness and weakness of so many of our bishops, that is not an excuse to leave. Did St. Athanasius leave when so many of his brother bishops subscribed to the Arian heresy? Did St. Catherine of Sienna or St. Vincent Ferrer leave the Church even when the papacy was divided? NO! Rather, they buckled down, stayed in union with the Church and did what they could through prayer and work to promote authentic unity in the Church. Follow them, not Luther.
jtuturic 7 months ago 2
@redtailhawkbuteo Catholisism is idioltry. There is only One True and Living God. God means what he says that we should not put anything or anyone above Him. I said that to say this, Why should you pray to people who also needed the Salvation that only Jesus the son of God gives? That Is Idoiltry. If you don't wake up on this side of life you will find yourself in hell with my mother. At her death she was screaming out in terror and fear. You've been warned and have no excuse.
michelle01forJesus 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@redtailhawkbuteo Catholisism is idioltry. There is only One True and Living God. God means what he says that we should not put anything or anyone above Him. I said that to say this, Why should you pray to people who also needed the Salvation that only Jesus the son of God gives? That Is Idoiltry. If you don't wake up on this side of life you will find yourself in hell with my mother. At her death she was screaming out in terror and fear. You've been warned and have no excuse.
michelle01forJesus 7 months ago
@redtailhawkbuteo Catholisism is idioltry. There is only One True and Living God. God means what he says that we should not put anything or anyone above Him. I said that to say this, Why should you pray to people who also needed the Salvation that only Jesus the son of God gives? That Is Idoiltry. If you don't wake up on this side of life you will find yourself in hell with my mother. At her death she was screaming out in terror and fear. You've been warned and have no excuse.
michelle01forJesus 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why does the RC Church still take us for fools? If your "church" is so true, how is it so very very false? How us it so pagan?, so idolatrous?, so satanic? Why does it baptise babies? Whose tradition is this? Why does it glorify Mary? Why does it call her co-saviour? Why does it continue to deceive the world? What apostolc traditions? Calling heresy truth, and truth heresy-this is not a church. Straaten
vstraaten 7 months ago
Why does the RC Church still take us for fools? If your "church" is so true, how is it so very very false? How us it so pagan?, so idolatrous?, so satanic? Why does it baptise babies? Whose tradiction is this? Why does it glorify Mary? Why does it call her co-saviour? Why does it continue to deceive the world? What apostolc traditions? Calling heresy truth, and truth heresy-this is not a church. Straaten
vstraaten 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The penalty in abeyance for a priest for molesting 15-year old Yesterday 06-07-11 A year and four months suspended prison Wejherowo Poland ,Court sentenced on Tuesday 48-year-old priest, catholic pastor of a small parish near Gdynia, accused of persuading the 15-year-olds to drink alcohol, and then her sexual harassment.
Christians are out of law , they can do anything they want . Poland is one of those places where catholicks never go to prison/jail for sexual harassment .
Yinhuwuduan 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Illuminati, who sold their souls for Lucifer, have an obligation to teach the world the wrong names of the Trinity. The purpose of this is so you condemn yourself upon judgment. When Christ asks "Who do you say that I am?" make sure and tell others to answer, :"You are God."
If you give their wrong answer, "You are the son of a talking fire (the Lord)," you will quickly find out what Freemasonry has done to you and you will have an eternity to think about it. FATIMAMOVEMENT d o t c o m
fatimamovement 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@325nicaea (Nah, your a heretic. The Church says all outside Her will go to hell.)
Oh you are one of those...Sorry,Have fun damning all to hell.
Seekerr1 7 months ago
@325nicaea Catholic Church...
Define Catholic Church..... Even the Pope will tell you that all that profess & is baptized is part of the Church.. Catholic = Universal...They may reject us but we are not to reject them..I have a gut feeling you are not Roman Catholic cause you do not sound like one of us....If you reject the Catechism you are rejecting the teachings of the Church.
Seekerr1 8 months ago
@325nicaea The Orthodox Church is not "outside" of the catholic church. Pope Eugene IV made that statement in hope that the Eastern Churches would somehow be brought back into unity with Rome. His strong language failed his efforts.
For your info, the Orthodox claim Rome is both schismatic and heretical.
vasilyjc1955 8 months ago
@325nicaea Those are pretty strong words that have no basis, and just proves the ignorance that exists.
vasilyjc1955 8 months ago
@325nicaea Just thought you would like know what the Church has to say about your comment.. God Bless & keep the faith.
Seekerr1 8 months ago
@325nicaea 847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.
Seekerr1 8 months ago
youtube.com/watch?v=UrEty-W-MpA
10WiseVirgins 8 months ago
@10WiseVirgins This video is misleading and not factual. If you read about the Franks conquering Rome, you would see that they gained control and used the Latin church for their political means, and wanted control over the entire church.
There always existed a balance of power in the East, and even when Constantinople tried to exert power, the other Patriarchates refused to give in. Stop misleading people with your propaganda.
vasilyjc1955 8 months ago
@vasilyjc1955 Are you talking about Charlemagne who gave ABSOLUTE power /land ownership to Pope Leo III , who crowned him as an Emperor ? Listen you, a provocateur , this is not KGB Russia, go and play your games elsewhere
10WiseVirgins 8 months ago
@10WiseVirgins I am stating facts, and Russia is far from being kgb.
vasilyjc1955 7 months ago
there is only one church, the church of Jesus Christ. he is building the church, not on Peter, but on himself being the foundation of the church. ("..and that rock was Christ," spiritual) he is the head, we are the divided body/ church, that needs to stop arguing and come together as one: we sing it: "One bread, one body, one spirit, one accord, one Lord. When 2 or 3 are gathered in his name, he is in our midst If we lift him up, he will draw all souls to himself, he'll add to the church. amen
kbelfort77 8 months ago
Actually the Orthodox Church is the original and 1st Church of Christ! Your argument is based on the fact that the word catholic is used in many of the early church writings, however, that word is based on a greek word meaning universal. There is a difference between catholic-universal, and Roman Catholic-the faith you are speaking of. What is known as the Orthodoxy has existed since 33 ad, where the Roman Catholic Church has existed since 1054, when it split from the 4 other Patriarchates.
assads2000 8 months ago
I shall never declare more than one spirit, by giving a response 'And with your spirit'. Never shall I. It would hurt Jesus. One body, one Spirit in Him. Amen
BritishSnail 8 months ago
@doctorbasslayer Jesus' church were Nazarene Jews in Jerusalem not Antioch. What has come to be called "Christianity" was of Greco Roman origin in Antioch, Epiphis, Rome etc. not Judean origin. It is apostasy.
clarkewi 8 months ago
0:25 - "If one really wants to hold to the traditions of the early Christians, they should follow the Catholic Church."
Wrong. They should follow the teachings of Yeshua and the apostles. Constantine and the Ecumenical councils combined Christianity with the Mystery Traditions (i.e. sun worship, etc.) to form what became the ROMAN Catholic Church. So, to suggest Catholicism represents Christianity in its purest form is absolute nonsense. It is a hybrid.
00RoninSamurai00 8 months ago
Records are only as official as you want them to be. Come on. You can't use todays terms to define official. What we have are writings and records from the church fathers that date back to the first century AD. Some of these writings were compiled to form the New Testament. Do you doubt the New Testament? I bet not. Aren't they also church documents?Why then do you doubt Church History? The Epistles of the Bible are just a few of many. We have the Bible, we have writings and from there, history.
a2j93 9 months ago
At first: Roman Catholicism is not the real apostolic Catholicism.
2nd: Roman-System and Evangelical-System dont fit togheter. Jesus is jewish Culture and not roman.
3rd: When Jesus gave the order to his followers: "And don't address anyone here on earth as 'Father', 'Pope', 'Abba', 'Baba', for only God in heaven is your spiritual holy Father." Then this is an order. No discusion about it. It is an order, by Jesus Christ himself. Amen.
jeshualivesforever 9 months ago
Apostololikon Catholikon has nothing to do with Roman Catholic church, priests not being married is not biblical, neither is the Pope, neither are the Statues you have in your churches, neither is all the child molestation plaguing your church, please dont prostitute the word Catholikon (which means united in Greek) with Roman Catholic, please learn to read and speak Greek which is what this was written in and then come back to us and stop prostituting the term Catholikon.
ByzantineRuler 9 months ago
This is bullcrap. The original Christians were the Gnostics and Coptics. They didn't have churches, or Bibles... They didn't run around burning people alive either. This is historical fact. The Roman Catholic Church is a false brand of Christianity.
ericzum 9 months ago
@ericzum you clearly have detoured somewhere. Read about the Gnostics. They were false prophets. And the early church was Catholic. Ever heard about the Nicene Creed? Today Roman Catholics and Orthodox Catholics are the only people with genuine claim to that early catholic church. The Coptics are a branch of Orthodox Catholics. The Orthodox Catholics split from the Roman Catholics because they were pressured by the Muslims.
a2j93 9 months ago
Mary is a filthy whore, and if I could I would get a whole heap of fetuses, crucify her on a cross but this time backwards, and kick the fetuses up into her calloused dry-rot vagina while Cher sings "if I could turn back time". Anyone with me??
OrthodoxDarwinist 9 months ago
@OrthodoxDarwinist
Given that your post was obviously contrived to provoke a response, do you have anything other than mindless and sophomoric, scatological ramblings?
serverfix 9 months ago
It's hilarious how many "TRUE" churches that this planet has. Are there many truths out there? The Catholic Church is the first TRUE CORRUPT church! Since they claim to be the first church, then they were the first to distort Christianity as well, right from the get go of claiming that Peter is the first Pope when Galatians states that Peter was ordained to the Jews, Paul to the Gentiles! And Peter was in Babylon, not Rome. Matthew 18:1=disciples, not apostles, not "the TWELVE" either.
chapmaned 9 months ago
@chapmaned Peter lived in ROME. The Vatican was built on top of his grave.
a2j93 9 months ago
@a2j93 I am not so sure that Peter is buried in Rome. In any case, according to the Bible, Paul was the one ordained by God to LIVE in Rome, to Preach to the Gentiles, and Paul's custom was to Preach to the Jews first, before Preaching to the Gentiles. Peter, according to the Bible, had the responsibility to Preach to the Jews. According to the Bible, Peters Epistles were directed to the Jews, and not only that, he said he was in Babylon. You don't believe that, replacing Babylon to Rome.
chapmaned 9 months ago
@chapmaned Peter is buried in Rome; in the Vatican. Research that. I get what you are saying, Peter preached to other people apart from the Romans. Indeed he was also the first Patriach of Antioch. But it was in Rome he spent the last years of his life. You base your history on the Bible. The Bible is not a history book. History reveals that Peter went to Rome. That is fact.
a2j93 9 months ago
@a2j93 There was no need for Peter to even be in Rome, as Paul had the Jurisdiction of the Gospel in Rome already. But, I think what you mean is Catholic History shows Peter in Rome. How about NON PARTISAN History that has nothing to do with Catholicism? Peter was NOT the first in Antioc. Paul was according to Acts chapter 11. Acts 6 is the first mention of Antioc, however, NO MENTION OF PETER being there. Catholics tracing things back to Peter is a conspiracy. You have no EYE WITNESSES!
chapmaned 9 months ago
@chapmaned Now that's daft. How can there be eye witnesses for something that happened two millenia ago? If you mean witnesses in history, we do have plenty of them. Protestantism is an attempt of applying democratic principles to the church, in a wrong manner. You clearly do not know your history and keep quoting verses the Bible which do not apply to the argument. Go & read more. There is no conspiracy, all the old churches trace their lineage back to the apostles. Called apostolic succession.
a2j93 9 months ago
@a2j93 You asked how there could be ey witnesses for something that happened 2000 years ago? Are you kidding? Jesus had eye witnesses, and it was written. I know my history very well. THE BIBLE states that for anything to be believed that you need the word of two or three witnesses. You can't provide them in history, therefore, your Catholic word cannot be believed by Bible standards. You need those witnesses, otherwise, it is just UNVERIFIED revised history.
chapmaned 9 months ago
@chapmaned Even Protestants agree that Peter spent his last days in Rome. I don't know why you are disputing that. There are records by witnesses who lived at that time. The history's verified. Ask your pastor where Peter died. He'll tell you Rome. That cannot be a basis for your argument because it is fact. You should argue based on something else, because Peter did die in Rome and not everything is in the Bible. Catholic Bishops through the Holy Spirit chose what to include in the Bible.
a2j93 9 months ago
@a2j93 I dispute it because of the false claims that Catholics make about Peter, which is easily disputed by Bible standards. Peter had no business being in Rome. What was he there for? The Bible states that his responsibilities were to make disciples of Jews. What would his purpose be in setting up residence in Rome? My pastor is not an eye witness of Peter in Rome. Give me names of those who saw him in Rome residing there as a permanent resident. Paul was a Roman Citizen. Peter wasn't.
chapmaned 9 months ago
@chapmaned The Bible does not say everything. It doesn't talk about Peter's death. It doesn't talk about Paul's death. In fact the only apostle who died in the bible was Judas Iscariot. The Acts of the Apostles talks about what happened a few decades after Jesus' resurrection and that is it. You are right that Paul went to Rome. What Peter was there for? Peter went there later in his life and was subsequently executed by Emperor Nero. This happens after the events that are recorded in the Bible.
a2j93 9 months ago
@a2j93 The Bible does talk about the responsibilities of Peter and Paul, and a timeline of their locations are in the Bible. Peters responsibilities were to JEWS, not Gentiles. Pauls responsibility was to Gentiles because Paul was a Roman citizen, and Peter was not. Peter had no business being in Rome. What was he there for? What was his business in Rome? Are there official records of Nero's reign that PROVES that Nero killed Peter? There is supposed to be. Who identified Peter's body?
chapmaned 9 months ago
@chapmaned How do we know how the Apostles died? It's not in the Bible, but it's in other equally early writings. Surely you can't say the Church fathers were biased. Peter was crucified upside down. paul was beheaded and so on. We know this because it was recorded. The Bible is not a history book. Even non-Catholic historians agree with to varying degrees with the Church's assertions.
a2j93 9 months ago
@a2j93 There is still no "eyewitness" accounts of Peter being the first Pope in Rome. There is only eyewitness accounts of Peter being crucified upside down. The Bible states that for any word to be believed, you need at least 2 or 3 witnesses.
chapmaned 8 months ago
@chapmaned Jesus built His church upon Peter (Petra) conferring upon him the Keys of the Kingdom. You think he was the janitor. Try reading a book without pictures.
kingsmen711 8 months ago
@kingsmen711 Jesus built His Church on the faith of Peter. The "rock" which the Church was built was always understood to mean the faith in Jesus Christ or the profession of faith in Christ. All twelve Apostles had the power of the keys. The "keys" are that path to salvation through our faith in Christ. This is evident on Pentecost when all twelve received the Holy Spirit.
vasilyjc1955 8 months ago
@vasilyjc1955 Not sure that the word "faith" was used by Jesus when he chose Peter. Peter's faith was evident. "You are Peter (Petras) and upon this rock (Peter) I will build my church. And the gates of Hell shall not prevail" Just not understanding your meaning. Christ spoke plainly about this and without conjecture.
kingsmen711 8 months ago
@kingsmen711 The 'rock" is the faith in Christ. Psalm:18:2- The Lord is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer, my God, my strength, in whom I trust. Psalm:18:31- For who is God besides the Lord? And who is the Rock except our God? God is called the Rock in the Old Testament and Paul confirmed that Christ is the Rock. I Cor.10:4. Peter himself testifies that Jesus is the foundation stone against whom hell did not prevail. 1 Peter 2:9, Matth. 21:42-44.
vasilyjc1955 8 months ago
@vasilyjc1955 YOU ALSO GOT IT CORRECT...THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT IS A LOT OF HELP!!I THINK CATHOLIC SHOULD START STUDYING GREEK SO THEY WILL UNDERSTAND IT.
357archangel 8 months ago
@kingsmen711 Jesus built his church upon himself, w/Peter's "declaration" that Jesus is the Christ. Everything I have read in the Bible about Peter is that his "commission" was to the Jews, just as Paul said in Galatians. Paul's epistles were addressed to Jewish Believers, not Gentiles Believers. Read Matthew 18:1, then the rest of Matthew 18, you will see that "disciples" have the same keys that you claim only Peter has.Jesus is the ONLY Petra (1 Cor 10:4). Peters name is Petros, not Petra.
chapmaned 8 months ago
@chapmaned AMEN TO YOU BROTHER!Jesus is the ONLY Petra (1 Cor 10:4). Peter's name is Petros, not Petra.YOU WILL ONLY GET THIS CORRECT INTERPRETATION WHEN YOU READ THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT..KEEP IT UP..LET THEM UNDERSTAND..GOD BLESS YOU.
357archangel 8 months ago
@357archangel Catholics ignore New Test Greek. In regards to Peter, they want to speak Aramaic, BUT, Jesus gave Cephas a Greek name (Peter), clarifying what KIND of rock Cephas is (a stone or pebble). The New Test is penned in Greek ON PURPOSE. Matthew thru John knew exactly what they were penning, & the definitions, otherwise, they would have penned all of the New Test in Aramaic. God chose Greek for a reason. Greek definitions are PRECISE in meaning so as not to confuse Aramaic definitions.
chapmaned 8 months ago
@chapmaned YEAH THAT'S SO SAD...THEY HAVE TO IMPROVISE ALIBIS SO THEY WON'T BE CAUGHT IN THE ACT OF TWISTING THE SCRIPTURES..WELL ANYWAY THANKS FOR THE REPLY..LET'S JUST KEEP ON PRAYING FOR THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE BOUND BY LIES AND DECEPTIONS.
357archangel 8 months ago
@chapmaned Protestant critics of the Catholic Church used to, and some still do make a great deal of the difference between Petros (m) and Petra (f); ignoring the fact that our Lord did not speak Latin or Greek to St Peter. It is interesting that John retains the Aramaic 'Kaypha'(John 1:42), and St Paul uses it by preference.
assasincomedy 8 months ago
@assasincomedy With all due respect, the criticism is necessary, as Greek was the International Language of the day, just as English is the international language of today. This is why it is extremely important that when translating the New Testament, the original Language that it was penned in is more important than the language it was spoken in. The sign above Jesus was written in Hebrew, Latin, & Greek, not Aramaic. Hebrew=Jews, Latin=Romans, Greek=everyone else. Aramaic=Babylon Captivity.
chapmaned 8 months ago
Respond to this video... As to eyewitnesses, I can give you names. There's emperor Nero, there's Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch. . . Of these people only Clement is mentioned in the Bible, in Philippians 4:3. Interestingly, Clement is regarded by Catholics as the third bishop of Rome, or third Pope.
a2j93 9 months ago
@a2j93 i m not Chiristian, am a bit confused isnt catholicism same as catholic religion, or is it different
i read sumwhere catholicism vs Judaism y its not chiristianity vs Judaism
filza18pk 9 months ago
Respond to this video... Saying there was no need for Peter to be in Rome doesn't change the fact that Peter lived and died in Rome--- It already happened. In fact, only the Orthodox Catholics can truly argue with Roman Catholics. The first churches were catholic in nature, who celebrated mass on the Lord's day; Sunday. Read Corinthians 11. The Bible contains some records, not all. The remaining records of early church history can be found in early churches: present day Catholicism.
a2j93 9 months ago
@a2j93 You said that it is a FACT that Peter lived and died in Rome. You have no proof that he lived in Rome. You have writings that were made many years later, but no eye witness accounts. You have a set of bones that you claim is Peter, but who verified that was Peter's body? Who identified the body? What was your purpose of providing me 1 Cor 11? Protestant churches are the church as well as the Catholic Church. Christians are the church, not a church name.
chapmaned 9 months ago
Respond to this video... The Greek, Eastern and Roman Catholic Churches existed before the Bible was put together that is why they can rightfully trace their lineage to the apostles and can cite sources other than the Bible to prove it. Remember the Bible came over three hundred years after Christianity. Who put the Bible together? Catholics.
a2j93 9 months ago
ahhhhhhh83 9 months ago
@watchful38
No, Vatican II in itself was heretical. the people who put together the documents of Vatican II were modernist theologians who had a clear goal of revamping the church. Documents like Dignatatis Humane, and Gaudium et Spes are almost word for word contradictions of Pope Pius IX syllabus of errors which even Ratzinger himself admits in his Book "Principles of Catholic Theology". Fr. Barron himself is a modernist who says that hell might be empty
OneTrueChurch 9 months ago
@OneTrueChurch Vatican II is not heretical. Christ promised the Church that the gates of hell would not prevail. Being a tradtional Catholic means that you have lost your belief in those words. Anyway, it still beats being Protestant.
a2j93 9 months ago
this is bullshit
macasmunchys 9 months ago
I do want to bring up one more thing on verbatim quote from the Bible of what it actually says. Hmm I could not find anywhere verbatim that the books in the Bible are actually right and exactly which books belong in the Bible. I can find this info in the ECFs writings as I can about which church is mentioned as the one Christ started but again nothing on the table of contents for the Bible. Wonder why that was forgotten if it too is so important and needed to be shown verbatim.
tomb1954 10 months ago
Historian4ever2 also asked where in the Bible Jesus stated He started the Catholic Church verbatim quoted from the Bible exactly as it is written.So if you use this logic the Protestants can't believe in the Trinity because it was not stated in the Bible verbatim and you would have to believe the true presence because it is verbatim stated. (but the ECFs who were taught by the Apostles did name this church and called it Catholic)
tomb1954 10 months ago
As you can see below I did not go to Catholic sites to make my case because I knew you would try to use that so I got most of my info from Stanford U. I also used a Protestant translation of the ECFs for some of that info. The CC started the universities so they were not against advancing intellectual knowledge and this is part of history but they did not like when they went against church teachings like Jesus is God and God made all things.
tomb1954 10 months ago