".. edificaré mi Iglesia, y las puertas del infierno no prevalecerán sobre ella"... "Yo estoy todos los días con ustedes, hasta el fin de los tiempos"... "El que a vosotros escucha, a Mi me escucha; el que a vosotros desprecia (desoye), a mi me desoye"... "Reciban el Espíritu Santo: a quienes perdonen los pecados, les quedan perdonados; a quienes se los retengan, les quedan retenidos".
THE FACT THE COUNCILS WERE CONCILIAR AND CALLED BY THE EMPEROR, WHERE SOME POPES WERE NOT EVEN PRESENT, ATTESTS TO THE FACT THAT THE APOSTOLIC AND EVEN SCRIPTURAL ECCLESIOLOGY OF THE CHURCH WAS CONCILIAR AND NOT SOME RIDICULOUSLY EVIL PAPAL MONARCHY. POPE's WERE BOUND BY THE DECISIONS OF THE COUNCILS AND COULD BE CONDEMNED BY THEM. ENOUGH, YOU ARE STUPID AND POINTLESS TO EVEN BOTHER WITH.THERE IS NO PRIMACY IN ANY SENSE WHEN THE POPE IS THE HERETIC AND HIS CHURCH HAS FALLEN AWAY. GOT IT STUPID?!
@jasonbently2002 You just repeated what you wrote a few days ago. What's wrong with copy pasting? Makes the quote accurate if you ask me. You're losing your cool and your control, poor kid. Now: 1. The emperor calling councils doesn't make the Church Conciliarist. Remember the Robber Council of Ephesus in 449? The emperor called it, but was annulled and condemned for its irregularities by Pope Leo I. HE excommunicated EVERYONE responsible for it. EVERYONE.
@jasonbently2002 2: "WHERE SOME POPES WERE NOT EVEN PRESENT" If they could not attend, they sent LEGATES. And if they weren't there how could they personally preside over the sessions? And does it negate their authority if they don't? Even in post-schism councils the Pope does not preside. And as the history of the Ecumenical Councils show, the decisions of an Ecumenical Council may be AFFIRMED and PROMULGATED or ANNULLED (as was done by the Papal Legate at Ephesus II)
@jasonbently2002 "YOU ARE STUPID AND POINTLESS TO EVEN BOTHER WITH." Then why fuss with me in the first place? The reply I made to you regarding protestant liturgies was meant for that protestant commenter on this page, not for your Church. As you can see I defended the Eastern Churches from calumny by that individual as I had high regard for it being, in the words of the late Pope, one of the two "lungs" of Christianity. You may not regard the Latins as such but that's not my problem.
FIRSTLY, YOU IGNORAMUS, THE DECREES OF THE HOLY ECUMENICAL ARE PREFACED WITH "IT SEEMED GOOD TO US AND THE HOLY SPIRIT." SECONDLY, PRIMACY MEANS BEING FIRST AMONG A GROUP OF OTHERS.THAT's THE MEANING OF THE WORD.THIRDLY I SIMPLY WENT AFTER YOUR IGNORANT LINE OF ARGUMENTATION, SHOWED HOW EVEN DECONTEXTUALIZATIONS HAVEN't THE SLIGHTEST FORCE BECAUSE THE ARGUMENT YOU PRESENT IS NON SEQUITER.YOU ARGUE PATRISTICS IDEAS ON PRIMACY AND SAY THAT IS HERETICAL PAPAL MONARCHY.IT DOES NOT FOLLOW...
Your sect begins in 1054 when you leave OUR CHURCH for papal despotism,heresies,blasphemies and even evolve entire theological and ecclesiological systems at variance with the Orthodox Catholic ChurchWE HAVE PRESERVED THAT.YOU HAVE ADULTERATED ITBy St. Vincent of Lerins definition WE ARE THE TRUE CATHOLICS:OUR FAITH IS ORTHODOX whereas you ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH AND DO NOT HOLD THE CATHOLIC FAITH.When the pope becomes Orthodoxthen primacy which MEANS PRESIDENCY IN COLLEGIALITY can occur
The very word "primacy" IMPLIES COLLEGIALITY NOT MONARCHY, but you don't seem to get that. I have torn apart those decontextualized "proof texts" on other threads by simply showing 1). THAT THE CHURCH WAS CONCILIAR AND THAT THE POPE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THERE WERE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS CALLED BY THE EMPEROR, WAS NOT THE ARBITER OR HEAD OF THE CHURCH & 2). THEY PRESUPPOSE AN ORTHODOX PAPACY TO MAKE THAT PRIMACY OPERATIVE.
THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD ALWAYS EVERYWHERE BY ALL. THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH HOLDS TO THAT FAITH.THEPAPAL SECT HAS ADDED HERETICAL INNOVATIONS,CCLESIOLOGICAL BLASPHEMIES WHICH ARE IN DRAMATIC DIVERGENCE FROM THAT FAITH. THUS IT CANNOT BE CATHOLIC.HERE CAN BE NO TALK OF PRIMACY OR COMMON PRAYER UNTIL YOU REPENT AND RETURN TO THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH.BY THE DEFINITION OF ST VINCENT OF LERINS THE PAPACY IS NEITHER CATHOLIC NOR ORTHODOX AND THE FAITH IT HOLDS IS APOSTATE.
Once you can reconcile your blasphemous papal heresy with the dictum of St. Vincent of Lerins THAT THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD EVERYWHERE AT ALL TIMES BY ALL which we Orthodox Catholics PRESERVE to this day then you can talk about "primacy" and proof texts EMANATING FROM CONCILIAR DECISIONS AND FATHERS WHO LIVED IN A REALITY WHERE COUNCILS, NOT POPES. SPOKE THE TRUTH IN THE HOLY SPIRIT
And another thing, you could probably visit my channel and see where I smacked one of your papist apologist down for the decontextulizations of the Fathers he made on an Orthodox thread. HE ran with tail between his legs. Again, even dealing with "proof texts." From the Book of Acts to St. Clement of Rome to St. Gregory the Great to papal statements AFTER Nicholas I to the Byzantine Emperor, it is easy to establish that the papacy ITSELF never held what you try to distort and deceive with.
@jasonbently2002 "see where I smacked one of your papist apologist...HE ran with tail between his legs." Learn HUMILITY from the Crucified One. I deal with some of the worse people here in Youtube to defend my faith. Do I afterward boast that I gave them a "smack" ? I can only TREMBLE with gratitude that He did not abandon me when I needed to witness for Him.
@drupes YOU BLASPHEME THE HOLY SPIRIT AND EQUATE WITH AN EMANATED DEMIGOD WITH YOUR FILIOQUE HERESY. YOU CRUCIFY CHRIST ANEW WITH YOUR IDEA OF CREATED GRACE. YOU BETRAY CHRIST LIKE JUDAS WHEN YOU SPEAK OF A POPE BEING HIS SOLE VICAR ON EARTH AND THE HEAD OF YOUR CHURCH. So for you blaspheming heretic to speak of humility when you ooze pride and blasphemy is beyond the pale. CHRIST WILLS THAT WE BE HOT OR COLD FOR THE LUKEWARM HE WILL SPIT OUT, AND ZEAL IS NOT PRIDE BUT CONFESSION OF CHRIST!
THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD ALWAYS EVERYWHERE BY ALL. THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH HOLDS TO THAT FAITH.THEPAPAL SECT HAS ADDED HERETICAL INNOVATIONS,CCLESIOLOGICAL BLASPHEMIES WHICH ARE IN DRAMATIC DIVERGENCE FROM THAT FAITH. THUS IT CANNOT BE CATHOLIC.HERE CAN BE NO TALK OF PRIMACY OR EVEN COMMON PRAYER UNTIL YOU REPENT AND RETURN TO THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH.BY THE DEFINITION OF ST VINCENT OF LERINS THE PAPACY IS NEITHER CATHOLIC NOR ORTHODOX AND THE FAITH IT HOLDS IS APOSTATE.
Your sect begins in 1054 when you leave OUR CHURCH for papal despotism,heresies,blasphemies and even evolve entire theological and ecclesiological systems at variance with the Orthodox Catholic Church. WE HAVE PRESERVED THAT.YOU HAVE ADULTERATED IT.By St. Vincent of Lerins definition WE ARE THE TRUE CATHOLICS:OUR FAITH IS ORTHODOX whereas you ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH AND DO NOT HOLD THE CATHOLIC FAITH.When the pope becomes Orthodoxthen primacy which MEANS PRESIDENCY IN COLLEGIALITY can occur.
A catholic sect? just shows your ignorance of history.careful, an orthodox might read your words and give you a scathing rebuttal. il leave that to them. the orthodox still have the same doctrines, same rites as they had before the great schism which makes their liturgy and baptism valid. unlike your kind who threw away everything and substituted your own caprice that has no basis in scripture, history or tradition. study more. make yourself worthy of our precious time and effort.
@assasincomedy NO ITS NOT UNCHARITABLE TO CALL AN IGNORANT MAN IGNORANT, AND TO CALL EVIL AS EVIL. This idiot is spreading lies about Our Lord and His Church and you want me to have kind words for him/her. Better admonish St. Peter and St. Paul too, he has even stronger words for the Church's enemies.
@drupes Well, now some Protestants actually have a variant of this Tridentine Rite like the High Church Lutherans and those Anglicans who use the "Missal." While the Book of Common Prayer, because it has retained much of the Ritual of the traditional English is actually more liturgically rich than most Novus Ordo and many "Traditional Rite" practices.
@jasonbently2002 "the Ritual of the traditional English is actually more liturgically rich than most Novus Ordo and many "Traditional Rite" practices." Maybe, but if they are still living apart from the Catholic Church, their worship is WORTHLESS. Plus the Anglicans (and I can say all of the protestant sects) have lost the Apostolic succession because they changed the ritual of ordiantion significantly, thats why Anglican clerics have to be reordained if they convert to the Catholic Church.
@drupes WELL THE papal church and its ritual exists today OUTSIDE OF THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH so matters of ritual are equivalent when considering the Anglicans or other Protestants. THE WEST IS OUT OF COMMUNION WITH THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH and its rituals are nothing but empty forms outside of it.
@jasonbently2002 St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, Martyr: " [to] the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that wills all things which are according to the love of Jesus Christ our God, which also presides in the place of the region of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of obtaining her every desire, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love..."
@jasonbently2002 St. John Chrysostom: "He says to him, "Feed My Sheep." Why does He pass over the others and speak about these to him? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the head of the choir; for this reason Paul went up to see him rather than the other ... He entrusts him with the PRIMACY of the brethren...(and) says: "If you love Me, rule the brethren." ... I would reply that He appointed Peter a teacher not of the chair, but of the world..."
@jasonbently2002 "Compelled thereto by the canons and by the letter of our most holy father and fellow-servant Celestine, the Roman bishop, we have come, with many tears, to this sorrowful sentence against him, namely, that our Lord Jesus Christ, Whom he has blasphemed, decrees by the holy Synod that Nestorius be excluded from the episcopal dignity, and from all priestly communion..." Decree against Nestorius, Council of Ephesus, 431 A.D.
@jasonbently2002 "The great and holy and universal Synod...in the metropolis of Chalcedon...to the most holy and blessed archbishop of Rome, Leo ... being set as the mouthpiece unto all of the blessed Peter, and imparting the blessedness of his Faith unto all ...and besides all this he [Dioscorus] stretched forth his fury even against him who had been charged with the custody of the vine by the Savior, we mean of course your holiness ..." Council of Chalcedon, 451 A.D.
@jasonbently2002 I could go on and on, but these I have just quoted lambasts the idea of the Pope being at least "primus inter pares" as the post schismatic eastern church claims and demands in order to return to full communion with Rome once more (aside from others). The Pope was acclaimed from the very beginning as having primacy over the Church by the bishops of east and west, the Fathers of the Church and the Ecumenical Councils. So, WHO left the true fold?
@drupes You could go on and on and shown to be wrong, FOR OVER A THOUSAND YEARS the CHURCH affirmed THE EQUALITY OF BISHOPS AND NEVER SAW THE PAPACY AS HAVING SOME SORT OF SUPREMACY. WHILE THE SUREST WAY TO SHOW YOUR PAPAL CULT IS OUTSIDE OF THE TRUE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH, A BLASPHEMOUS SECT IS THAT IT DOES NOT HOLD THE FAITH, DOCTRINE AND DISCIPLINE OF THAT CHURCH, WHICH WE HAVE PRESERVED, BUT HAS ADULTERATED WITH HERESIES AND BLASPHEMIES! REPENT, LEAVE YOUR HERESY AND ENTER CHRIST's CHURCH!
@jasonbently2002 Well, wheres those thousand years' worth of evidence? I gave mine, cite yours to the contrary. That's how you discern truth. It's that simple. But the words of Saint John Chrysostom who was himself Patriarch of Constantinople "He entrusts him with the PRIMACY of the brethren." and the deference that the Church Councils gave the Bishop of Rome, as shown by those decrees I have quoted, is quite hard to ignore. Go ahead and prove me wrong, may this be a very fruitful discussion :-)
@drupes The very word "primacy" IMPLIES COLLEGIALITY AND NOT MONARCHY, but you don't seem to get that. I have torn apart those decontextualized "proof texts" on other threads by simply showing 1). THAT THE CHURCH WAS CONCILIAR AND THAT THE POPE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THERE WERE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS CALLED BY THE EMPEROR, WAS NOT THE ARBITER OR HEAD OF THE CHURCH & 2). THEY PRESUPPOSE AN ORTHODOX PAPACY TO MAKE THAT PRIMACY OPERATIVE.
@jasonbently2002 At least you could have told me what those "deconstructions" are, instead of just conclusions. Its free here on Youtube, you know. How can I refute your claims when I don't even know where you based them?
@drupes The very word "primacy" IMPLIES COLLEGIALITY AND NOT MONARCHY, but you don't seem to get that. I have torn apart those decontextualized "proof texts" on other threads by simply showing 1). THAT THE CHURCH WAS CONCILIAR AND THAT THE POPE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THERE WERE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS CALLED BY THE EMPEROR, WAS NOT THE ARBITER OR HEAD OF THE CHURCH & 2). THEY PRESUPPOSE AN ORTHODOX PAPACY TO MAKE THAT PRIMACY OPERATIVE.
@drupes Since you heretics do not hold to the Orthodox Catholic Faith held AT ALL TIME in ALL PLACES by ALL,but have adulterated the Faith,introduced BLASPHEMIES AND SOUL DESTROYING HERESIES to the point where your entire theological system is now predicated on aristotlean philosophy supported by nothing more than papal obscurantism.There is no concept of the MIND OF CHRIST in your cult, aside from a warped view of magisterium.The very fact you believe grace is a creature means you deny CHRIST.
@jasonbently2002 You can only come to those conclusions when these concepts are discussed. I cannot take you at your word that you are correct and I am wrong, of course you have to show me WHY.
Your sect begins in 1054 when you leave OUR CHURCH for papal despotism,heresies,blasphemies and even evolve entire theological and ecclesiological systems at variance with the Orthodox Catholic ChurchWE HAVE PRESERVED THAT.YOU HAVE ADULTERATED ITBy St. Vincent of Lerins definition WE ARE THE TRUE CATHOLICS:OUR FAITH IS ORTHODOX whereas you ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH AND DO NOT HOLD THE CATHOLIC FAITH.When the pope becomes Orthodoxthen primacy which MEANS PRESIDENCY IN COLLEGIALITY can occur
Once you can reconcile your blasphemous papal heresy with the dictum of St. Vincent of Lerins THAT THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD EVERYWHERE AT ALL TIMES BY ALL which we Orthodox Catholics PRESERVE to this day then you can talk about "primacy" and proof texts EMANATING FROM CONCILIAR DECISIONS AND FATHERS WHO LIVED IN A REALITY WHERE COUNCILS, NOT POPES. SPOKE THE TRUTH IN THE HOLY SPIRIT which you decontextualize like a Protestant vandalizing Scripture The Lerentian Canon excludes you
Once you can reconcile your blasphemous papal heresy with the dictum of St. Vincent of Lerins THAT THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD EVERYWHERE AT ALL TIMES BY ALL which we Orthodox Catholics PRESERVE to this day then you can talk about "primacy" and proof texts EMANATING FROM CONCILIAR DECISIONS AND FATHERS WHO LIVED IN A REALITY WHERE COUNCILS, NOT POPES. SPOKE THE TRUTH IN THE HOLY SPIRIT which you decontextualize like a Protestant vandalizing Scripture. The Lerentian Canon excludes you.
@jasonbently2002 Like I said, cite those "deconstructions" that you were talking about. Or at least give me the URL of those forums where you blasted the arguments for Papal Primacy. Be specific. You have not shown that the decrees of the Ecumenical Councils and statements of Church Fathers were spoken in the "context" of collegiality, you merely said it was. What are the Papal "despotism, blasphemies, and heresies"? Don't say, PROVE.
@drupes FIRSTLY, YOU IGNORAMUS, THE DECREES OF THE HOLY ECUMENICAL ARE PREFACED WITH "IT SEEMED GOOD TO US AND THE HOLY SPIRIT." SECONDLY, PRIMACY MEANS BEING FIRST AMONG A GROUP OF OTHERS.THAT's THE MEANING OF THE WORD.THIRDLY I SIMPLY WENT AFTER YOUR IGNORANT LINE OF ARGUMENTATION, SHOWED HOW EVEN DECONTEXTUALIZATIONS HAVEN't THE SLIGHTEST FORCE BECAUSE THE ARGUMENT YOU PRESENT IS NON SEQUITER.YOU ARGUE PATRISTICS IDEAS ON PRIMACY AND SAY THAT IS HERETICAL PAPAL MONARCHY.IT DOES NOT FOLLOW...
@jasonbently2002 "FIRSTLY, YOU IGNORAMUS" Ah name calling! How "Orthodox"! The "Holy Canons" teach you that? And what's with the all caps? Cool down, you won't convert anyone by "shouting" at them. In any case you FAILED to present evidence to the contrary. What I am looking for is a statement from the Church Fathers that the honors given to the Pope was merely, shall we say for the lack of a better word, "ceremonial" , like the precedence given the Patriarch of Constantinople.
@drupes IF had the authority you are deluded into believing, THE EMPEROR WOULDN'T HAVE CALLED THE COUNCILS, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN NECESSARY.THE POPE SIMPLY WOULD HAVE ENFORCED HIS RULE.No, in the early Church, the Chair of St. Peter was appealed to not because it could compel, but because it was viewed with a reverence and had an authority of MORAL SUASION,which DID NOT in any way impede heresies AS THE CALLING OF THE COUNCILS, WHICH SPOKE IN THE HOLY SPIRIT, RESOLVED THE DISPUTES, not popes.
@jasonbently2002 And if the Bishop of Rome was merely "first among equals" why did St. Irenaeus claim that "it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority [propter potentiorem principalitatem - pre-eminence or superiority for the sake of one more mighty (Christ)]" That is Primacy PROPERLY DEFINED. Not the PERSONAL (and post-schism) interpretation you just gave.
@drupes St. Irenaeus was BISHOP OF LYONS IN GAUL WHICH WAS SUBJECT TO ROME, a second century Father. "THIS CHURCH" he is referring to is THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, not the papacy nor a papal throne nor is he saying anyone is compelled to follow its dictates, but ONLY TO RESPECT THE AUTHORITY OF ROME AS FIRST AMONG EQUALS. If Rome had the authority you claim, HE WOULD HAVE WRITTEN "MUST" AND NOT "SHOULD." THAT IMPLIES INFLUENCE NOT COMPULSION. IN other words, THE PATRISTIC ORTHODOX IDEA OF PRIMACY.
@jasonbently2002 Since you mentioned the Holy Councils, let me repeat the decree of the Council of Ephesus against Nestorius: ""COMPELLED thereto by the canons AND by the letter of our most holy father and fellow-servant Celestine, the Roman bishop..." Compulsion or command CANNOT come from one who is merely "first among equals" Tell me, does the Patriarch of Constantinople (who is now "first" of the schismatic Patriarchs) have that authority?
@drupes A pope did preside at Ephesus, yes, THE POPE OF ALEXANDRIA, St. Cyril, AND THE CONCILIAR DECISIONS ARE WHAT COMPELLED, not the pope, CONCILIAR DECISIONS WHICH WERE BINDING UPON ROME. EPHESUS AFFIRMS A COLLEGIAL STRUCTURE TO THE CHURCH WHERE ROME-ALEXANDRIA-ANTIOCH AND JERUSALEM AND CONSTANTINOPLE ARE DECLARED A PENTARCHY. REALLY, READ THOSE CANONS HERETIC AND DON'T CUT AND PASTE. LASTLY, YOU HERETIC, PRIMACY IS ESTABLISHED IN RIGHT CONFESSION OF FAITH, ORTHODOXY AND ROME IS IN HERESY.
Catholics claim that the present day bishops and priests in the Catholic Church are successors to the apostles, being inheritors of their power and authority. This cannot be true. The Catholic bishops and priests were not promised the power from on high nor commanded to wait in Jerusalem to receive it (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4,8). They have no authority because they are not inspired of the Holy Spirit nor are they eyewitnesses of Jesus (John 20:22-23; Acts 1:8, 21-26)...
@kiwichristian2009 ... They cannot prove their authority by speaking in tongues, prophesying and working miracles (2 Cor. 12:12). They are not the chosen ambassadors who were selected to deliver God's message or "the faith" to mankind (Eph. 3:3-4; Jude 3). Moreover, they cannot be successors to the apostles and prophets because the only infallible succession to them are the inspired writings (2 Pet. 1:15; 3:1; 2 Tim. 3:14-17).
@kiwichristian2009 Rubbish talking, the verse you gave is strongly confirming that Christ have established His church upon Peter and the Apostles, and the day of Pentecost is the day where Church born physically on Earth. How did you make those verse against Catholic Church?
Then, if you said that they're not inspired by the Holy Spirit, how could you believe the Bible, Scriptures that established and canonized by Catholic Church? Amusing....
Peter understood with all humility the implications of being only a man. But popes, being only men like Peter, allow multitudes to bow their knees before them, kiss their feet, and reverence them—thereby receiving worship that does not rightfully belong to them. What a tremendous difference between Peter and his supposed successors!
@kiwichristian2009 Peter, as all the Popes are human and truly human, but they're not just as ordinary human like us, laymen. They're Vicar of Christ, and Christ has given this authority to Peter until He comes for the second time, in a judgment day. (Mt 15.17; Lk 10.16; Mk 16.16; Jn 3.18; Lk 11.23; Ti 3.11).
How could you claim if you did obey Christ, but you didn't obey the visible Vicar of Christ? how could you claim if you have a desire for Heaven Kingdom, but you reject the visible Church?
@alprasetya Catholics claim that the present day bishops and priests in the Catholic Church are successors to the apostles, being inheritors of their power and authority. This cannot be true. The Catholic bishops and priests were not promised the power from on high nor commanded to wait in Jerusalem to receive it (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4,8). They have no authority because they are not inspired of the Holy Spirit nor are they eyewitnesses of Jesus (John 20:22-23; Acts 1:8, 21-26).
@kiwichristian2009 Then the promise that Jesus said, "The gates of Hades shall not prevail" (Mat 16:18-19) is just a lie, made a lie by Protestant.....
And the fact is, from the year 55 until circa 1500, Pope, and Bishops from East and West are considered as the legitimate successor. Will you say that the Church from the beginning have made a fault? and the Protestant movement in which arose 1500 years after the ascension of Christ truly inspired by the Holy Ghost?
@alprasetya This is where we differ. You think that Jesus established the catholic church, i say it was your first pope, emperor constantine who declared himself pontius maximus, the title STILL used to this day.
@ixtoc999 Sorry, my friend, i only speak english. But yes, as luther fell into apostasy like the church he left, there is a good chance he may be in hell. But then again, hang on, according to you guys, he could just be in "purgatory".
@alprasetya ...They cannot prove their authority by speaking in tongues, prophesying and working miracles (2 Cor. 12:12). They are not the chosen ambassadors who were selected to deliver God's message or "the faith" to mankind (Eph. 3:3-4; Jude 3). Moreover, they cannot be successors to the apostles and prophets because the only infallible succession to them are the inspired writings (2 Pet. 1:15; 3:1; 2 Tim. 3:14-17).
@kiwichristian2009 Then, how will you explained the fact that in the time of Christian persecutions, the successor of Peter is the most wanted person by the Emperor of Rome? have you read the biography of Linus, Anacletus, etc?
@kiwichristian2009 I agree my friend, but which Word of God? the Word that denies His Church? the Word which denies the authority of Pope? the Word which legitimate the Protestant's movement?
"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unan Snactam, 1302). INFALLIBLE PAPAL STATEMENT. But, God says otherwise. In Acts4:12 He says "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”. Either the pope is a liar, or God is. I know where my money is!
@kiwichristian2009 Yes, I also know where your money is, your money is in your "pastors" deep pockets, your money were used for their life, wealthiness, and to promote further their false teaching. You are the one of their "money fountain".
@alprasetya My pastor is poor. lives in a run-down in-need-of-repair house. He has spread the Word of God in different countries including islamic ones. You know nothing. How rich is the vatican? How much gold? The catholic church spends HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars trying to buy forgiveness from victims of CHILD RAPE by its own priests, so dont you DARE play that card with me.
@kiwichristian2009 Funny, and you judge the gift from the Christian for ages as the legitimacy for the poorness of your Pastor? member of Theology of Poverty? another heretic again?
@kiwichristian2009 - "My pastor is poor. lives in a run-down in-need-of-repair house." - Taking pride in our humilty, are we? Perhaps, that's a little too ostentatious and hypocritical? Maybe, that whole comment should be reviewed to discover it was in very poor taste?
Having been raised Catholic, I can attest to the big difference between the Mass and the typical protestant service. The Mass is a thing of majestic beauty, sacredness and solemnity.
@alprasetya YOu may as well say "Yes I know that human traditions that contradict the Bible are condemned in Mark 7:7-9, but all the doctrines that contradict the Bible which the Pope through up were revealed to him directly by Christ and therefore, although they contradict the Bible, they are divinely approved by Christ himself."
@kiwichristian2009 You even don't understand the Tradition and tradition. You have spoke so much word, it's already reflects the truth of the Church teachings, the protestant is the work of the reprobate, know nothing about the true teaching of Christ, and gave birth to so many Satan's denomination.
@alprasetya "I have figuratively applied to myself... so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other."1 Cor4:6.Three times Jesus was tempted by the Devil and each time Jesus replied exactly the same three dangerous words that defeated the Devil: "IT IS WRITTEN" Read it for yourself! If any one could have used oral tradition, it was Jesus, yet he chose the only safe and sure way to defeat Satan: Scripture.
@kiwichristian2009 Yes! Sola scripture works so remarkably well that there are thousands upon thousands of Protestant tradition churches who all believe something different and break away to start their own "church of Christ". The whole situation is so wholey pathetic now, with the number of new independaent Protestant churches multiplying exponentially with every calendar year that passes.
@kiwichristian2009 Then, when did the Scripture written? and when did the first community of Christian born? what Scripture did they use? Holy Bible like nowadays?
@dubaipogi When Christ said to eat His body and drink His blood He was speaking figuratively, not literally. The Book of John also says "unless a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." Does this mean we need to be pushed out of our mother's womb again? Of course not. That would be impossible. Christ offered His body and blood on the cross for us. He wants us to accept His body and blood sacrifice for the atonement of our sins.
@Pacisdiligo The mass is a re-sacrificing of Christ. "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner," (CCC, 1367). What does the Catechism mean here?
Heb.7:27 Who needeth NOT daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did ONCE, when he offered up himself.
@kiwichristian2009 Eucharist is NOT a re-sacrificing of Christ, but THE SAME ONE TRUE SACRIFICE as Christ did. When He said ;
19And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me." 20In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.
Is the institution of the New Testament for all humanity. It is NOT the final as you said.
@alprasetya In John chapter 6 Christ is speaking about eating His flesh. Then He goes on to explain what He meant....."63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." He is clearly speaking figuratively when he says to 'eat His body and drink His blood'. In JN 6:63 He even told us the words are SPIRITUAL! Jesus SAID the words are SPIRITUAL the FLESH profits NOTHING!
@kiwichristian2009 If that was a spiritual flesh, why did Paul said to Corinthian in 1 Cor 10:16-17 as truly a flesh and blood? not the other figurative terms?
In fact, from the first time til' now, the Christian believe in a true Flesh and Blood of Christ in Eucharist, and preserved by the Catholic Church and Orthodox Churches.
Both of them actually condemned Protestanism heresy.
@alprasetya Bread and wine are offered, being the FIGURE of the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. They who participate in this visible bread eat, SPIRITUALLY, the flesh of the Lord. (Macarius, Homily xxvii.) Macarius of Egypt (ca. 300-391).Ratranmus wrote: "The bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ in a FIGURATIVE sense" (De corpore et sanguine Christi).
@alprasetya As far as the New Testament is concerned, Jesus didn't pluck part of His flesh out to be eaten by His disciples at the Last Supper, which should be the primary example of celebrating the Lord's Supper afterwards.Where does the Bible say that the bread actually turns into Christ's flesh? The Last Supper was also symbolic, the Lord's supper is symbolic. Jesus Christ's sacrifice on the cross was the one true real thing. Jesus said "IT IS FINISHED" meaning it does not need to be repeated
@alprasetya Obviously Jesus words, "this is my body" should be taken symbolically because it falls within a long list of symbolic statements Christ said: "I am the bread," (John 6:41), "I am the vine," (John 15:5), "I am the door," (John 10:7,9), "I am the good shepherd,"(John 10:11,12), "You are the world the salt, (Matthew 5:13), "You are the light of the world. (Matthew 5:14)
@Pacisdiligo As far as the New Testament is concerned, Jesus didn't pluck part of His flesh out to be eaten by His disciples at the Last Supper, which should be the primary example of celebrating the Lord's Supper afterwards. Where does the Bible say that the bread actually turns into Christ's flesh? The Last Supper was also symbolic, the Lord's supper is symbolic. Jesus Christ's sacrifice on the cross was the one true real thing.
@Pacisdiligo Is that all you can come up with? Acts4:12 "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
@kiwichristian2009 False doctrines according to whose criteria? The Coptics? The Orthodox? The Mennonites? The Lutherans? The Baptists? The Presbyterians? The Nazarenes? The Assembly of God? The Seventh Day Adventists? Pentecostal Church of God? Good luck with that one.
@Pacisdiligo According to the Word of God itself, which contains CLEAR "do's and don'ts" that catholics love to ignore. eg: Exodus 20:4,5 couldn't be any clearer that even BOWING down to a statue is idolatry. Yet, Catholics foolishly claim that they are not worshipping the statues they are bowing down to. BUT, God forbids us from even bowing to statues. In fact, the Bible is so clear on this matter that the Vatican has even REMOVED the second of the Ten Commandments to deceive you.
@kiwichristian2009 But of course! "According to the Word of God itself". It's just so "CLEAR"! Words that continue to echo down the corridors of history. Oh, the irony.
@kiwichristian2009 But the early Church until before Re(de)formation begun still recognize the transsubtantiation, and the Protestant also condemned by the Orthodox Church. We also knew that Orthodox Church, based on their claim, preserves the teaching and Tradition through the Apostles until now.
Have you ever celebrated the "novus" Ordo missae in latin, with the priest's back to the people? It's all allowed. I don't feel any extreme unfaithful difference then...(although I know there are a lot, e.g. introibo, last evangelium etc etc)
Remeber the tridentine mass exists since the tridentine council, and there were many different rites in europe before.
Have you ever celebrated the "novus" Ordo missae in latin, with the priest's back to the people? It's all allowed. I don't feel any extreme unfaithful difference then...(although I know there are a lot, e.g. introibo, last evangelium etc etc)
Remeber the tridentine mass exists since the tridentine council, and there were many different rites in europe before.
Please Holy God, purge and lceanse your Church of the corruption and heretics. Return the Church to its former glory by the power of Your Spirit, so that You may be glorified in it. Then all heretics, heathens, pagans, aetheists and apostates will see the purity of You Way, and come to You. Then they shall put aside their false ways, then we shall have peace.
Summorum Pontificum is the first step to return to the true Catholic Tradition , in the next step Pope Benedict XVI banished Novus Ordo in 2012 and since that year Tridentine mass will be the one and only Catholic mass without that protestant Novus Ordo crap!
Wishful thinking! However you can join any of the break away Latinist groups. You Trads are amazing...all about Tradition, pomp and circumstance ...just like the Pharisees.
All about external rituals maybe you should focus more on being more Christian and less ceremonial.
Its never suprising to hear the Novus Ordo crowd get ugly when their precious banality is attacked. Yes you get to keep all the ugliness you like. Its a shame that with all your supposed charity you have so little for those who have remained faithful to the rite of their fathers.
Again keep your smells and bells, pomp, circumstance and Latin mumblings. But don't force that on the others. So much ceremony and NO Christianity. And your hatred of Jews and Protestants is most Unchristian.
By t he way do you practice and glorify self scourging too? or crawling up a rocky hill to a shrine on your knees ?
let us pray for our Holy Mother the Church, for the Holy father and the Clergy that they may always be strong and be guided by the Holy Spirit. be protected from the attack of the enemy.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
exe, you talking nonsense, the "Church", is the body of Bible believing Christians.
There is NO 30,000 denominations, this is all roman/ papal lies. Where does the word "PONTIFF" originate?...eh?...what was the Babylonian Priests called?
...PONTIFFS !!!.....go on worshipping your statues, and false wafer god, or....read REV 17....and come out of the whore!
Tsk tsk tsk, what an uneducated reply... pls DON'T call yourself a Christian, you are so filled with anger and hatred, where is the Love? I guess it's not found in your church.
@Frappacinomj85 St.Paul also gave anathema to all who oppose the teachings of Christ that given to them. The Church gave the ANATHEMA because of her concern for the salvation of the Christian souls to not profess heretic. That's the caring mother Church. Unlike Protestant who were the priest and the pope for themselves and gave birth so many denomination, and cursing one another, like the child of the devil crying for more human souls for their prey.
@alprasetya I just read the passage. What better example of someone who needs to be anathema'd than the roman catholic church who has perverted, twisted and preached a different gospel than the one Jesus Christ taught. This passage clearly condemns the catholic church.
ANATHEMA SIT !! the true Satan works within the church is the heresy, and one of the greatest work is protestantism. The modernism and liberalism was once cursed by Pius X, and those were originated from protestantism. May God has mercy towards you and all protestant, may He still remember you in The Judgement Day, the everlasting torments awaits.
@kiwichristian2009 The meaning of the "smoke of Satan" is somewhat liberalism and modernism has entered in so many ways in this Holy Church, by so many theologians taught a false teachings.
Modernism and Liberalism are the fruit from Protestant. This is what the meaning of the Pope does say.
And....why did there are so many denominations in Protestant and there are a lot of contradiction from one another denoms? Does it worse before Luther did his deed? does it against John 17?
@alprasetya Community of the Lady of All Nations, the Palmarian Catholic Church, the Philippine Independent Church, the Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church, the Free Catholic Church, the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God, Sodalitium Christianae Vitae, Byzantine Catholics,White Robed Benedictine Network of Catholics,Polish National Catholics, etc.
@kiwichristian2009 Community of the Lady of All Nations, the Palmarian Catholic Church, the Philippine Independent Church, the Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church, the Free Catholic Church, the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God, White Robed Benedictine Network of Catholics, are SCHISMATIC and not considered as Catholic Church.
Do you know the exact definition of Catholic Church itself? I think you have to learn more before accusing with such statements.
@alprasetya catholic means "universal". What i am saying is just as YOU say that these sects are NOT part of the catholic "church", I also say that other denominations which you call "protestant" are NOT Christian "sects". You see?
@kiwichristian2009 Byzantine Catholics, even Syro-Maronite, Coptic Church, and other Eastern Orthodox Church are in full communion with Rome, they're Catholic. They still preserved the Eucharist, and Apostolic Succession, and in a communion with the See of Peter.
Catholic Church is not the same with Latin Church. You have to search and learn well again the history of Christianity in an objective view, not by such false accusations from the False Prophet of Protestants.
@alprasetya I do research, my friend. The Bible, the ccc and catholic "church" history and historical history all provide good evidence against the claim that the catholic "church" is Christian. Who is "False Prophet of Protestants" ?
@alprasetya My friend, i agree with Gal1:8, which describes exactly the catholic gospel which is totally different to the one preached by Christ. There are so many verses in scripture that contradict RCC theology Rom 4:5 utterly condemns the System of salvation by masses penance priests etc, bible teaches that salvation is gift of God not of works & this gift is freely given by God to those who trust in the merits of Christ's finished work on Calvary.
@kiwichristian2009 Then we both agree that system of salvation comes from Christ himself, not from priest. BUT Christ gave His mandate through His Apostles and His Priests as Persona Christi. That's the reason why the Sacrament of Orders is so important and no rupture from the Apostles until nowadays. This is what we called "hermeneutic of continuity", seen on "Apostolic succession".
@alprasetya Rubbish. There is no need or provision for a modern sacrificial priesthood. Even peter never called himself a priest or pope. Heb.7:27 Who needeth NOT daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did ONCE, when he offered up himself.
@kiwichristian2009 Another rubbish comment....then, could you explain, why did after Peter's death, and the other Apostles death, the early Christian looking for their successor whom has legitimate authority? Why did the early Church Fathers looking for the advice and decision from The Successor of Peter when they encountering problems and conflicts within their Particular Church's territory?
Those are the evidence of early Papacy in early Christian. Now you did reject it.....
@alprasetya The Roman Catholic Church claims that Peter is the rock that the church is built on. They say that Peter is the first Pope who stands in the place of Christ. This position is known as the Vicar of Christ. This is the lineage through which the present Pope receives his authority. Today, the Pope is still the rock that the Roman Catholic Church is built on. The Roman Catholic Church declares. “...
@alprasetya ...that it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff [Pope].” (Pope Boniface VIII, 1302 AD in an ex cathedra in his Bull Unum Sanctum). Pope Pius IX said about himself, “I am the way, the truth, and the life”. By the office of the Pope, the Roman Catholic Church denies Jesus his rightful place as the foundation of the true church.
@kiwichristian2009 Oww...thank you for the Papal Bull and the statements from the Vicar of Christ, I've made the translation to my local language, those are my favourite documents.
Have you read the whole documents? or just the final statement? read it in a whole, then you will find the meaning those statements. And yes, it is truly amenable that "every human creatures salvation is the subject of Roman Pontiff", that statement is the faith of Christian, before Luther was born.
@alprasetya Catholics claim that the present day bishops and priests in the Catholic Church are successors to the apostles, being inheritors of their power and authority. This cannot be true. The Catholic bishops and priests were not promised the power from on high nor commanded to wait in Jerusalem to receive it (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4,8). They have no authority because they are not inspired of the Holy Spirit nor are they eyewitnesses of Jesus (John 20:22-23; Acts 1:8, 21-26)...
@kiwichristian2009 So, did your protestant priest are inspired by the Holy Spirit and the eyewitness of Jesus? but the protestant have so many sects and contradict each other, they are against Jesus's command in John 17 for the unity of Christian.....
Will God contradict Himself???
Again, those verse you gave still not contradict the Catholic teaching.
@alprasetya ... They cannot prove their authority by speaking in tongues, prophesying and working miracles (2 Cor. 12:12). They are not the chosen ambassadors who were selected to deliver God's message or "the faith" to mankind (Eph. 3:3-4; Jude 3). Moreover, they cannot be successors to the apostles and prophets because the only infallible succession to them are the inspired writings (2 Pet. 1:15; 3:1; 2 Tim. 3:14-17).. PS: sorry for the many comments.
@alprasetya God says Christ died ONCE, yet He is continually sacrificed in the mass. God says Christ took ALL our sins on the cross, the rcc say NO, He didn't. God says there is only ONE mediator, the rcc says NO, there are others. Christ taught us how to pray, the rcc says NO, pray to others. The rcc calls the pope and priests god on earth and "another Christ". rcc teaches salvation by works, God teaches otherwise. You see, different gospel, my friend.
@kiwichristian2009 I understand why you and other Protestant friends were difficult to understand. With those mindset of "Scipture Only" will never understand the mystery of Eucharist. Not a different gospel my friend, but DIFFERENT FAITH. Our Faith is truly come from Christ and the Apostles and His Prophet from Old Testament. But your faith come from a heretic priest in 16th century. That's why we're so different.
@alprasetya My faith is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles of the first century, as found in the Bible. Roman Catholicism did not exist as such until the third or fourth centuries. The Protestant reformation was a return to biblically sound doctrine.
@kiwichristian2009 HUH...Amusing....so amusing statements....from which source did you gave such statements???
[[[Roman Catholicism did not exist as such until the third or fourth centuries]]]]
So, could you explain the existence of Popes? Bishops? also Eucharist?? they're drawn obviously clear in Catacombs....that's a strong evidence that what they did is the same with Catholic Church nowadays....
Protestant is not a reformation, but rather deformation. Why did so much rupture exists??
@kiwichristian2009 Protestant is the subject matter of Protestanism. And the protestanism is already defined and understood in so many historic literature. If I have to describe, I think this is not a suitable place to define 34000 denominations of rupture here.
@alprasetya then don't call me something if you then refuse to define that term. I have heard a number of different descriptions of the word "protestant", the most common among catholics is a follower of martin luther, which is odd, because i know next to nothing about the man!
@kiwichristian2009 Then in what term I have to define you? some of my Protestant friends having a proud by those term. They define themselves as Christian-Protestant, and the Protestant Churches here also states "Protestant" in their church building. Why did you refuse such a term? if you have a justification for that term, then it's another matter. If you considered it as the truth ones, then it's another matter. No matter if I define it or not.
@kiwichristian2009 Most Catholic define "Protestant" as the followers of Marthin Luther, somehow, I agree with you that it is odd and FALSE! because the Protestant Fathers is not only Marthin Luther, there are also John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, and so on. But it still true that because of them, nowadays, being a Protestant doesn't belong only toward their Fathers, but toward their own 'priest' and 'themselves as individual priest'. It's true that you have no priest, you are priest for yourselves.
@alprasetya That's what gets me a little mad. People saying that i follow so-and-so or a particular line of "interpretation". I dont study "church fathers". My faith is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles of the first century, as found in the Bible. Roman Catholicism did not exist as such until the third or fourth centuries.
@kiwichristian2009 From which Jesus did you base your faith? Jesus who denies His Flesh and Blood? Jesus who didn't build His Church for salvation? Jesus who taught "Once Saved always be Saved"? When the Bible were not written, from which Scripture did the early Christian learned their faith??
Then you ignorantly saith only trust the Bible alone, ignoring the Church's authority who did canonize the Bible you hold now??
We Adore You oh Christ and Praise You. Amen!
cyberwi09 4 months ago
A comfort for us Catholics of the True Church, watch these videos
mcpetropolis 6 months ago
".. edificaré mi Iglesia, y las puertas del infierno no prevalecerán sobre ella"... "Yo estoy todos los días con ustedes, hasta el fin de los tiempos"... "El que a vosotros escucha, a Mi me escucha; el que a vosotros desprecia (desoye), a mi me desoye"... "Reciban el Espíritu Santo: a quienes perdonen los pecados, les quedan perdonados; a quienes se los retengan, les quedan retenidos".
jcastrodelabarra 6 months ago
THE FACT THE COUNCILS WERE CONCILIAR AND CALLED BY THE EMPEROR, WHERE SOME POPES WERE NOT EVEN PRESENT, ATTESTS TO THE FACT THAT THE APOSTOLIC AND EVEN SCRIPTURAL ECCLESIOLOGY OF THE CHURCH WAS CONCILIAR AND NOT SOME RIDICULOUSLY EVIL PAPAL MONARCHY. POPE's WERE BOUND BY THE DECISIONS OF THE COUNCILS AND COULD BE CONDEMNED BY THEM. ENOUGH, YOU ARE STUPID AND POINTLESS TO EVEN BOTHER WITH.THERE IS NO PRIMACY IN ANY SENSE WHEN THE POPE IS THE HERETIC AND HIS CHURCH HAS FALLEN AWAY. GOT IT STUPID?!
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 You just repeated what you wrote a few days ago. What's wrong with copy pasting? Makes the quote accurate if you ask me. You're losing your cool and your control, poor kid. Now: 1. The emperor calling councils doesn't make the Church Conciliarist. Remember the Robber Council of Ephesus in 449? The emperor called it, but was annulled and condemned for its irregularities by Pope Leo I. HE excommunicated EVERYONE responsible for it. EVERYONE.
drupes 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 2: "WHERE SOME POPES WERE NOT EVEN PRESENT" If they could not attend, they sent LEGATES. And if they weren't there how could they personally preside over the sessions? And does it negate their authority if they don't? Even in post-schism councils the Pope does not preside. And as the history of the Ecumenical Councils show, the decisions of an Ecumenical Council may be AFFIRMED and PROMULGATED or ANNULLED (as was done by the Papal Legate at Ephesus II)
drupes 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 "YOU ARE STUPID AND POINTLESS TO EVEN BOTHER WITH." Then why fuss with me in the first place? The reply I made to you regarding protestant liturgies was meant for that protestant commenter on this page, not for your Church. As you can see I defended the Eastern Churches from calumny by that individual as I had high regard for it being, in the words of the late Pope, one of the two "lungs" of Christianity. You may not regard the Latins as such but that's not my problem.
drupes 7 months ago
FIRSTLY, YOU IGNORAMUS, THE DECREES OF THE HOLY ECUMENICAL ARE PREFACED WITH "IT SEEMED GOOD TO US AND THE HOLY SPIRIT." SECONDLY, PRIMACY MEANS BEING FIRST AMONG A GROUP OF OTHERS.THAT's THE MEANING OF THE WORD.THIRDLY I SIMPLY WENT AFTER YOUR IGNORANT LINE OF ARGUMENTATION, SHOWED HOW EVEN DECONTEXTUALIZATIONS HAVEN't THE SLIGHTEST FORCE BECAUSE THE ARGUMENT YOU PRESENT IS NON SEQUITER.YOU ARGUE PATRISTICS IDEAS ON PRIMACY AND SAY THAT IS HERETICAL PAPAL MONARCHY.IT DOES NOT FOLLOW...
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
Your sect begins in 1054 when you leave OUR CHURCH for papal despotism,heresies,blasphemies and even evolve entire theological and ecclesiological systems at variance with the Orthodox Catholic ChurchWE HAVE PRESERVED THAT.YOU HAVE ADULTERATED ITBy St. Vincent of Lerins definition WE ARE THE TRUE CATHOLICS:OUR FAITH IS ORTHODOX whereas you ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH AND DO NOT HOLD THE CATHOLIC FAITH.When the pope becomes Orthodoxthen primacy which MEANS PRESIDENCY IN COLLEGIALITY can occur
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
The very word "primacy" IMPLIES COLLEGIALITY NOT MONARCHY, but you don't seem to get that. I have torn apart those decontextualized "proof texts" on other threads by simply showing 1). THAT THE CHURCH WAS CONCILIAR AND THAT THE POPE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THERE WERE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS CALLED BY THE EMPEROR, WAS NOT THE ARBITER OR HEAD OF THE CHURCH & 2). THEY PRESUPPOSE AN ORTHODOX PAPACY TO MAKE THAT PRIMACY OPERATIVE.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD ALWAYS EVERYWHERE BY ALL. THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH HOLDS TO THAT FAITH.THEPAPAL SECT HAS ADDED HERETICAL INNOVATIONS,CCLESIOLOGICAL BLASPHEMIES WHICH ARE IN DRAMATIC DIVERGENCE FROM THAT FAITH. THUS IT CANNOT BE CATHOLIC.HERE CAN BE NO TALK OF PRIMACY OR COMMON PRAYER UNTIL YOU REPENT AND RETURN TO THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH.BY THE DEFINITION OF ST VINCENT OF LERINS THE PAPACY IS NEITHER CATHOLIC NOR ORTHODOX AND THE FAITH IT HOLDS IS APOSTATE.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Once you can reconcile your blasphemous papal heresy with the dictum of St. Vincent of Lerins THAT THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD EVERYWHERE AT ALL TIMES BY ALL which we Orthodox Catholics PRESERVE to this day then you can talk about "primacy" and proof texts EMANATING FROM CONCILIAR DECISIONS AND FATHERS WHO LIVED IN A REALITY WHERE COUNCILS, NOT POPES. SPOKE THE TRUTH IN THE HOLY SPIRIT
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
And another thing, you could probably visit my channel and see where I smacked one of your papist apologist down for the decontextulizations of the Fathers he made on an Orthodox thread. HE ran with tail between his legs. Again, even dealing with "proof texts." From the Book of Acts to St. Clement of Rome to St. Gregory the Great to papal statements AFTER Nicholas I to the Byzantine Emperor, it is easy to establish that the papacy ITSELF never held what you try to distort and deceive with.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 "see where I smacked one of your papist apologist...HE ran with tail between his legs." Learn HUMILITY from the Crucified One. I deal with some of the worse people here in Youtube to defend my faith. Do I afterward boast that I gave them a "smack" ? I can only TREMBLE with gratitude that He did not abandon me when I needed to witness for Him.
drupes 7 months ago
@drupes YOU BLASPHEME THE HOLY SPIRIT AND EQUATE WITH AN EMANATED DEMIGOD WITH YOUR FILIOQUE HERESY. YOU CRUCIFY CHRIST ANEW WITH YOUR IDEA OF CREATED GRACE. YOU BETRAY CHRIST LIKE JUDAS WHEN YOU SPEAK OF A POPE BEING HIS SOLE VICAR ON EARTH AND THE HEAD OF YOUR CHURCH. So for you blaspheming heretic to speak of humility when you ooze pride and blasphemy is beyond the pale. CHRIST WILLS THAT WE BE HOT OR COLD FOR THE LUKEWARM HE WILL SPIT OUT, AND ZEAL IS NOT PRIDE BUT CONFESSION OF CHRIST!
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD ALWAYS EVERYWHERE BY ALL. THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH HOLDS TO THAT FAITH.THEPAPAL SECT HAS ADDED HERETICAL INNOVATIONS,CCLESIOLOGICAL BLASPHEMIES WHICH ARE IN DRAMATIC DIVERGENCE FROM THAT FAITH. THUS IT CANNOT BE CATHOLIC.HERE CAN BE NO TALK OF PRIMACY OR EVEN COMMON PRAYER UNTIL YOU REPENT AND RETURN TO THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH.BY THE DEFINITION OF ST VINCENT OF LERINS THE PAPACY IS NEITHER CATHOLIC NOR ORTHODOX AND THE FAITH IT HOLDS IS APOSTATE.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
Your sect begins in 1054 when you leave OUR CHURCH for papal despotism,heresies,blasphemies and even evolve entire theological and ecclesiological systems at variance with the Orthodox Catholic Church. WE HAVE PRESERVED THAT.YOU HAVE ADULTERATED IT.By St. Vincent of Lerins definition WE ARE THE TRUE CATHOLICS:OUR FAITH IS ORTHODOX whereas you ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH AND DO NOT HOLD THE CATHOLIC FAITH.When the pope becomes Orthodoxthen primacy which MEANS PRESIDENCY IN COLLEGIALITY can occur.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
Sanctus Sanctus Sanctus
whisperinglindas 1 year ago
We adore You Oh Christ and praise You, because by Your Holy Cross You have redeemed this world.
cyberwi09 1 year ago
A catholic sect? just shows your ignorance of history.careful, an orthodox might read your words and give you a scathing rebuttal. il leave that to them. the orthodox still have the same doctrines, same rites as they had before the great schism which makes their liturgy and baptism valid. unlike your kind who threw away everything and substituted your own caprice that has no basis in scripture, history or tradition. study more. make yourself worthy of our precious time and effort.
drupes 1 year ago
@drupes What you are saying is true, but 'make yourself worthy of our precious time and effort.' Is certainly uncharitable and unchristian.
assasincomedy 1 year ago
@assasincomedy NO ITS NOT UNCHARITABLE TO CALL AN IGNORANT MAN IGNORANT, AND TO CALL EVIL AS EVIL. This idiot is spreading lies about Our Lord and His Church and you want me to have kind words for him/her. Better admonish St. Peter and St. Paul too, he has even stronger words for the Church's enemies.
drupes 1 year ago
@drupes Well, now some Protestants actually have a variant of this Tridentine Rite like the High Church Lutherans and those Anglicans who use the "Missal." While the Book of Common Prayer, because it has retained much of the Ritual of the traditional English is actually more liturgically rich than most Novus Ordo and many "Traditional Rite" practices.
jasonbently2002 11 months ago
@jasonbently2002 "the Ritual of the traditional English is actually more liturgically rich than most Novus Ordo and many "Traditional Rite" practices." Maybe, but if they are still living apart from the Catholic Church, their worship is WORTHLESS. Plus the Anglicans (and I can say all of the protestant sects) have lost the Apostolic succession because they changed the ritual of ordiantion significantly, thats why Anglican clerics have to be reordained if they convert to the Catholic Church.
drupes 10 months ago
@drupes WELL THE papal church and its ritual exists today OUTSIDE OF THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH so matters of ritual are equivalent when considering the Anglicans or other Protestants. THE WEST IS OUT OF COMMUNION WITH THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH and its rituals are nothing but empty forms outside of it.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, Martyr: " [to] the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that wills all things which are according to the love of Jesus Christ our God, which also presides in the place of the region of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of obtaining her every desire, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love..."
drupes 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 St. John Chrysostom: "He says to him, "Feed My Sheep." Why does He pass over the others and speak about these to him? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the head of the choir; for this reason Paul went up to see him rather than the other ... He entrusts him with the PRIMACY of the brethren...(and) says: "If you love Me, rule the brethren." ... I would reply that He appointed Peter a teacher not of the chair, but of the world..."
drupes 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 "Compelled thereto by the canons and by the letter of our most holy father and fellow-servant Celestine, the Roman bishop, we have come, with many tears, to this sorrowful sentence against him, namely, that our Lord Jesus Christ, Whom he has blasphemed, decrees by the holy Synod that Nestorius be excluded from the episcopal dignity, and from all priestly communion..." Decree against Nestorius, Council of Ephesus, 431 A.D.
drupes 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 "The great and holy and universal Synod...in the metropolis of Chalcedon...to the most holy and blessed archbishop of Rome, Leo ... being set as the mouthpiece unto all of the blessed Peter, and imparting the blessedness of his Faith unto all ...and besides all this he [Dioscorus] stretched forth his fury even against him who had been charged with the custody of the vine by the Savior, we mean of course your holiness ..." Council of Chalcedon, 451 A.D.
drupes 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 I could go on and on, but these I have just quoted lambasts the idea of the Pope being at least "primus inter pares" as the post schismatic eastern church claims and demands in order to return to full communion with Rome once more (aside from others). The Pope was acclaimed from the very beginning as having primacy over the Church by the bishops of east and west, the Fathers of the Church and the Ecumenical Councils. So, WHO left the true fold?
drupes 7 months ago
@drupes You could go on and on and shown to be wrong, FOR OVER A THOUSAND YEARS the CHURCH affirmed THE EQUALITY OF BISHOPS AND NEVER SAW THE PAPACY AS HAVING SOME SORT OF SUPREMACY. WHILE THE SUREST WAY TO SHOW YOUR PAPAL CULT IS OUTSIDE OF THE TRUE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH, A BLASPHEMOUS SECT IS THAT IT DOES NOT HOLD THE FAITH, DOCTRINE AND DISCIPLINE OF THAT CHURCH, WHICH WE HAVE PRESERVED, BUT HAS ADULTERATED WITH HERESIES AND BLASPHEMIES! REPENT, LEAVE YOUR HERESY AND ENTER CHRIST's CHURCH!
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 Well, wheres those thousand years' worth of evidence? I gave mine, cite yours to the contrary. That's how you discern truth. It's that simple. But the words of Saint John Chrysostom who was himself Patriarch of Constantinople "He entrusts him with the PRIMACY of the brethren." and the deference that the Church Councils gave the Bishop of Rome, as shown by those decrees I have quoted, is quite hard to ignore. Go ahead and prove me wrong, may this be a very fruitful discussion :-)
drupes 7 months ago
@drupes The very word "primacy" IMPLIES COLLEGIALITY AND NOT MONARCHY, but you don't seem to get that. I have torn apart those decontextualized "proof texts" on other threads by simply showing 1). THAT THE CHURCH WAS CONCILIAR AND THAT THE POPE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THERE WERE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS CALLED BY THE EMPEROR, WAS NOT THE ARBITER OR HEAD OF THE CHURCH & 2). THEY PRESUPPOSE AN ORTHODOX PAPACY TO MAKE THAT PRIMACY OPERATIVE.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 At least you could have told me what those "deconstructions" are, instead of just conclusions. Its free here on Youtube, you know. How can I refute your claims when I don't even know where you based them?
drupes 7 months ago
@drupes The very word "primacy" IMPLIES COLLEGIALITY AND NOT MONARCHY, but you don't seem to get that. I have torn apart those decontextualized "proof texts" on other threads by simply showing 1). THAT THE CHURCH WAS CONCILIAR AND THAT THE POPE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THERE WERE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS CALLED BY THE EMPEROR, WAS NOT THE ARBITER OR HEAD OF THE CHURCH & 2). THEY PRESUPPOSE AN ORTHODOX PAPACY TO MAKE THAT PRIMACY OPERATIVE.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@drupes Since you heretics do not hold to the Orthodox Catholic Faith held AT ALL TIME in ALL PLACES by ALL,but have adulterated the Faith,introduced BLASPHEMIES AND SOUL DESTROYING HERESIES to the point where your entire theological system is now predicated on aristotlean philosophy supported by nothing more than papal obscurantism.There is no concept of the MIND OF CHRIST in your cult, aside from a warped view of magisterium.The very fact you believe grace is a creature means you deny CHRIST.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 You can only come to those conclusions when these concepts are discussed. I cannot take you at your word that you are correct and I am wrong, of course you have to show me WHY.
drupes 7 months ago
Your sect begins in 1054 when you leave OUR CHURCH for papal despotism,heresies,blasphemies and even evolve entire theological and ecclesiological systems at variance with the Orthodox Catholic ChurchWE HAVE PRESERVED THAT.YOU HAVE ADULTERATED ITBy St. Vincent of Lerins definition WE ARE THE TRUE CATHOLICS:OUR FAITH IS ORTHODOX whereas you ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH AND DO NOT HOLD THE CATHOLIC FAITH.When the pope becomes Orthodoxthen primacy which MEANS PRESIDENCY IN COLLEGIALITY can occur
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
Once you can reconcile your blasphemous papal heresy with the dictum of St. Vincent of Lerins THAT THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD EVERYWHERE AT ALL TIMES BY ALL which we Orthodox Catholics PRESERVE to this day then you can talk about "primacy" and proof texts EMANATING FROM CONCILIAR DECISIONS AND FATHERS WHO LIVED IN A REALITY WHERE COUNCILS, NOT POPES. SPOKE THE TRUTH IN THE HOLY SPIRIT which you decontextualize like a Protestant vandalizing Scripture The Lerentian Canon excludes you
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
Once you can reconcile your blasphemous papal heresy with the dictum of St. Vincent of Lerins THAT THE CATHOLIC FAITH IS THAT FAITH HELD EVERYWHERE AT ALL TIMES BY ALL which we Orthodox Catholics PRESERVE to this day then you can talk about "primacy" and proof texts EMANATING FROM CONCILIAR DECISIONS AND FATHERS WHO LIVED IN A REALITY WHERE COUNCILS, NOT POPES. SPOKE THE TRUTH IN THE HOLY SPIRIT which you decontextualize like a Protestant vandalizing Scripture. The Lerentian Canon excludes you.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 Like I said, cite those "deconstructions" that you were talking about. Or at least give me the URL of those forums where you blasted the arguments for Papal Primacy. Be specific. You have not shown that the decrees of the Ecumenical Councils and statements of Church Fathers were spoken in the "context" of collegiality, you merely said it was. What are the Papal "despotism, blasphemies, and heresies"? Don't say, PROVE.
drupes 7 months ago
@drupes FIRSTLY, YOU IGNORAMUS, THE DECREES OF THE HOLY ECUMENICAL ARE PREFACED WITH "IT SEEMED GOOD TO US AND THE HOLY SPIRIT." SECONDLY, PRIMACY MEANS BEING FIRST AMONG A GROUP OF OTHERS.THAT's THE MEANING OF THE WORD.THIRDLY I SIMPLY WENT AFTER YOUR IGNORANT LINE OF ARGUMENTATION, SHOWED HOW EVEN DECONTEXTUALIZATIONS HAVEN't THE SLIGHTEST FORCE BECAUSE THE ARGUMENT YOU PRESENT IS NON SEQUITER.YOU ARGUE PATRISTICS IDEAS ON PRIMACY AND SAY THAT IS HERETICAL PAPAL MONARCHY.IT DOES NOT FOLLOW...
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 "FIRSTLY, YOU IGNORAMUS" Ah name calling! How "Orthodox"! The "Holy Canons" teach you that? And what's with the all caps? Cool down, you won't convert anyone by "shouting" at them. In any case you FAILED to present evidence to the contrary. What I am looking for is a statement from the Church Fathers that the honors given to the Pope was merely, shall we say for the lack of a better word, "ceremonial" , like the precedence given the Patriarch of Constantinople.
drupes 7 months ago
@drupes IF had the authority you are deluded into believing, THE EMPEROR WOULDN'T HAVE CALLED THE COUNCILS, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN NECESSARY.THE POPE SIMPLY WOULD HAVE ENFORCED HIS RULE.No, in the early Church, the Chair of St. Peter was appealed to not because it could compel, but because it was viewed with a reverence and had an authority of MORAL SUASION,which DID NOT in any way impede heresies AS THE CALLING OF THE COUNCILS, WHICH SPOKE IN THE HOLY SPIRIT, RESOLVED THE DISPUTES, not popes.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 And if the Bishop of Rome was merely "first among equals" why did St. Irenaeus claim that "it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority [propter potentiorem principalitatem - pre-eminence or superiority for the sake of one more mighty (Christ)]" That is Primacy PROPERLY DEFINED. Not the PERSONAL (and post-schism) interpretation you just gave.
drupes 7 months ago
@drupes St. Irenaeus was BISHOP OF LYONS IN GAUL WHICH WAS SUBJECT TO ROME, a second century Father. "THIS CHURCH" he is referring to is THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, not the papacy nor a papal throne nor is he saying anyone is compelled to follow its dictates, but ONLY TO RESPECT THE AUTHORITY OF ROME AS FIRST AMONG EQUALS. If Rome had the authority you claim, HE WOULD HAVE WRITTEN "MUST" AND NOT "SHOULD." THAT IMPLIES INFLUENCE NOT COMPULSION. IN other words, THE PATRISTIC ORTHODOX IDEA OF PRIMACY.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
Comment removed
drupes 7 months ago
@jasonbently2002 Since you mentioned the Holy Councils, let me repeat the decree of the Council of Ephesus against Nestorius: ""COMPELLED thereto by the canons AND by the letter of our most holy father and fellow-servant Celestine, the Roman bishop..." Compulsion or command CANNOT come from one who is merely "first among equals" Tell me, does the Patriarch of Constantinople (who is now "first" of the schismatic Patriarchs) have that authority?
drupes 7 months ago
@drupes A pope did preside at Ephesus, yes, THE POPE OF ALEXANDRIA, St. Cyril, AND THE CONCILIAR DECISIONS ARE WHAT COMPELLED, not the pope, CONCILIAR DECISIONS WHICH WERE BINDING UPON ROME. EPHESUS AFFIRMS A COLLEGIAL STRUCTURE TO THE CHURCH WHERE ROME-ALEXANDRIA-ANTIOCH AND JERUSALEM AND CONSTANTINOPLE ARE DECLARED A PENTARCHY. REALLY, READ THOSE CANONS HERETIC AND DON'T CUT AND PASTE. LASTLY, YOU HERETIC, PRIMACY IS ESTABLISHED IN RIGHT CONFESSION OF FAITH, ORTHODOXY AND ROME IS IN HERESY.
jasonbently2002 7 months ago
is that me at 0.31?
leopictor 1 year ago
Catholics claim that the present day bishops and priests in the Catholic Church are successors to the apostles, being inheritors of their power and authority. This cannot be true. The Catholic bishops and priests were not promised the power from on high nor commanded to wait in Jerusalem to receive it (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4,8). They have no authority because they are not inspired of the Holy Spirit nor are they eyewitnesses of Jesus (John 20:22-23; Acts 1:8, 21-26)...
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 ... They cannot prove their authority by speaking in tongues, prophesying and working miracles (2 Cor. 12:12). They are not the chosen ambassadors who were selected to deliver God's message or "the faith" to mankind (Eph. 3:3-4; Jude 3). Moreover, they cannot be successors to the apostles and prophets because the only infallible succession to them are the inspired writings (2 Pet. 1:15; 3:1; 2 Tim. 3:14-17).
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Rubbish talking, the verse you gave is strongly confirming that Christ have established His church upon Peter and the Apostles, and the day of Pentecost is the day where Church born physically on Earth. How did you make those verse against Catholic Church?
Then, if you said that they're not inspired by the Holy Spirit, how could you believe the Bible, Scriptures that established and canonized by Catholic Church? Amusing....
alprasetya 1 year ago
The Catechism of the Council of Trent states these words: "It is lawful to have images in the Church, and to give honor and worship unto them...".
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
Peter understood with all humility the implications of being only a man. But popes, being only men like Peter, allow multitudes to bow their knees before them, kiss their feet, and reverence them—thereby receiving worship that does not rightfully belong to them. What a tremendous difference between Peter and his supposed successors!
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Peter, as all the Popes are human and truly human, but they're not just as ordinary human like us, laymen. They're Vicar of Christ, and Christ has given this authority to Peter until He comes for the second time, in a judgment day. (Mt 15.17; Lk 10.16; Mk 16.16; Jn 3.18; Lk 11.23; Ti 3.11).
How could you claim if you did obey Christ, but you didn't obey the visible Vicar of Christ? how could you claim if you have a desire for Heaven Kingdom, but you reject the visible Church?
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Catholics claim that the present day bishops and priests in the Catholic Church are successors to the apostles, being inheritors of their power and authority. This cannot be true. The Catholic bishops and priests were not promised the power from on high nor commanded to wait in Jerusalem to receive it (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4,8). They have no authority because they are not inspired of the Holy Spirit nor are they eyewitnesses of Jesus (John 20:22-23; Acts 1:8, 21-26).
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Then the promise that Jesus said, "The gates of Hades shall not prevail" (Mat 16:18-19) is just a lie, made a lie by Protestant.....
And the fact is, from the year 55 until circa 1500, Pope, and Bishops from East and West are considered as the legitimate successor. Will you say that the Church from the beginning have made a fault? and the Protestant movement in which arose 1500 years after the ascension of Christ truly inspired by the Holy Ghost?
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya This is where we differ. You think that Jesus established the catholic church, i say it was your first pope, emperor constantine who declared himself pontius maximus, the title STILL used to this day.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 TU ES PETRUS, NOT TU ES LUTHER. Luther is burning in Hell, while Peter keeps the Keys of Heaven.
ixtoc999 1 year ago
@ixtoc999 Sorry, my friend, i only speak english. But yes, as luther fell into apostasy like the church he left, there is a good chance he may be in hell. But then again, hang on, according to you guys, he could just be in "purgatory".
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@alprasetya ...They cannot prove their authority by speaking in tongues, prophesying and working miracles (2 Cor. 12:12). They are not the chosen ambassadors who were selected to deliver God's message or "the faith" to mankind (Eph. 3:3-4; Jude 3). Moreover, they cannot be successors to the apostles and prophets because the only infallible succession to them are the inspired writings (2 Pet. 1:15; 3:1; 2 Tim. 3:14-17).
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Then, how will you explained the fact that in the time of Christian persecutions, the successor of Peter is the most wanted person by the Emperor of Rome? have you read the biography of Linus, Anacletus, etc?
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya The Word of God is all i need. And it is all you need.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 I agree my friend, but which Word of God? the Word that denies His Church? the Word which denies the authority of Pope? the Word which legitimate the Protestant's movement?
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Exactly, that's why Christ built His church on Himself, not on peter.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Read it by yourself Mat 16:18-19. That's your own opinion, not Christ did say. I mean, the Protestant's opinion
alprasetya 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MUST WATCH :
Vatican has just decoded some God's messages to the Catholic Faithful & certain century-old TRUTH can now be revealed PUBLICLY finally:
watch?v=VABSoHYQr6k
You won't be disappointed at these newly decoded God's messages, I swear on the Honour of Vatican & His Holiness
AzerChristians 1 year ago
"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unan Snactam, 1302). INFALLIBLE PAPAL STATEMENT. But, God says otherwise. In Acts4:12 He says "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”. Either the pope is a liar, or God is. I know where my money is!
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 This is the way the Protestant did fear with the sole authority of the Pope and the whole Church...
alprasetya 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Yes, I also know where your money is, your money is in your "pastors" deep pockets, your money were used for their life, wealthiness, and to promote further their false teaching. You are the one of their "money fountain".
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya My pastor is poor. lives in a run-down in-need-of-repair house. He has spread the Word of God in different countries including islamic ones. You know nothing. How rich is the vatican? How much gold? The catholic church spends HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars trying to buy forgiveness from victims of CHILD RAPE by its own priests, so dont you DARE play that card with me.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Funny, and you judge the gift from the Christian for ages as the legitimacy for the poorness of your Pastor? member of Theology of Poverty? another heretic again?
alprasetya 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kiwichristian2009 - "My pastor is poor. lives in a run-down in-need-of-repair house." - Taking pride in our humilty, are we? Perhaps, that's a little too ostentatious and hypocritical? Maybe, that whole comment should be reviewed to discover it was in very poor taste?
TenderTrap86 1 year ago
Having been raised Catholic, I can attest to the big difference between the Mass and the typical protestant service. The Mass is a thing of majestic beauty, sacredness and solemnity.
Pacisdiligo 1 year ago
@Pacisdiligo correct. The Mass and other Catholic traditions are the heights of majesty.
dubaipogi 1 year ago
@dubaipogi Shame that NONE of the catholic traditions are biblical.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 And the Protestant teachings in which always claim that Bible is the sole source of faith were not written at the bible too...
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya YOu may as well say "Yes I know that human traditions that contradict the Bible are condemned in Mark 7:7-9, but all the doctrines that contradict the Bible which the Pope through up were revealed to him directly by Christ and therefore, although they contradict the Bible, they are divinely approved by Christ himself."
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 You even don't understand the Tradition and tradition. You have spoke so much word, it's already reflects the truth of the Church teachings, the protestant is the work of the reprobate, know nothing about the true teaching of Christ, and gave birth to so many Satan's denomination.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya "I have figuratively applied to myself... so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other."1 Cor4:6.Three times Jesus was tempted by the Devil and each time Jesus replied exactly the same three dangerous words that defeated the Devil: "IT IS WRITTEN" Read it for yourself! If any one could have used oral tradition, it was Jesus, yet he chose the only safe and sure way to defeat Satan: Scripture.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Then show me the Verses that says only the Bible is the source of faith...Reductionist !
alprasetya 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Yes! Sola scripture works so remarkably well that there are thousands upon thousands of Protestant tradition churches who all believe something different and break away to start their own "church of Christ". The whole situation is so wholey pathetic now, with the number of new independaent Protestant churches multiplying exponentially with every calendar year that passes.
TenderTrap86 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Then, when did the Scripture written? and when did the first community of Christian born? what Scripture did they use? Holy Bible like nowadays?
alprasetya 1 year ago
@dubaipogi When Christ said to eat His body and drink His blood He was speaking figuratively, not literally. The Book of John also says "unless a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." Does this mean we need to be pushed out of our mother's womb again? Of course not. That would be impossible. Christ offered His body and blood on the cross for us. He wants us to accept His body and blood sacrifice for the atonement of our sins.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@Pacisdiligo The mass is a re-sacrificing of Christ. "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner," (CCC, 1367). What does the Catechism mean here?
Heb.7:27 Who needeth NOT daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did ONCE, when he offered up himself.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Eucharist is NOT a re-sacrificing of Christ, but THE SAME ONE TRUE SACRIFICE as Christ did. When He said ;
19And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me." 20In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.
Is the institution of the New Testament for all humanity. It is NOT the final as you said.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya In John chapter 6 Christ is speaking about eating His flesh. Then He goes on to explain what He meant....."63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." He is clearly speaking figuratively when he says to 'eat His body and drink His blood'. In JN 6:63 He even told us the words are SPIRITUAL! Jesus SAID the words are SPIRITUAL the FLESH profits NOTHING!
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 I will save my writings, since I have to back to my village. I will reply this soon. May Jesus bless you.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Have a safe journey my friend.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 If that was a spiritual flesh, why did Paul said to Corinthian in 1 Cor 10:16-17 as truly a flesh and blood? not the other figurative terms?
In fact, from the first time til' now, the Christian believe in a true Flesh and Blood of Christ in Eucharist, and preserved by the Catholic Church and Orthodox Churches.
Both of them actually condemned Protestanism heresy.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Bread and wine are offered, being the FIGURE of the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. They who participate in this visible bread eat, SPIRITUALLY, the flesh of the Lord. (Macarius, Homily xxvii.) Macarius of Egypt (ca. 300-391).Ratranmus wrote: "The bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ in a FIGURATIVE sense" (De corpore et sanguine Christi).
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@alprasetya As far as the New Testament is concerned, Jesus didn't pluck part of His flesh out to be eaten by His disciples at the Last Supper, which should be the primary example of celebrating the Lord's Supper afterwards.Where does the Bible say that the bread actually turns into Christ's flesh? The Last Supper was also symbolic, the Lord's supper is symbolic. Jesus Christ's sacrifice on the cross was the one true real thing. Jesus said "IT IS FINISHED" meaning it does not need to be repeated
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@alprasetya Obviously Jesus words, "this is my body" should be taken symbolically because it falls within a long list of symbolic statements Christ said: "I am the bread," (John 6:41), "I am the vine," (John 15:5), "I am the door," (John 10:7,9), "I am the good shepherd,"(John 10:11,12), "You are the world the salt, (Matthew 5:13), "You are the light of the world. (Matthew 5:14)
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@Pacisdiligo As far as the New Testament is concerned, Jesus didn't pluck part of His flesh out to be eaten by His disciples at the Last Supper, which should be the primary example of celebrating the Lord's Supper afterwards. Where does the Bible say that the bread actually turns into Christ's flesh? The Last Supper was also symbolic, the Lord's supper is symbolic. Jesus Christ's sacrifice on the cross was the one true real thing.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Do you troll-bomb every Youtube video you take issue with? Come up for air, amigo.
Pacisdiligo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Pacisdiligo Is that all you can come up with? Acts4:12 "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@Pacisdiligo As long as the catholic church and catholics themselves preach their false doctrines, i will not be silent in presenting the truth.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 False doctrines according to whose criteria? The Coptics? The Orthodox? The Mennonites? The Lutherans? The Baptists? The Presbyterians? The Nazarenes? The Assembly of God? The Seventh Day Adventists? Pentecostal Church of God? Good luck with that one.
Pacisdiligo 1 year ago
Comment removed
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@Pacisdiligo According to the Word of God itself, which contains CLEAR "do's and don'ts" that catholics love to ignore. eg: Exodus 20:4,5 couldn't be any clearer that even BOWING down to a statue is idolatry. Yet, Catholics foolishly claim that they are not worshipping the statues they are bowing down to. BUT, God forbids us from even bowing to statues. In fact, the Bible is so clear on this matter that the Vatican has even REMOVED the second of the Ten Commandments to deceive you.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 But of course! "According to the Word of God itself". It's just so "CLEAR"! Words that continue to echo down the corridors of history. Oh, the irony.
Pacisdiligo 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 But the early Church until before Re(de)formation begun still recognize the transsubtantiation, and the Protestant also condemned by the Orthodox Church. We also knew that Orthodox Church, based on their claim, preserves the teaching and Tradition through the Apostles until now.
alprasetya 1 year ago
If Vatican II failed, perhaps the other councils were wrong, too? Impossible. Where is your trust that God leads the church through the time?
Balti50 1 year ago
Have you ever celebrated the "novus" Ordo missae in latin, with the priest's back to the people? It's all allowed. I don't feel any extreme unfaithful difference then...(although I know there are a lot, e.g. introibo, last evangelium etc etc)
Remeber the tridentine mass exists since the tridentine council, and there were many different rites in europe before.
Balti50 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Have you ever celebrated the "novus" Ordo missae in latin, with the priest's back to the people? It's all allowed. I don't feel any extreme unfaithful difference then...(although I know there are a lot, e.g. introibo, last evangelium etc etc)
Remeber the tridentine mass exists since the tridentine council, and there were many different rites in europe before.
Balti50 1 year ago
Ego sum panis vitæ : qui venit ad me, non esuriet, et qui credit in me, non sitiet umquam.
JANELLA911 1 year ago
Please Holy God, purge and lceanse your Church of the corruption and heretics. Return the Church to its former glory by the power of Your Spirit, so that You may be glorified in it. Then all heretics, heathens, pagans, aetheists and apostates will see the purity of You Way, and come to You. Then they shall put aside their false ways, then we shall have peace.
catholicpeter 2 years ago 2
Summorum Pontificum is the first step to return to the true Catholic Tradition , in the next step Pope Benedict XVI banished Novus Ordo in 2012 and since that year Tridentine mass will be the one and only Catholic mass without that protestant Novus Ordo crap!
MrDevin1984 2 years ago 8
Wishful thinking! However you can join any of the break away Latinist groups. You Trads are amazing...all about Tradition, pomp and circumstance ...just like the Pharisees.
All about external rituals maybe you should focus more on being more Christian and less ceremonial.
NativeNewYorkGuy 2 years ago
Its never suprising to hear the Novus Ordo crowd get ugly when their precious banality is attacked. Yes you get to keep all the ugliness you like. Its a shame that with all your supposed charity you have so little for those who have remained faithful to the rite of their fathers.
vinnyb1633 2 years ago
You Medievalists are the ones who always attack.
Again keep your smells and bells, pomp, circumstance and Latin mumblings. But don't force that on the others. So much ceremony and NO Christianity. And your hatred of Jews and Protestants is most Unchristian.
By t he way do you practice and glorify self scourging too? or crawling up a rocky hill to a shrine on your knees ?
NativeNewYorkGuy 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I CLOSE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCHES
Ken Kosiorek
molestedcatholic 2 years ago
what do u mean? retard?
AureliusGloria111 2 years ago
@molestedcatholic The more closed the better
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
let us pray for our Holy Mother the Church, for the Holy father and the Clergy that they may always be strong and be guided by the Holy Spirit. be protected from the attack of the enemy.
irvinrexs 2 years ago 10
Beautiful depiction of Christ's Church.
Deo Gratias.
crabstu 2 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
exe, you talking nonsense, the "Church", is the body of Bible believing Christians.
There is NO 30,000 denominations, this is all roman/ papal lies. Where does the word "PONTIFF" originate?...eh?...what was the Babylonian Priests called?
...PONTIFFS !!!.....go on worshipping your statues, and false wafer god, or....read REV 17....and come out of the whore!
cliffordmc1963 2 years ago
Tsk tsk tsk, what an uneducated reply... pls DON'T call yourself a Christian, you are so filled with anger and hatred, where is the Love? I guess it's not found in your church.
Frappacinomj85 2 years ago 2
@Frappacinomj85 St.Paul also gave anathema to all who oppose the teachings of Christ that given to them. The Church gave the ANATHEMA because of her concern for the salvation of the Christian souls to not profess heretic. That's the caring mother Church. Unlike Protestant who were the priest and the pope for themselves and gave birth so many denomination, and cursing one another, like the child of the devil crying for more human souls for their prey.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya You said "St.Paul also gave anathema to all who ". Can you provide this verse please?
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Gal 1:8, etc
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya I just read the passage. What better example of someone who needs to be anathema'd than the roman catholic church who has perverted, twisted and preached a different gospel than the one Jesus Christ taught. This passage clearly condemns the catholic church.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
ANATHEMA SIT !! the true Satan works within the church is the heresy, and one of the greatest work is protestantism. The modernism and liberalism was once cursed by Pius X, and those were originated from protestantism. May God has mercy towards you and all protestant, may He still remember you in The Judgement Day, the everlasting torments awaits.
alprasetya 2 years ago 3
@alprasetya “Through some crack or other in the temple of God, the smoke of Satan has entered .” — Pope Paul VI, 1972
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 The meaning of the "smoke of Satan" is somewhat liberalism and modernism has entered in so many ways in this Holy Church, by so many theologians taught a false teachings.
Modernism and Liberalism are the fruit from Protestant. This is what the meaning of the Pope does say.
And....why did there are so many denominations in Protestant and there are a lot of contradiction from one another denoms? Does it worse before Luther did his deed? does it against John 17?
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Why are there so many sects within catholicism?
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Which sects? now I'm asking you....
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Community of the Lady of All Nations, the Palmarian Catholic Church, the Philippine Independent Church, the Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church, the Free Catholic Church, the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God, Sodalitium Christianae Vitae, Byzantine Catholics,White Robed Benedictine Network of Catholics,Polish National Catholics, etc.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Community of the Lady of All Nations, the Palmarian Catholic Church, the Philippine Independent Church, the Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church, the Free Catholic Church, the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God, White Robed Benedictine Network of Catholics, are SCHISMATIC and not considered as Catholic Church.
Do you know the exact definition of Catholic Church itself? I think you have to learn more before accusing with such statements.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya catholic means "universal". What i am saying is just as YOU say that these sects are NOT part of the catholic "church", I also say that other denominations which you call "protestant" are NOT Christian "sects". You see?
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Byzantine Catholics, even Syro-Maronite, Coptic Church, and other Eastern Orthodox Church are in full communion with Rome, they're Catholic. They still preserved the Eucharist, and Apostolic Succession, and in a communion with the See of Peter.
Catholic Church is not the same with Latin Church. You have to search and learn well again the history of Christianity in an objective view, not by such false accusations from the False Prophet of Protestants.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya I do research, my friend. The Bible, the ccc and catholic "church" history and historical history all provide good evidence against the claim that the catholic "church" is Christian. Who is "False Prophet of Protestants" ?
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 All the Protestants priests are False Prophet against Christian doctrine. Then it is true what Paul did saith;
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (Gal 1:8)
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya My friend, i agree with Gal1:8, which describes exactly the catholic gospel which is totally different to the one preached by Christ. There are so many verses in scripture that contradict RCC theology Rom 4:5 utterly condemns the System of salvation by masses penance priests etc, bible teaches that salvation is gift of God not of works & this gift is freely given by God to those who trust in the merits of Christ's finished work on Calvary.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Then we both agree that system of salvation comes from Christ himself, not from priest. BUT Christ gave His mandate through His Apostles and His Priests as Persona Christi. That's the reason why the Sacrament of Orders is so important and no rupture from the Apostles until nowadays. This is what we called "hermeneutic of continuity", seen on "Apostolic succession".
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Rubbish. There is no need or provision for a modern sacrificial priesthood. Even peter never called himself a priest or pope. Heb.7:27 Who needeth NOT daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did ONCE, when he offered up himself.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Another rubbish comment....then, could you explain, why did after Peter's death, and the other Apostles death, the early Christian looking for their successor whom has legitimate authority? Why did the early Church Fathers looking for the advice and decision from The Successor of Peter when they encountering problems and conflicts within their Particular Church's territory?
Those are the evidence of early Papacy in early Christian. Now you did reject it.....
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya The Roman Catholic Church claims that Peter is the rock that the church is built on. They say that Peter is the first Pope who stands in the place of Christ. This position is known as the Vicar of Christ. This is the lineage through which the present Pope receives his authority. Today, the Pope is still the rock that the Roman Catholic Church is built on. The Roman Catholic Church declares. “...
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@alprasetya ...that it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff [Pope].” (Pope Boniface VIII, 1302 AD in an ex cathedra in his Bull Unum Sanctum). Pope Pius IX said about himself, “I am the way, the truth, and the life”. By the office of the Pope, the Roman Catholic Church denies Jesus his rightful place as the foundation of the true church.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Oww...thank you for the Papal Bull and the statements from the Vicar of Christ, I've made the translation to my local language, those are my favourite documents.
Have you read the whole documents? or just the final statement? read it in a whole, then you will find the meaning those statements. And yes, it is truly amenable that "every human creatures salvation is the subject of Roman Pontiff", that statement is the faith of Christian, before Luther was born.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Catholics claim that the present day bishops and priests in the Catholic Church are successors to the apostles, being inheritors of their power and authority. This cannot be true. The Catholic bishops and priests were not promised the power from on high nor commanded to wait in Jerusalem to receive it (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4,8). They have no authority because they are not inspired of the Holy Spirit nor are they eyewitnesses of Jesus (John 20:22-23; Acts 1:8, 21-26)...
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 So, did your protestant priest are inspired by the Holy Spirit and the eyewitness of Jesus? but the protestant have so many sects and contradict each other, they are against Jesus's command in John 17 for the unity of Christian.....
Will God contradict Himself???
Again, those verse you gave still not contradict the Catholic teaching.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Define "protestant", please? I have no priest but God.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@alprasetya ... They cannot prove their authority by speaking in tongues, prophesying and working miracles (2 Cor. 12:12). They are not the chosen ambassadors who were selected to deliver God's message or "the faith" to mankind (Eph. 3:3-4; Jude 3). Moreover, they cannot be successors to the apostles and prophets because the only infallible succession to them are the inspired writings (2 Pet. 1:15; 3:1; 2 Tim. 3:14-17).. PS: sorry for the many comments.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Wait......tell me in honest;
[[[They cannot prove their authority by speaking in tongues, prophesying and working miracles (2 Cor. 12:12).]]]
ARE YOU PENTECOSTALS??
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Nope, my friend.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@alprasetya God says Christ died ONCE, yet He is continually sacrificed in the mass. God says Christ took ALL our sins on the cross, the rcc say NO, He didn't. God says there is only ONE mediator, the rcc says NO, there are others. Christ taught us how to pray, the rcc says NO, pray to others. The rcc calls the pope and priests god on earth and "another Christ". rcc teaches salvation by works, God teaches otherwise. You see, different gospel, my friend.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 I understand why you and other Protestant friends were difficult to understand. With those mindset of "Scipture Only" will never understand the mystery of Eucharist. Not a different gospel my friend, but DIFFERENT FAITH. Our Faith is truly come from Christ and the Apostles and His Prophet from Old Testament. But your faith come from a heretic priest in 16th century. That's why we're so different.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya My faith is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles of the first century, as found in the Bible. Roman Catholicism did not exist as such until the third or fourth centuries. The Protestant reformation was a return to biblically sound doctrine.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 HUH...Amusing....so amusing statements....from which source did you gave such statements???
[[[Roman Catholicism did not exist as such until the third or fourth centuries]]]]
So, could you explain the existence of Popes? Bishops? also Eucharist?? they're drawn obviously clear in Catacombs....that's a strong evidence that what they did is the same with Catholic Church nowadays....
Protestant is not a reformation, but rather deformation. Why did so much rupture exists??
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya Define "protestant" please.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Protestant is the subject matter of Protestanism. And the protestanism is already defined and understood in so many historic literature. If I have to describe, I think this is not a suitable place to define 34000 denominations of rupture here.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya then don't call me something if you then refuse to define that term. I have heard a number of different descriptions of the word "protestant", the most common among catholics is a follower of martin luther, which is odd, because i know next to nothing about the man!
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Then in what term I have to define you? some of my Protestant friends having a proud by those term. They define themselves as Christian-Protestant, and the Protestant Churches here also states "Protestant" in their church building. Why did you refuse such a term? if you have a justification for that term, then it's another matter. If you considered it as the truth ones, then it's another matter. No matter if I define it or not.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 Most Catholic define "Protestant" as the followers of Marthin Luther, somehow, I agree with you that it is odd and FALSE! because the Protestant Fathers is not only Marthin Luther, there are also John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, and so on. But it still true that because of them, nowadays, being a Protestant doesn't belong only toward their Fathers, but toward their own 'priest' and 'themselves as individual priest'. It's true that you have no priest, you are priest for yourselves.
alprasetya 1 year ago
@alprasetya That's what gets me a little mad. People saying that i follow so-and-so or a particular line of "interpretation". I dont study "church fathers". My faith is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles of the first century, as found in the Bible. Roman Catholicism did not exist as such until the third or fourth centuries.
kiwichristian2009 1 year ago
@kiwichristian2009 From which Jesus did you base your faith? Jesus who denies His Flesh and Blood? Jesus who didn't build His Church for salvation? Jesus who taught "Once Saved always be Saved"? When the Bible were not written, from which Scripture did the early Christian learned their faith??
Then you ignorantly saith only trust the Bible alone, ignoring the Church's authority who did canonize the Bible you hold now??
Then what Christ did saith were true (Mt 7:3)
alprasetya 1 year ago
I pity you. may God bless you
fatimajoe 2 years ago