The Bible proves Catholic beliefs that most protestants deny, part 2

[Archangel777Catholic]

Thank you for this wonderful light in the darkness of the condemning times. God bless.

-Adam Villegas, Arch.

P.S. Ever heard of the Archangelati?

[jeff30458]

Can you explain something to me? I haven't attended church regularly. When I did, I attended a Southern Baptist Church. I've been looking into Catholicism here lately and have noted that Catholics take the Eucharist very seriously which I do to. That's my thing, in a lot of the videos and things I've read, Catholics are defending it like protestants don't believe it. We did this usually about once every 3 months or so. Are there other denominations that don't believe in the Eucharist?

[heretic154]

I am convinced that the Catholic Church conforms much more closely to all of the biblical data,offers the only coherent view of the history of Christianity(i.e.,Christian morality,spirituality,social ethic,and philosophy.

[heretic154]

I am Catholic because I sincerely believe,by virtue of much cumulative evidence,,that Catholicism is true,and that the Catholic Church is the visible Church divinely-established by our Lord Jesus Christ against which the gates of hell shall cannot and shall not prevail(Mt 16:18),thereby possessing an authority to which I feel bound in Christian duty to submit!

-150 reasons I'm Catholic and you should be too!, by Dave Armstrong-

[yellowballpoets]

God bless the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church faithful to our Lords teachings for 2000years by the grace of God and to his glory.

[kiwichristian2009]

From Bishop Liguoris' "The Glories of Mary", APPROVED by the vatican! "She (Mary) is . . . the only hope of sinners: (p. 69),"We will be heard and saved sooner by going to Mary, and invoking her holy name, than that of Jesus our Savior. We will find salvation sooner going to the mother than going to the Son" (p. 82),"Many things asked of God and not received are asked and received from Mary (p. 82). All obey the precepts of Mary, even God" (p. 115). ALL CATHOLIC LIES!

[MrJamesthecatholic]

@kiwichristian2009

","We will be heard and saved sooner by going to Mary, and invoking her holy name, than that of Jesus our Savior. We will find salvation sooner going to the mother than going to the Son (p. 82)"

Wow this is getting really interesting for me. Mr kiwichristian2009 can you paste that entire paragraph from page 82 please ? Let all of us read it in context. I challenge you on this one.

[kiwichristian2009]

the rcc says that evolution is in line with Christianity and catholics can believe in it. This is CONTRARY to the Bible. the rcc says mary was sinless. this is CONTRARY to the Bible. the rcc says confess your sins to a priest. this is CONTRARY to the Bible. the rcc says mary can save you. this is CONTRARY to the Bible. the rcc says peter was "the rock". this is CONTRARY to the Bible. The rcc murdered MILLIONS of Christians. This is CONTRARY to the Bible.

[montanasosa21]

can't you see... the Jews were taking everything literally Jesus was saying I am the bread of life... he is not figuratively saing hey i'm a loaf of bread take and bite... He is speaking figuratively to say that hey believe in me... make me your food and drink... make me your necesity!!

[ComeHomeCatholics]

@montanasosa21 For over 1500 years all of Christianity (generally speaking) understood that Jesus was speaking the truth about eating His Body and drinking His Blood.

If the aposltes weren't to have successors, then why do we see then choosing a successor for Judas?

And if there were no difference between "word" and "epistle" then why did St. Paul make the distinction?

[montanasosa21]

@ComeHomeCatholics Ok... the reason they needed a successor was to fulfill judas place... it gave distinct guidelines how ever they were chosen... the bishops of your church do not meet those requirements. The requirements included that they had followed christ through out his ministry starting at his babtism and all the way through his ascension to heaven. So how is it that the bishops were there during christ's ministry they weren't... they don't meet the guidelins given

[ComeHomeCatholics]

@montanasosa21 the pool of candidates at that time would have been very limited. So it only makes since that if there were still people alive that knew and saw Jesus, then they would be at the top of the list to be a successor. As time went on there were no longer people who were alive at the time Jesus was, but that doesn't mean that was the end of apostolic succession.

[Noffy1111]

@ComeHomeCatholics It most certainly does mean apostolic succession ceased. In other words an apostle had to know Christ. There were far more that followed Him as disciples but were not apostles. This is made clear in the Word.

[kiwichristian2009]

@Noffy1111 You got it. Apostles were first-hand witnesses of Christ. The true successor to the apostles is the Word of God.

[kiwichristian2009]

@Noffy1111 The Roman Catholic Church was not really in effect as an organization in the first couple hundred years of the Christian Church. The Christian church was under persecution and official church gatherings were risky business in the Roman Empire. Catholicism as an organization with a central figure located in Rome did not occur for quite some time, in spite of its false claim they can trace the papacy back to Peter.

[redbaron998]

@kiwichristian2009

It would be a historical mistake to say that Christians were under constant persecution by the Empire, there were actually only a few official persecutions and then many local unofficial ones depending on how the local governers felt. Of course this is not to belittle the sacrifices of the early Martyrs but a organizer Church was indeed presence. St Ignatius of Antioch talks in detail about thins in the year 100 when he describes the Bishops, priests, and deacons.

[montanasosa21]

Yet again Jesus was speaking sybolically in John 6:53

[montanasosa21]

Wow clearly you can see that Jesus gave them bread and it symbolically represented his body... Jesus wasn't giving them a pieces of his flesh to eat mabye i'm misunderstanding you but you say "not that it was symbolic of is body and blood" but yes it was symbolic of his blood and hsi body if you read the whole 4 vs and just not a tiny exerpt

[montanasosa21]

Wrong again about sacred tradition... It says traditions which you were taught, whether by word or epistle (the word as in God's word and epistle the word of the apostles who at the time were guided by the Holy Spirit) There is a big difference of following a tradition of the apostles being led by the holy spirit then that of men.

[montanasosa21]

the bishops can't be successors of the apostles and the pope can't be a successor of Peter.

[montanasosa21]

What you forget to mention is the guidelines for succesion.... Acts 1:21 Therefore of these men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning rom the babtism of John to that day when he was taken up from us, one of these muse become a witness with use of His resurrection. So when were the bishops with Christ? when were they when he was babtized. when where they when Christ rose up to heaven. You guessed right THEY WEREN"T so obviously

[zzvv11a]

where's part 1?

[ComeHomeCatholics]

part 1 is a seperate video I've made with the same title. You can find it on my youtube channel under the playlist "Catholicism in the Bible". God bless †

[bwmnstar7]

@ComeHomeCatholics In both of your videos I have viewed so far, you have taken several things out of context. If you are going to post verses, I would suggest reading the entire chapter before you post a verse.

You say that you always take Jesus at his word. Well then why haven't you cut off your handa or feet, because Jesus said that if you "right hand or eye causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away, for it is better for you to enter life...

[bwmnstar7]

@ComeHomeCatholics He also stated that we are the salt of the earth and the light of the world. He also said that he is the vine and we are the branches. These were all figurative examples of what Jesus meant to make his points understandable.

Jesus said in John that if a man abides and believes in him, he will never see death. And some of the people who heard him had a hard time believing him, but he meant spiritual death, and they thought he meant physical.

[ComeHomeCatholics]

@bwmnstar7 and how do we "abide" in Jesus? John 6:56 "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him." So to abide in Jesus we must eat His flesh and drink His blood.

In protestant churches you don't have validy ordained priests, so you can't experience the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. It is only in the Catholic and Orthodox Church that the bread and wine literally become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ.

[bwmnstar7]

@ComeHomeCatholics Exactly my point. Just like the jailer and his household, you neglected to put up the verse that they all believed. So too in John 6, you neglect to put up verse 63.

"The words that I have just spoken to you are SPIRIT and they are LIFE." His words were spiritual words that impart life unto those who believe. Context man; take things in context.

[ComeHomeCatholics]

@bwmnstar7 @bwmnstar7 when Catholics receive the Eucharist they do profess their belief. The priest says while giving you the Eucharist "Body of Christ" and you say "Amen" (I believe). I was addressing how Jesus says that we 'abide' in Him, and the only way Jesus says that we can 'abide' in His is by eating His flesh and drinking His blood.

You have the same belief as those who stopped following Jesus "..How can this man give us His flesh to eat?" John 6:52

[bwmnstar7]

@bwmnstar7 Are you not listening? verse 63 Jesus tells his disciples that the "FLESH" counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are Spirit and they are life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe.

Jesus says that he was speaking Spiritual words that impart life. His body and blood are spiritual representations of participation in the sufferings of Christ.

[bwmnstar7]

@ComeHomeCatholics What does verse 63 say to you?

[ComeHomeCatholics]

@bwmnstar7 where exaclty does Jesus say "His body and blood are spiritual representations"? Have you read John chapter 6? Jesus says over and over again that this is His body and His blood, and that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. During the consecration the priest calls down the Holy Spirit "Let your Spirt come upon these gifts to make them holy..." So yes I agree with verse 63, "the Spirit gives life.", and not the works of man.

[bwmnstar7]

@ComeHomeCatholics Where does it say that Jesus is speaking figuratively when he commands us to cut off our hands and feet when they cause us to sin.

When Jesus said he would tear down the temple in three days and rebuild it, he was talking about his body, but he allowed the people there to believe he was talking about the building (temple).

[ComeHomeCatholics]

@bwmnstar7 from the earliest days of the Church it was understood that Jesus meant what He said about eating His flesh and drinking His blood. Over the centuries countless martyrs went to their death for their faith in the most Holy Eucharist. When someone reads the Last Supper accounts and then John chapter 6 with an open mind without trying to read their perconceived notions into the text, it is clear that Jesus meant what He said.