Can someone answer me why the majority of catholic paintings (Jesus, Mary and the angels) make with their fingers the sign number two??? What is the meaning of that?
Tracing the Church of Rome, 'christian,' back to its roots in Babylon, clearly defines the pagan, Hebrew Scripture despising Church of Rome's attempts to destroy all form of the Hebrew Scripture. Why else substitute worship of forbidden creatures in their official religious practice?
Maccabees are the Jews whom revolted against ROME, they fled to Arabia, whom, set up a Family Shrine called "Maccabees" MAKKA_KAABA, MAKKA mutated into MATTHIAS (it is THEY who wrote TORAH(Ptolomy), GOSPELS(Josephus) and QURAN(Muhammad)
@thone2008 This seems untrue: The term Maccabees as used to describe the Jewish army is taken from the Hebrew word for "hammer". Also, Mecca is much older than the book of Maccabees. Plus the muslims believe the Kaaba to be a millenium older than Solomon's temple. So, an etymological connection seems unlikely.
Lol, The Kaaba is as old as the Islamic Religion, which appeared in the first Millemia AD, thats a Cock Story, etymology could suggest that Maccabee is a synonym with Mason, but my theory is the Jews after 70Ce or.And 135CE Revolt againts Rome, they Fled from Judea to Saudi, and the Maccabee's Transformed into the Meccans, its not an Impossible Scenario, is it
Religion is the by-Products of AUTHORS, DUH, Book of Mormon was written by an AUTHOR, and Mormonism the By-Products, Star Wars was created by an AUTHOR, and generated Star Wars FANS, Its not HARD to understand, Gospel of Matthew wqas written by an AUTHOR[Josephus] in 74AD and generated FANS called Christians , its a STORY, you GRAP A PEN, AND WRITE SOMETHING , the term WORD OF GOD, GOD in OUR IMAGE, we can CREATE anything with just a PEN and writing WORDS,
I dont think any of you should be judging anyone first off especially other denominations Christians shouldnt fight about doctrine they should work together againgst the common good but ya all are too concerned on whos right who wrong denominations man made no has it 100% correct not even the catholics not even the protestants and I am catholic and I dont think being catholic means your souls saved I dont think God cares what denomination you belong to
well perhaps. but then you have denominations like mormans, Seventh day adventist, Jehovas Witness, Westboro baptist church popping up. All claiming to truly follow Christ. Now, all of these have large differences. A protestant might say on they dont follow the bible, but they can equally say that back at you. There must be some Parameters on intrepreting the bible, but who sets these standards? Martin Luther? Or perhaps the Church that has been given authority.
@donniedarkofreak559 yes god doesn't care which denominations but god cares who teaches the right thing the way he teaches when he was alive and ONLY the catholic church teach the same way as the early christians so means we are on the right track..
@donniedarkofreak559 I encourage you to study the faith, being catholic does not mean your soul is saved, in this you are correct but it is the means for your salvation
The Roman Catholic Church teaches unbiblical doctorines like the Trinity and celebrates Pagan festivals Like Christmas and Easter, Also batpizes Infants which is completely unbiblical
you are a true infidel. . .u nuts. look at the muslims they are united in faith thru Holy Quran. Christians should start be united in faith through Christ and the Holy Bible no matter what sect you belong to. but, if christians cannot be as one in faith and trying to ruins each others faith then time will come Christianity will collapse.
@rederama1 Muslims are united? Really?! Are you forgetting the Sunnis and Shi'a groups that like opressing and killing eachother in Iraq and Iran? Not to mention the multiple other smaller groups, movements and sects - some that are more moderate and others want to blow stuff up. Islam is just as fragmented as Christianity.
As for the collapse of Christianity - read revelations. There be hard times ahead!
Where do you think the Bible came from, Martin Luther? No, it came from the Catholic Church. And please, stop being a such a "Rivetthead" and do a little research before throwing your illiterate, uneducated, ramblings around like you actually know what you're talking about. You sound utterly foolish and ignorant.
@TheRivetthead and judging from your profile page, you are an idiotic heretical "Christian". Go worship your own personal Jesus like the 35,000 other Protestant sects.
@TheRivetthead We've been around for 2000 years, and were founded by Christ Himself in Matthew 16:18.
When was your heretical sect founded? Or are you the founder of your own "Christian" belief system? Protestantism is about a man's own ego, not about Christ. Ultimately, the Self wins out, because Christ is just an "idea" to a Protestant - to be molded into whatever he wants Christ to be.
@TheRivetthead there is as many Catholics as there are protestant, and Protestants are divided, if this came to a "kicking butt war" the orthodox would side with the Catholics to, and then there are even more.
however i do admit you'v kicked some butt, like the genocide my family fled from caused by prods that is the reason i was born in the USA.
anyway, would this not be better if you prods just keep on splinting up your churches, and calling each other heretics and left us alone?
And also the Anglicans(another protestant sect) would would also side with the catholics.
yah there there may be 35,000 protestant sect, but you guys are not united. for sure there will be other protestant sect that would go on the side of the TRUE CHURCH FOUNDED BY CHRIST HIMSELF.
Thank you very much for these videos. I kept getting different stories from different people, and this clears it up. I will now go read the book of Baruch.
And gess what buddy we where burned are bibles where destoryed we where feed to the lions not you. And gess what we have been here for almost 2000 years and still have more active worshipers than you any day.
The pope is the anti christ that Christ JESUS the lord warned us about. paul said the anti christ would sit in the christian church and call himself God. daniel said the anti christ would come out of the divided roman empire right after its collpase and call himself the equal of JESUS and change Gods sabbath day and kill the christians. rev 17 said the anti christ would sit with the harlot church in rome the city which lays on seven hills . Only one man matches this PROPHECY THE POPE
The truth is that every mans work will be made manifest. You say you're Catholic Christian, I say I'm Apostolic Christian, but it matters not what we are called. In the end our works as well as our faith in Almighty God will be tested. It's time for us to start proving our faith in God and stop arguing over religion. You say you believe in God then prove your belief in him by works of righteiousness and acts faith. I'm gonna abandon this ignorance, because it does nothing for me.
@lastofmany1 But, only to the people who believe that the Bible is the *only* soure of God's revelation. It's an entirely self-defeating concept, as the Bible appears to contradict itself in various instances. Not to mention that there was no Bible for the early centuries of Christianity. And, even after the Bible was compiled, it would still be over 1,000 years before it would be available to the masses. /// The Catholic Church believes in Scripture and Tradition. It's a composite of both.
@lastofmany1 The Bible is sourced from Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic manuscripts. Anyone can make a translation including the enemies of Christianity. The Bible happens to be the most popular book in the entire history of mankind. It makes sense to have many translations. Your argument is moot.
AMEN! to Saint Thomas Aquinas - a beautiful expression of faith. What is up with these virulent attacks on Catholicism? This fellow below is obviously very "impressed" with his cerebral knowledge of alleged "revelations" of errors of the Church that Jesus Christ founded. A sad commentary of ones soul. Peace be with you.
@oldcatholics The pope is the anti christ that Christ JESUS the lord warned us about. paul said the anti christ would sit in the christian church and call himself God. daniel said the anti christ would come out of the divided roman empire right after its collpase and call himself the equal of JESUS and change Gods sabbath day and kill the christians. rev 17 said the anti christ would sit with the harlot church in rome the city which lays on seven hills .
@vladimirkovalski Now ask yourself, did the Pope do ANY OF THOSE? The Pope is the Vicar of Christ, the successor of St. Peter. The antichrist in the book of Revelation is Emperor Nero. It's been expressed repeatedly how the numeric value of his name is 666. No other person is supposed to meet this criteria, that's why John put tha dang thing in there. Emperor Nero executed all of the apostles accept St. John who he sent into exile. His reason for doing so was because the Emporer of Rome was
@vladimirkovalski the only one to be considered a god-incarnate, not the Christ that the Christians followed. That's why it says he "puts himself in God's throne, and says to himself, 'I will exhalt my throne over God's.'" Any religion that wasn't of the Roman Empire was considered national atheism and was therefore illegal. Hence, what resulted in the death of the apostles and more 1st century Jewish Christians.... I converted to Catholicism, btw, because there were certain aspects of it....
@MrZetterlund777 That is because the roman catholic church is the only church which fits the description of the harlot church of rev 17. She rules over the kings of the earth she is drunk with the blood of Gods people she dresses herself in gold and purple she sits in rome the city which lays on seven hills and she sits in power with the beast the blasphemere man that calls himself the equal of Christ. Only the vatican and pope match this bible prophecy. infact the jesuits who rule are satani
@vladimirkovalski No, it's because Christ promised to protect His Church from the powers of hell. You don't even realize what you're talking about. Think about it, is the Church "Drunk with the blood of the Saints"? NO. Pagan Rome under the rule of Emperor Nero who martyred the early Christians and apostles is the anti-christ, and the Roman Empire of idolatry, since the Emperor was considered "god-incarnate" rather than any "Christ." The Pope hasn't proclaimed himself god, nor has he ever killed
@vladimirkovalski ...My brothers you sick individual. I converted to Catholicism because they are the only Christian faith who stands united (1 Cor. 1:10.) They are the only Church that upholds the ACTUAL presence of Christ in the Eucharist (1 Cor. 11:23-27.) And they are the only ones who respect the position of the Vicar of Christ, St. Peter (Matt. 16:18 & John 21:15-18.)
@MrZetterlund777 The roman catholic church is the only church which matches revelation 17 consenring the harlot church. That is not a christian church that is a church of satan full of idols and blasphemies. do you read your bible at all or do you follow blind man made traditions and culture. rev 17 said the harlot chrurch will come out of rome will kill the true christians will dress in purple and gold and will sit with a blasphemoues man. The pope and the vatican are the only who match this
@vladimirkovalski Brother, why do you say the harlot in Revelation 17 is a Church? The word “Church” is found nowhere in Revelation 17, and Christ promised the protection of His Church from the powers of hell in Matt. 16:18. The woman in Rev. 17 is described as having “seven heads.” According to verses 9-10, these are “seven hills with seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and one has yet to come.” Here we understand it is talking about KINDGOMS, not a Church .…
When he writes, “Five have fallen, ” he was referring to five great empires that had fallen; Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece, that give power and authority to the beast.” Along with “the one which is,” which is Rome, and “the one which is to come,” The Antichrist’s reign, which will be brief. (Rev. 12:12, 13:5.) This cannot be the Church, since it is described as “ruling over the kings of the Earth.” In 17:18. The Church doesn’t have political or economic authority
@vladimirkovalski The Pope isn’t the antichrist, either, Emperor Nero was. The Greek spelling, "Nerōn Kaisar", transliterates into Aramaic as "נרון קסר", nrwn qsr:
Resh: 200
Samech: 60
Qof: 100
Noon: 50
Vav: 6
Resh: 200
Noon: 50
Total: 666
Nero suppressed the early Christians, was worshipped as “god-incarnate” burned Christians in fires, and even martyred the apostles. It is impossible to doubt that this is the anti-Christ St. John was referring to….
@vladimirkovalski Yes brother, I DO read my Bible. I converted to Catholicism because they acknowledge the actual presence of Jesus in Communion (1 Cor. 11:24-27) the power of the priest to forgive sins (John 20:23) the cleansing fires of purgatory (1 Cor. 3:15-16) the primacy of the Pope (Matt. 16:18) we are like-minded with no denominations (1 Cor. 1:10) and we don’t believe in the heresy of Sola-Fide “faith alone” which is ironically only found in James 2:24.
@vladimirkovalski We also don’t believe in the heresy of “Sola-Scriptura” or “Scripture alone” since it is ironically unbiblical (2 Thessalonians 2:15.) We ARE the Biblical Church, who stands fast with God’s promise in Matt. 16:18. I see no reason to reform from Christ’s promise, because Christ’s promise is good enough for me.
@MrZetterlund777 You are a bible church? You burned the bible in the dark ages you burned people who had bibles you wouldnt allow the bible to be translated in any other language but latin you wouldnt preach in any other langue but latin so that people wouldnt understand, and you call this church a bible church. You have idols you took out the second commandment, you change the sabbath day and even a ddmit boldy that you did. all these things christ said the anti christ would do
@vladimirkovalski Hello, sorry I took so long to respond to you. I was out of town to see family. ^_^ Wow, I’m almost prepared to ask “Where does the Bible say the anti-Christ will do THAT?” However, there are bigger issues at hand needed to be addressed: The Church burned Bibles in the dark ages because they were vernacular translations. The Latin Vulgate was the approved version for the Church, because most in Europe who weren’t illiterate could read and write Latin....
@vladimirkovalski Vernacular translations were usually discouraged due to most languages not having similarly developed alphabets, or not having alphabets at all. Vernacular translations weren’t intollerated until propaganda attempted to be justified using vernacular translations. And, of course, there are potent examples of Catholics in that time who have made great efforts to make vernacular translations to spread the gospel who are canonized as saints by the Church....
Book burning was simply a common practice as well. Protestant reformer John Calvin had as many copies as could be found of the Servetus Bible burned, since he didn’t approve of them. Saying the Church would only translated or PREACHED in Latin so others wouldn’t understand it is erroneous, since Latin was the common language of the time. Hence, “Vulgate” means “common version” since it was the most widely used and understood. The Church never burned someone for the sake of owning a Bible....
@vladimirkovalski Brother, I was persuaded on the Church’s position on using images and iconography the same way the Church was. During the Crusades, a multitude of Muslim jihads against the Church persuaded her to decide to remove their images and iconography, since the Muslims were very against these things, and their victories over the Church were taken as a sign from God that they may need to remove their use of iconography and images....
@vladimirkovalski In response to this, a monk made several points to show that God does not disapprove of the use of images: 1.) God would be breaking His own commandment if it were so, since He commanded Moses to make images of two cherubim on top of the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:18,) a bronze snake in the wilderness (Numb. 21:8,) and the fact that the very incarnation of our Lord would be a sin, since Jesus is made in the exact image and likeness of God the Father (Colossians. 1:15.)
@vladimirkovalski The emphasis on the second commandment is clearly on the worship of images rather than making them. If not, then cartoons, artwork and sketches are all idolatry. The second commandment is also clearly in Chapter one article two of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, so clearly couldn’t have been removed by her. By the way, there were no numerals when the “ten” commandments were given. They were actually divided up socially, in relationship to God and to your neighbor....
@vladimirkovalski Also, Christians aren’t supposed to observe the Sabbath since we are no longer under the law but under the grace of God (Romans 6:14) and also it is the day of our Lord’s resurrection and a more suitable day of worship. Technically, Jesus would have risen on the Sabbath since His calendar measured a day by sunrise to sunrise, however, our measures in 24-hour periods. The resurrection occurred before the rising of the sun....
@vladimirkovalski 1st century Christians worshipped early from 4-6 AM on “Sunday” mornings; both to the parallel of the time of the discovery of the empty tomb, and to avoid Roman persecution. Anyways, hope I was helpful to you. May God bless you and keep you on your search and journey to the Truth and hope that is Jesus Christ. My assistance will be with you always, your brother here in the Catholic Church. :)
@MrZetterlund777 God said rember to keep the 7th day holy there is a reason god said the 7th day and there is a reason ejsus said i did not come to change the law and there is a reason jesus critized the jewish phariese for tampering with Gods commandments and there is a reason daniel said the anti christ which will kill Gods people would think to change Gods times and laws ps sabbath day and when you consider the pope spoke blasphemy killed the saints and changed the sabbath day to sunday
@planetery The pope is the anti christ that Christ JESUS the lord warned us about. paul said the anti christ would sit in the christian church and call himself God. daniel said the anti christ would come out of the divided roman empire right after its collpase and call himself the equal of JESUS and change Gods sabbath day and kill the christians. rev 17 said the anti christ would sit with the harlot church in rome the city which lays on seven hills .
LIES! There were15 books ADDED and marked "UNINSPIRED"by the RCC in the1st Bible . Martin Luther removed them alltogether and at Trent the RCC only RE-ADDED 7 of the 15 books Matin removed.
Martin Luther got tired of the SCAM the RCC used like the one in 2 Maccabees12:43 Where Judas tried to BUY SOULS OF THE DEAD FROM SIN.The RCC was using these LIES to get rich as they STILL ARE DOING TODAY.
If these 15 books are of God then why only re-add 7 of the 15 and not all of them?
The Printing Press was invented around 1450 by Johannes Gutenberg. And the Gutenberg Bible was the first real book printed. Which means that the Bible did include the 7 deuterocanonical, a good 50 or 60 years before the reformation. And 80 or 90 years before the Council of Trent. So who was it that changed the bible?
Some say that the Catholic Church added the books at Council of Trent which was in 1546. Ok. But I have a question. The first book ever printed with the printing press was the Bible. And it included the deuterocanonical books; which might make sense, if it printed was printing after 1546. But here is the thing. (see next post)
Why does the Vatican have a large Obelisk taking pride of place in St Peters square? The Obelisk can be found at almost every capital location, all over the earth...why? Back to Rome though, why is that Egyptian monument in the middle of a place of religious importance? Please dont say there is no reason, or, its pretty, or change the point and ask why im asking. Can anyone tell me what the Obelisk is for in St Peters square?
@kaderoder For the same reason that Protestants join the Freemasons- because the world is run by Satanists who enjoy getting you to follow false belief systems.
@MarcusMarcusMe LOL You really shouldn't assume you know things. I'm not Christian AT ALL. I just recognize the simple fact that Catholics have at the very least a basic grasp of concepts like history and the relevance of tradition, whereas Protestants- particularly Evangelicals- are COMPLETELY ignorant of such things.
As far as I'm concerned, all three Abrahamic faiths are primitive blood sacrifice religions. If you respected history you could see that. But alas..
@planetery: It was not an assumption at all... One could only infer from your original statement that you were Catholic. However, I find it curious that you would spend your time denouncing something that you find to be beneath you.
I on the other hand do not have time to waste discussing a topic with someone who is clueless on the matters of the spirit, wanting only instead to impress himself with his own intellect; therefore I decline to converse with you any futher.
@MarcusMarcusMe Actually, all you have said is that you are too scared to discover something that might challenge your preconceived belief system.
As far as "One could only infer from your original statement that you were Catholic", the very fact that I am not is proof in itself of the idiocy of your statement.
As far as knowing spirit- God is everything that exists. There is nothing that ISN'T part of God. For you to even NEED a book, or a savior, is proof that you know NOTHING about God.
@MarcusMarcusMe Actually, all you have said is that you are too scared to discover something that might challenge your preconceived belief system.
As far as "One could only infer from your original statement that you were Catholic", the very fact that I am not is proof in itself of the idiocy of your statement.
As far as knowing spirit- God is everything that exists. There is nothing that ISN'T part of God. For you to even NEED a book, or a savior, is proof that you know NOTHING about God.
@planetery BTW, for you to assume that I was Catholic even after i had JUST SAID that the narratives of a virgin birth and a crucifixion/resurrection were total fiction is HILARIOUS.
If you think that Catholics don't believe in the Virgin Mary, that idiocy speaks for itself.
If you simply did not read my words, you only show that you are prone to pontificating on things you haven't bothered to research, and your actions prove EVERYTHING I said about Christians being illiterate fools...
@armando1955ify Roman Catholicism is legalism at it's best. Christianity is Jesus Christ, not Roman-Catholicism, Orthodoxism, Protestant or any other religion. True Christianity is based on a relationship with Jesus Christ that results in true repentance and obediance from heart, not forced. And salvation is by faith ALONE through grace ALONE in Jesus ALONE, not by works, least anyone should boast. Salvation > Change of heart > Change of actions, AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND, GET THAT.
If this video is claiming that the Catholic canon was fixed at its present composition prior to the Council of Trent, the contents of the Vulgate (which was developed in stages and included material not considered canon by Catholics) and the widespread use of the Septuagint prior to said council serve as evidence against that.
I said it in your other video and i'll say it again:
Protentant-ism didn't start until the 17th century. Therfore, Catholics did NOT add 7 more books from the protestant bible. The protestants took everything from the catholic bible, and took away 7 books.
Catholisism started in: 32-33 A.D. established by Jesus
Protestantism started in: The 17th century by Henry the 8th and Marting Luther(not martin luther king Jr.)
"The protestants took everything from the catholic bible, and took away 7 books."
More like, the Catholics and Protestants both removed stuff from the Septuagint, but Protestants (who followed the Jewish canon) removed 7 more books than Catholics. Did you actually watch the videos, which explained this?
The Protestant Reformation began around 1517, not "the 17th century."
@chessleach absolute nonsense.The Roman catholic church is NOT the one true church.That is dogma and nonsense.read the Holy Bible and then tell me that .
@chessleach I am saying it because it is true.Your teachings are unscriptural.This thing about Peter being the head of the church is nonsense and contrary to Scripture.This business about Jesus ONLY being in the Catholic Church is contrary to Scripture.The vatican collecting Gold and silver is CONTRARY to Scripture.
It is because of the Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called, "The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. thats the reason You have your Bible because of apostolic tradition
CATHOLIC TRADITION - Venerating/worshipping images. Pope bows to statues of Mary, people worship the eucharist and have statues/candles in their homes and churches. THE BIBLE SAYS:Exodus
20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God
CATHOLIC TRADITION - Pope called Holy Father. BUT THE BIBLE SAYS: John-17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.The term Holy Father is only found one time in the entire Bible. It was when Jesus prayed before He and His disciples went to the garden of Gethsemane. He referred to God the Father as Holy Father.
CATHOLIC TRADITION - Mary is the mother of God. BUT THE BIBLE SAYS: Mary is the mother of the earthly Jesus, not God. Jesus pre- existed from everlasting as God (see John 1:1). When He came to redeem mankind, He laid aside His glory and was made like unto sinful man so that He could take our punishment (Hebrew 2:9). God has no mother. He has lived from everlasting which means He had no beginning...No wonder catholics are taught not to believe 100% in the bible "interesting"...
Peter was married (remember the pope is supposedly continuing the apostolic line through Peter). So, peter had a wife, huh? how come catholics Popes are forbidden to get married if they claim to be Peter's susessors??? Wich means that the catholic church follows man's traditions...
@PianoForteSky popes and roman catholic priests are forbidden to marry because it is a discipline, like fasting during Lent, it is not dogma. But it is very unlikly to change due to the corruption of married priests and bishops in the early church history.
Priests and Popes are married to the Church and like, Paul, claim chastity and single vocation is best.
With so many evidence, acces to information such as the internet, books, news etc..whoever denies the lies , murders, and maipulation of the Catholic church and still believe the catholic church is the one true church is because they chose to be ignorant.
During the Inquisition, the Roman Catholic institution killed millions. Why? Primarily to suppress any and all opposition to her heresies. Side "benefits" included taking the material wealth of its victims and showing the pope's power. The Catholic Inquisitors tortured, crippled, burned, and imprisioned millions of people.What happened to love your enemies? (Matthew 5:44) .... hummm that explains how they got to own the bible...of course they stole it.
No matter how "righteous" or "self-righteous" a man may be he is still a sinner and i'd rather believe the words of Jesus Christ than the words of a sinner.
Why is it that those who spread lies and calumny about the Catholic Church never have any authentic historical documents to "prove" their false charges?
@martlut Oh and by the way even the bible provides you documents but I guess its forbidden to catholics to read about those....catholics followers are spiritually blind, they act like robots they are programed to believe what catholics leader tell them to believe such as confess their sins to them to be saved or forgiven even though the bible says that you have to confess your sins to God...duh
@PianoForteSky really even the Bible Provides documents really what are they and why did the catholic church include them in the bible. Spiritually blind now tell me where in the Bible did Jesus say confess your sins to him or to God talk about the intellectually spiritually defunct.
@martlut CATHOLIC TRADITION - Mary is the queen of heaven.....BUT THE BIBLE SAYS: Jeremiah-7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.7:19 Do they provoke me to anger? saith the LORD: do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of their own faces? Let meknow if you WANT MORE I will happily keep posting them
@martlut CATHOLIC TRADITION - Mary is the queen of heaven.....BUT THE BIBLE SAYS: Jeremiah
7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.
7:19 Do they provoke me to anger? saith the LORD: do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of their own faces?...(Bible proof #1)...do you want number 23456789 etcc..??
Why is it that Catholics can provide authentic historical documents, which Protestants refuse to read, and yet Protestants in turn, cannot provide any authentic historical documents that Catholics ask of them
In the years I have asked for proof from scores of those who make these false charges, I have never even once received documented "proof" of what they charge.
The reason for their lack of "evidence" is most certainly that the lie cannot be "proven".
I would suggest that those who make these false charges, to please open their Bibles and read
Your canon is a late invention. It draws from spurious texts from Alexandria. It includes books which were rejected by the Jews long before Christ came. And books which the Christian church subsequently rejected for the same reasons the Jews had. I understand that you want your claims to be true. Wanting them to be true is substantially different from making claims and then repeating the same claims out of an absence of any support for them.
@havoc092 who put the first bible together again you know the one with all the Books under one cover you cant seem to answer it nothing like skirting around these questions and refusing to answer To be versed in history is to cease to be Protestant. ... It's about being intellectually honest - to oneself and to God.
@havoc092 Gee is that why the Septuagint. According to Jewish Encyclopedia com, the Septuagint is "The oldest and most important of all the [Bible] versions made by Jews" I guess that's why the Ethiopian Jews still use It as well ROFL By the way it ws a bible scioty that deleted them their reason they would not fund any bible written with them because of their catholic hatred
@martlut It may be important for some specific reasons. That doesn't make the table of contents canon of the jews. You have this misguided notion that if it's in the LXX or some other work, that somehow that makes it canon. Not so. If it was canonized by the Jews, it is canon. You don't seem to have this problem in understanding with your own version of canon; but, that isn't surprising. Playing dumb isn't a mark of authority any more than making claims is.
Well, again, we're dealing with your claims, rather than reality. When we examine those claims, they turn out not to hold any water. Catholic claims are backed up by works from later centuries that pretend to be early writings. This is why I put the challenge to you guys to back up your claims. If I weren't certain of what you have to rely upon, doing this would be suicide for my position. Catholicism has no early footprint. It isn't in the Bible anywhere. The apostles never heard of it.
.. and it's widely used because most seem to like the language of it and the copyist errors in it are widely known and corrected. Personally, I prefer a good parallel myself or a Thompson chain version of the KJV. Though I have a collection of them after so many years of study
And held as authority to be recognized and respected. The Jews have a word for that. Americans do too; but, it's rather more vulgar in the American version. Then you wonder why we question your credibility and rather state that you have none.
Catholics usurped authority over Jewish canon and of no authority, altered it, then tried to force everyone to accept Catholic authority. That isn't how it works.
@havoc092 Better go tell the Jews in Ethiopia to remove them from their Old testament they still use it to this day sorry and don't forget to remove the Verses Jesus and the Apostles used from it in your KJV ROFL
@havoc092 Catholics put together the New testament sorry the Jews didn't belive in Christ now did they and have no authority in directing what books are to be in the christian Bible.
@havoc092 By the way the KJV which contains 2,600 translation errors. Some foundation. Don't believe it? Just google "KJV translation errors". better get rid of that trash book which their was no authority to print it in the first place ROFL
@martlut So now you're attacking a translation of the Bible to defend your position..
I'll leave that for you to ponder. It's normal that I see catholics shred the bible in defense of philosophy; but, to attack a translation in a desperate attempt at justifying their lack of authority is stunning. Well, not really. It's difficult to gall me anymore.
..if the new candidate revelation conflicts with the known good, the new is fraudulent.
You call this sola scriptura and repudiate it. The jews call this verifying revelation and have done it this way since Moses. You repudiate the standard for judging revelation that has been the measure every prophet and all the Apostles were held to and then pretend that substituting another standard allows you to avoid inspection. Not only that; but, in violating authority, you want your violation raised
We already know from the research done by IBRI that your church lied about Jamnia (Yavneh). It isn't even debateable, they made it up. And the records at Yavneh proves they made it up. Just as the pseudo-ignatian text you keep wanting to cite is a 9th century text rather than a 2nd century text. You offer something, we check, and it's not what you offered it to be.
One more thing. The verification of revelation from the time of moses was to compare with prior good revelation..
@havoc092 sorry the catholic church lied about Jamia not in your wildest dreams did you know they also picked a new Messiah to replace Jesus and Built a temple for Him ROFL the ruins are still their and can be visited today
@martlut The Catholic church provably lied about Jamnia. It isn't even a question at this point because the information is freely available and open to scrutiny. Your own scholars had to fess up to it, and that IS in the IBRI white paper. If you are such a bigot that facts are immaterial to your ideological stance, then perhaps we need to rethink whether dealing in facts is of any use at all. If you are unmoved by facts you generally have a term for that yourself, invincibly ignorant.
@havoc092 ell I guess the Jews should throw out that decision that was rendered at Jamia Lie hardly in you case yes you are lying Im surprised you even herd the word Jamia seems you didn't mention the Rabbi's Name or the new messiah's name he chose ask a Jew he will tell you all about it ROFL
@martlut Well, the jews didn't author the nonsense, so they hardly need to throw anything out. Roman Catholicism authored the lie. But, I doubt any of you will stop parading it about anytime soon. I certainly don't see the author of this video checking his facts and fixing his mistatements. Par for the course.
@havoc092 really the Catholic Church didnt give us the Bible that we have today please . who did then who chose the Books of the NT to be Included in the Bible.
@martlut No, the Catholic Church didn't give us the NT that we have today. The NT as it exists today largely owes its existance to reformeres and early MS. If you would bother doing research, most of the scholarship going into modern Bibles is a direct review of original MS. Who is that owed to? Apparently you're so full of pride in your claims you can't bother to back them up and simply think you're owed something for what you wish to claim. I think the KJV is the most common still today.
@havoc092 give me the name of the complete Bible before the catholic church gave it to you you've been studying this stuff since the 80's should be on the tip of your tongue but you never say who it was or what books were in it who put it together
I have finished researching the claims made by the source which martlut plagarized and tried to pass off as his own words. What he was not aware of was that the claims contradict the Vatican itself.
This is true and proof is found on the vatican's official website. Go there and take a look under "Resource library", then under "The Bible, then under English, then scroll down to "Acts" and click "9" for chapter 9.
When you scroll down to verse “31” this is what you will find,
"The church throughout all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria was at peace. It was being built up and walked in the fear of the Lord, and with the consolation of the holy Spirit it grew in numbers."
Martlut in his extreme ignorance has gone against even the Vatican itself (which like the Pharisees does occasionally get things right). Carson attempts to take two words “throughout all” and twist them to say “Catholic” when they in fact do not. Motney claims that the Greek words found in the Byzantine Greek text for “through all”, were” kath” and “olays” which is true.
However his claim that “kath olays” is rendered “Catholic” in modern English is completely false. In fact this is a proper word for for word transliteration and translation of the portion of verse 31 in question. First this is the 1st part of verse 31 from the Byzantine Greek text
As you can see, the claim that kath olēs is rendered “Catholic” is an absolute lie and is not even supported by the vatican. Also “throughout all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria does not equate to “universal”, being but is regional.
In the end do not take my word for it there are plenty of free online translators. Select one and
Paste “ καθ' ὅλης” and I guarantee you that you will never get “Catholic” as the translation
In fairness to Russ Montney; he only did a transliteration of Acts 9:31 from the Byzantine Greek text (not a translation). The erroneous translation into English seems to have originated from a Catholic apologist by the name of Randy Carson in a forum called “Catholic Answers” from Sept 22, 2006. In any case the Vatican itself does not support the translation or the claim by martlut. So his claim goes against the view of his own sect.
As you probably know, Catholic Bibles have 73 books, 46 in the Old Testament, and 27 in the New Testament. Protestant Bibles have 66 books with only 39 in the Old Testament. The books missing from Protestant Bibles are: Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and parts of Esther and Daniel
They are called the 'Deuterocanonicals' by Catholics and 'Apocrypha' by Protestants. Martin Luther, without any authority whatsoever, removed those seven books and placed them in an appendix during the reformation. They remained in the appendix of Protestant Bibles until about 1826, and then they were removed altogether.
Please be mindful of the fact that those seven books had been in Bibles used by all Christians from the very foundation of Christianity.
Hellenistic Greek was the language of the day during the time of Christ. This was due to the fact that Alexander the Great had conquered the region several hundred years before. The Hebrew language was on its way out, and there was a critical need for a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament for dispersed Greek speaking Jews.
This translation, called the Septuagint, or LXX, was completed by Jewish scholars in about 148 B.C. and it had all of the books, including the seven removed by Martin Luther over 1650 years later. The New Testament has about 350 references to Old Testament verses.
By careful examination, scholars have determined that 300 of these are from the Septuagint and the rest are from the Hebrew Old Testament*. They have shown that Jesus Christ Himself, quoted from the Septuagint. Early Christians used the Septuagint to support Christian teachings.
For the first 300 years of Christianity, there was no Bible as we know it today. Christians had the Old Testament Septuagint, and literally hundreds of other books from which to choose. The Catholic Church realized early on that she had to decide which of these books were inspired and which ones weren't.
The debates raged between theologians, Bishops, and Church Fathers, for several centuries as to which books were inspired and which ones weren't. In the meantime, several Church Councils or Synods, were convened to deal with the matter, notably, Rome in 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419. The debates sometimes became bitter on both sides
One of the most famous was between St. Jerome, who felt the seven books were not canonical, and St. Augustine who said they were. Protestants who write about this will invariably mention St. Jerome and his opposition, and conveniently omit the support of St. Augustine. I must point out here that Church Father's writings are not infallible statements, and their arguments are merely reflections of their own private opinions
When some say St. Jerome was against the inclusion of the seven books, they are merely showing his personal opinion of them. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. However, A PERSONS PRIVATE OPINION DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH AT ALL. There are always three sides to every story, this side, that side, and the side of truth. Whether Jerome's position, or Augustine's position was the correct position, had to be settled by a third party, and that third party was the Catholic Church.
Now the story had a dramatic change, as the Pope stepped in to settle the matter. In concurrence with the opinion of St. Augustine, and being prompted by the Holy Spirit, Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called,
The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. He then asked St. Jerome to use this canon and to write a new Bible translation which included an Old Testament of 46 books, which were all in the Septuagint, and a New Testament of 27 books.
ROME HAD SPOKEN, THE ISSUE WAS SETTLED.
"THE CHURCH RECOGNIZED ITS IMAGE IN THE INSPIRED BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. THAT IS HOW IT DETERMINED THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE.
Can someone answer me why the majority of catholic paintings (Jesus, Mary and the angels) make with their fingers the sign number two??? What is the meaning of that?
TheValleyOfLight 2 months ago
The title should be "why do protitents have 7 less books in the bible"
jfabproductions 3 months ago
So the New Testament quotes books which our not found in the Old Testament? What in the world?
Lindemann04109 3 months ago
Tracing the Church of Rome, 'christian,' back to its roots in Babylon, clearly defines the pagan, Hebrew Scripture despising Church of Rome's attempts to destroy all form of the Hebrew Scripture. Why else substitute worship of forbidden creatures in their official religious practice?
claudius2u 3 months ago
well done my friend! Extra Ecclesiam Nullas Salus
biggatorcaesar 4 months ago
Maccabees are the Jews whom revolted against ROME, they fled to Arabia, whom, set up a Family Shrine called "Maccabees" MAKKA_KAABA, MAKKA mutated into MATTHIAS (it is THEY who wrote TORAH(Ptolomy), GOSPELS(Josephus) and QURAN(Muhammad)
thone2008 4 months ago
@thone2008 This seems untrue: The term Maccabees as used to describe the Jewish army is taken from the Hebrew word for "hammer". Also, Mecca is much older than the book of Maccabees. Plus the muslims believe the Kaaba to be a millenium older than Solomon's temple. So, an etymological connection seems unlikely.
Khamug 2 months ago
@Khamug
Lol, The Kaaba is as old as the Islamic Religion, which appeared in the first Millemia AD, thats a Cock Story, etymology could suggest that Maccabee is a synonym with Mason, but my theory is the Jews after 70Ce or.And 135CE Revolt againts Rome, they Fled from Judea to Saudi, and the Maccabee's Transformed into the Meccans, its not an Impossible Scenario, is it
thone2008 2 months ago
@thone2008 one shouldn't make up things in religion, religion is not something to be made up by one's own theories and fantasies
Khamug 2 months ago
@Khamug
Religion is the by-Products of AUTHORS, DUH, Book of Mormon was written by an AUTHOR, and Mormonism the By-Products, Star Wars was created by an AUTHOR, and generated Star Wars FANS, Its not HARD to understand, Gospel of Matthew wqas written by an AUTHOR[Josephus] in 74AD and generated FANS called Christians , its a STORY, you GRAP A PEN, AND WRITE SOMETHING , the term WORD OF GOD, GOD in OUR IMAGE, we can CREATE anything with just a PEN and writing WORDS,
thone2008 2 months ago
@thone2008 Wow your deep!
dtt1900 3 days ago
I dont think any of you should be judging anyone first off especially other denominations Christians shouldnt fight about doctrine they should work together againgst the common good but ya all are too concerned on whos right who wrong denominations man made no has it 100% correct not even the catholics not even the protestants and I am catholic and I dont think being catholic means your souls saved I dont think God cares what denomination you belong to
donniedarkofreak559 5 months ago
@donniedarkofreak559
well perhaps. but then you have denominations like mormans, Seventh day adventist, Jehovas Witness, Westboro baptist church popping up. All claiming to truly follow Christ. Now, all of these have large differences. A protestant might say on they dont follow the bible, but they can equally say that back at you. There must be some Parameters on intrepreting the bible, but who sets these standards? Martin Luther? Or perhaps the Church that has been given authority.
neoknux009 4 months ago
@donniedarkofreak559 yes god doesn't care which denominations but god cares who teaches the right thing the way he teaches when he was alive and ONLY the catholic church teach the same way as the early christians so means we are on the right track..
Skyethur 3 months ago
@donniedarkofreak559 I encourage you to study the faith, being catholic does not mean your soul is saved, in this you are correct but it is the means for your salvation
AK8591 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Roman Catholic Church teaches unbiblical doctorines like the Trinity and celebrates Pagan festivals Like Christmas and Easter, Also batpizes Infants which is completely unbiblical
Mcstroke57 5 months ago
why dont you start from now on campaign for a united christians no matter who or what sect you belong. you pighead
rederama1 5 months ago
@rederama1
it won't be possible until the Protestants stops their heresies
BboyJuice98 5 months ago
you are a true infidel. . .u nuts. look at the muslims they are united in faith thru Holy Quran. Christians should start be united in faith through Christ and the Holy Bible no matter what sect you belong to. but, if christians cannot be as one in faith and trying to ruins each others faith then time will come Christianity will collapse.
rederama1 5 months ago
@rederama1 Muslims are united? Really?! Are you forgetting the Sunnis and Shi'a groups that like opressing and killing eachother in Iraq and Iran? Not to mention the multiple other smaller groups, movements and sects - some that are more moderate and others want to blow stuff up. Islam is just as fragmented as Christianity.
As for the collapse of Christianity - read revelations. There be hard times ahead!
mjribes 5 months ago
Brothers and sisters, let us study our faith so that we defend it. make it a habit to read
and study
catholicapologetics.info
this the most Comprehensive Catholic Apologetics website on the net, that gives answers to
many questions about religion and spirituality, while having a vast amount of helpful
resources. General topics include, the Church, morality, apologetics, Sacred Scripture,
modern problems, evolution, modernism, freemasonry, etc.
BboyJuice98 5 months ago
Where do you think the Bible came from, Martin Luther? No, it came from the Catholic Church. And please, stop being a such a "Rivetthead" and do a little research before throwing your illiterate, uneducated, ramblings around like you actually know what you're talking about. You sound utterly foolish and ignorant.
oldcatholics 6 months ago
Catholics are pagans
TheRivetthead 7 months ago
@TheRivetthead and judging from your profile page, you are an idiotic heretical "Christian". Go worship your own personal Jesus like the 35,000 other Protestant sects.
drdst17 6 months ago
@drdst17 im a true christian your just a catholic heathen and thoes 35,000 other Protestant sects kick catholic butt
TheRivetthead 6 months ago
@TheRivetthead We've been around for 2000 years, and were founded by Christ Himself in Matthew 16:18.
When was your heretical sect founded? Or are you the founder of your own "Christian" belief system? Protestantism is about a man's own ego, not about Christ. Ultimately, the Self wins out, because Christ is just an "idea" to a Protestant - to be molded into whatever he wants Christ to be.
drdst17 6 months ago
@TheRivetthead there is as many Catholics as there are protestant, and Protestants are divided, if this came to a "kicking butt war" the orthodox would side with the Catholics to, and then there are even more.
however i do admit you'v kicked some butt, like the genocide my family fled from caused by prods that is the reason i was born in the USA.
anyway, would this not be better if you prods just keep on splinting up your churches, and calling each other heretics and left us alone?
kevinjjfr 6 months ago
@kevinjjfr
And also the Anglicans(another protestant sect) would would also side with the catholics.
yah there there may be 35,000 protestant sect, but you guys are not united. for sure there will be other protestant sect that would go on the side of the TRUE CHURCH FOUNDED BY CHRIST HIMSELF.
CATHOLICISM IS THE FULLNESS OF CHRISTIANITY.
BboyJuice98 5 months ago 2
@BboyJuice98 What do you mean, You guys?
I'm Popish.
kevinjjfr 5 months ago
@kevinjjfr I mean the Protestants, I am a catholic convert and was formerly a Presbyterian protestant and now I see the big difference.
Being a christian never felt this good until I became a Catholic.
I'm from the Philippines, the largest catholic population in asia.
BboyJuice98 5 months ago
Thank you very much for these videos. I kept getting different stories from different people, and this clears it up. I will now go read the book of Baruch.
MultiWafflemaster 7 months ago
And gess what buddy we where burned are bibles where destoryed we where feed to the lions not you. And gess what we have been here for almost 2000 years and still have more active worshipers than you any day.
14ACDC 8 months ago
Excellent videos. Thank you very much.
adam95y 8 months ago
Poor theology and utter nonsense. Typical fundamentalist interpretation of the scriptures...
God bless
oldcatholics 8 months ago
The pope is the anti christ that Christ JESUS the lord warned us about. paul said the anti christ would sit in the christian church and call himself God. daniel said the anti christ would come out of the divided roman empire right after its collpase and call himself the equal of JESUS and change Gods sabbath day and kill the christians. rev 17 said the anti christ would sit with the harlot church in rome the city which lays on seven hills . Only one man matches this PROPHECY THE POPE
vladimirkovalski 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The truth is that every mans work will be made manifest. You say you're Catholic Christian, I say I'm Apostolic Christian, but it matters not what we are called. In the end our works as well as our faith in Almighty God will be tested. It's time for us to start proving our faith in God and stop arguing over religion. You say you believe in God then prove your belief in him by works of righteiousness and acts faith. I'm gonna abandon this ignorance, because it does nothing for me.
God Bless
soulsurcher 8 months ago
jesus is coming........look busy!
777azathoth 9 months ago
This is proof that the bible is bullshit because if it was perfect there would not be this many versions. Can't explain that away.
lastofmany1 9 months ago
@lastofmany1 But, only to the people who believe that the Bible is the *only* soure of God's revelation. It's an entirely self-defeating concept, as the Bible appears to contradict itself in various instances. Not to mention that there was no Bible for the early centuries of Christianity. And, even after the Bible was compiled, it would still be over 1,000 years before it would be available to the masses. /// The Catholic Church believes in Scripture and Tradition. It's a composite of both.
TenderTrap86 9 months ago
@lastofmany1 The Bible is sourced from Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic manuscripts. Anyone can make a translation including the enemies of Christianity. The Bible happens to be the most popular book in the entire history of mankind. It makes sense to have many translations. Your argument is moot.
JAGChristianos 9 months ago
Thank you.
CatholicView 9 months ago
AMEN! to Saint Thomas Aquinas - a beautiful expression of faith. What is up with these virulent attacks on Catholicism? This fellow below is obviously very "impressed" with his cerebral knowledge of alleged "revelations" of errors of the Church that Jesus Christ founded. A sad commentary of ones soul. Peace be with you.
oldcatholics 10 months ago
@oldcatholics The pope is the anti christ that Christ JESUS the lord warned us about. paul said the anti christ would sit in the christian church and call himself God. daniel said the anti christ would come out of the divided roman empire right after its collpase and call himself the equal of JESUS and change Gods sabbath day and kill the christians. rev 17 said the anti christ would sit with the harlot church in rome the city which lays on seven hills .
vladimirkovalski 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski Now ask yourself, did the Pope do ANY OF THOSE? The Pope is the Vicar of Christ, the successor of St. Peter. The antichrist in the book of Revelation is Emperor Nero. It's been expressed repeatedly how the numeric value of his name is 666. No other person is supposed to meet this criteria, that's why John put tha dang thing in there. Emperor Nero executed all of the apostles accept St. John who he sent into exile. His reason for doing so was because the Emporer of Rome was
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski the only one to be considered a god-incarnate, not the Christ that the Christians followed. That's why it says he "puts himself in God's throne, and says to himself, 'I will exhalt my throne over God's.'" Any religion that wasn't of the Roman Empire was considered national atheism and was therefore illegal. Hence, what resulted in the death of the apostles and more 1st century Jewish Christians.... I converted to Catholicism, btw, because there were certain aspects of it....
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski I noticed weren't upheld in protestantism that ARE Biblical, AND Christian.
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@MrZetterlund777 That is because the roman catholic church is the only church which fits the description of the harlot church of rev 17. She rules over the kings of the earth she is drunk with the blood of Gods people she dresses herself in gold and purple she sits in rome the city which lays on seven hills and she sits in power with the beast the blasphemere man that calls himself the equal of Christ. Only the vatican and pope match this bible prophecy. infact the jesuits who rule are satani
vladimirkovalski 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski No, it's because Christ promised to protect His Church from the powers of hell. You don't even realize what you're talking about. Think about it, is the Church "Drunk with the blood of the Saints"? NO. Pagan Rome under the rule of Emperor Nero who martyred the early Christians and apostles is the anti-christ, and the Roman Empire of idolatry, since the Emperor was considered "god-incarnate" rather than any "Christ." The Pope hasn't proclaimed himself god, nor has he ever killed
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski ...My brothers you sick individual. I converted to Catholicism because they are the only Christian faith who stands united (1 Cor. 1:10.) They are the only Church that upholds the ACTUAL presence of Christ in the Eucharist (1 Cor. 11:23-27.) And they are the only ones who respect the position of the Vicar of Christ, St. Peter (Matt. 16:18 & John 21:15-18.)
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@MrZetterlund777 The roman catholic church is the only church which matches revelation 17 consenring the harlot church. That is not a christian church that is a church of satan full of idols and blasphemies. do you read your bible at all or do you follow blind man made traditions and culture. rev 17 said the harlot chrurch will come out of rome will kill the true christians will dress in purple and gold and will sit with a blasphemoues man. The pope and the vatican are the only who match this
vladimirkovalski 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski Brother, why do you say the harlot in Revelation 17 is a Church? The word “Church” is found nowhere in Revelation 17, and Christ promised the protection of His Church from the powers of hell in Matt. 16:18. The woman in Rev. 17 is described as having “seven heads.” According to verses 9-10, these are “seven hills with seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and one has yet to come.” Here we understand it is talking about KINDGOMS, not a Church .…
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
When he writes, “Five have fallen, ” he was referring to five great empires that had fallen; Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece, that give power and authority to the beast.” Along with “the one which is,” which is Rome, and “the one which is to come,” The Antichrist’s reign, which will be brief. (Rev. 12:12, 13:5.) This cannot be the Church, since it is described as “ruling over the kings of the Earth.” In 17:18. The Church doesn’t have political or economic authority
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski The Pope isn’t the antichrist, either, Emperor Nero was. The Greek spelling, "Nerōn Kaisar", transliterates into Aramaic as "נרון קסר", nrwn qsr:
Resh: 200
Samech: 60
Qof: 100
Noon: 50
Vav: 6
Resh: 200
Noon: 50
Total: 666
Nero suppressed the early Christians, was worshipped as “god-incarnate” burned Christians in fires, and even martyred the apostles. It is impossible to doubt that this is the anti-Christ St. John was referring to….
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski Yes brother, I DO read my Bible. I converted to Catholicism because they acknowledge the actual presence of Jesus in Communion (1 Cor. 11:24-27) the power of the priest to forgive sins (John 20:23) the cleansing fires of purgatory (1 Cor. 3:15-16) the primacy of the Pope (Matt. 16:18) we are like-minded with no denominations (1 Cor. 1:10) and we don’t believe in the heresy of Sola-Fide “faith alone” which is ironically only found in James 2:24.
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski We also don’t believe in the heresy of “Sola-Scriptura” or “Scripture alone” since it is ironically unbiblical (2 Thessalonians 2:15.) We ARE the Biblical Church, who stands fast with God’s promise in Matt. 16:18. I see no reason to reform from Christ’s promise, because Christ’s promise is good enough for me.
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@MrZetterlund777 You are a bible church? You burned the bible in the dark ages you burned people who had bibles you wouldnt allow the bible to be translated in any other language but latin you wouldnt preach in any other langue but latin so that people wouldnt understand, and you call this church a bible church. You have idols you took out the second commandment, you change the sabbath day and even a ddmit boldy that you did. all these things christ said the anti christ would do
vladimirkovalski 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski Hello, sorry I took so long to respond to you. I was out of town to see family. ^_^ Wow, I’m almost prepared to ask “Where does the Bible say the anti-Christ will do THAT?” However, there are bigger issues at hand needed to be addressed: The Church burned Bibles in the dark ages because they were vernacular translations. The Latin Vulgate was the approved version for the Church, because most in Europe who weren’t illiterate could read and write Latin....
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski Vernacular translations were usually discouraged due to most languages not having similarly developed alphabets, or not having alphabets at all. Vernacular translations weren’t intollerated until propaganda attempted to be justified using vernacular translations. And, of course, there are potent examples of Catholics in that time who have made great efforts to make vernacular translations to spread the gospel who are canonized as saints by the Church....
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
Book burning was simply a common practice as well. Protestant reformer John Calvin had as many copies as could be found of the Servetus Bible burned, since he didn’t approve of them. Saying the Church would only translated or PREACHED in Latin so others wouldn’t understand it is erroneous, since Latin was the common language of the time. Hence, “Vulgate” means “common version” since it was the most widely used and understood. The Church never burned someone for the sake of owning a Bible....
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski Brother, I was persuaded on the Church’s position on using images and iconography the same way the Church was. During the Crusades, a multitude of Muslim jihads against the Church persuaded her to decide to remove their images and iconography, since the Muslims were very against these things, and their victories over the Church were taken as a sign from God that they may need to remove their use of iconography and images....
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski In response to this, a monk made several points to show that God does not disapprove of the use of images: 1.) God would be breaking His own commandment if it were so, since He commanded Moses to make images of two cherubim on top of the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:18,) a bronze snake in the wilderness (Numb. 21:8,) and the fact that the very incarnation of our Lord would be a sin, since Jesus is made in the exact image and likeness of God the Father (Colossians. 1:15.)
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski The emphasis on the second commandment is clearly on the worship of images rather than making them. If not, then cartoons, artwork and sketches are all idolatry. The second commandment is also clearly in Chapter one article two of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, so clearly couldn’t have been removed by her. By the way, there were no numerals when the “ten” commandments were given. They were actually divided up socially, in relationship to God and to your neighbor....
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski Also, Christians aren’t supposed to observe the Sabbath since we are no longer under the law but under the grace of God (Romans 6:14) and also it is the day of our Lord’s resurrection and a more suitable day of worship. Technically, Jesus would have risen on the Sabbath since His calendar measured a day by sunrise to sunrise, however, our measures in 24-hour periods. The resurrection occurred before the rising of the sun....
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@vladimirkovalski 1st century Christians worshipped early from 4-6 AM on “Sunday” mornings; both to the parallel of the time of the discovery of the empty tomb, and to avoid Roman persecution. Anyways, hope I was helpful to you. May God bless you and keep you on your search and journey to the Truth and hope that is Jesus Christ. My assistance will be with you always, your brother here in the Catholic Church. :)
MrZetterlund777 8 months ago
@MrZetterlund777 God said rember to keep the 7th day holy there is a reason god said the 7th day and there is a reason ejsus said i did not come to change the law and there is a reason jesus critized the jewish phariese for tampering with Gods commandments and there is a reason daniel said the anti christ which will kill Gods people would think to change Gods times and laws ps sabbath day and when you consider the pope spoke blasphemy killed the saints and changed the sabbath day to sunday
vladimirkovalski 8 months ago
"How can we live in harmony? First we need to know we are all madly in love with the same God."
- Saint Thomas Aquinas
planetery 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@planetery The pope is the anti christ that Christ JESUS the lord warned us about. paul said the anti christ would sit in the christian church and call himself God. daniel said the anti christ would come out of the divided roman empire right after its collpase and call himself the equal of JESUS and change Gods sabbath day and kill the christians. rev 17 said the anti christ would sit with the harlot church in rome the city which lays on seven hills .
vladimirkovalski 8 months ago
LIES! There were15 books ADDED and marked "UNINSPIRED"by the RCC in the1st Bible . Martin Luther removed them alltogether and at Trent the RCC only RE-ADDED 7 of the 15 books Matin removed.
Martin Luther got tired of the SCAM the RCC used like the one in 2 Maccabees12:43 Where Judas tried to BUY SOULS OF THE DEAD FROM SIN.The RCC was using these LIES to get rich as they STILL ARE DOING TODAY.
If these 15 books are of God then why only re-add 7 of the 15 and not all of them?
MarcusMarcusMe 10 months ago
The Printing Press was invented around 1450 by Johannes Gutenberg. And the Gutenberg Bible was the first real book printed. Which means that the Bible did include the 7 deuterocanonical, a good 50 or 60 years before the reformation. And 80 or 90 years before the Council of Trent. So who was it that changed the bible?
mattsgame1 10 months ago
@mattsgame1 SHHH! Don't bring up historical facts. Christians don't like them!
planetery 10 months ago
Some say that the Catholic Church added the books at Council of Trent which was in 1546. Ok. But I have a question. The first book ever printed with the printing press was the Bible. And it included the deuterocanonical books; which might make sense, if it printed was printing after 1546. But here is the thing. (see next post)
mattsgame1 10 months ago
Why does the Vatican have a large Obelisk taking pride of place in St Peters square? The Obelisk can be found at almost every capital location, all over the earth...why? Back to Rome though, why is that Egyptian monument in the middle of a place of religious importance? Please dont say there is no reason, or, its pretty, or change the point and ask why im asking. Can anyone tell me what the Obelisk is for in St Peters square?
kaderoder 11 months ago
@kaderoder For the same reason that Protestants join the Freemasons- because the world is run by Satanists who enjoy getting you to follow false belief systems.
planetery 10 months ago
@planetery BINGO!
kaderoder 10 months ago
What Protestants don't know about their own religion could fill libraries...
planetery 1 year ago
@planetery: And what Catholics don't know about salvation will fill Hell with Billions of Souls.
MarcusMarcusMe 10 months ago
@MarcusMarcusMe LOL Thank you for proving my point.
You know, a SMART person would've asked for specifics before proclaiming something they know nothing about.
BTW- You know the Bible narratives about virgin birth and resurrection have been categorically disproven, right?
Of course not. Because Protestants don't read...
planetery 10 months ago
@planetery What point did I prove in "your world"? Oh wait, I see, I can't know anything unless the RCC approves it.
Did you notice that you rambled on about what I don't know but said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO THE CONTRARY?...All talk!
You seem to be under the impression that because your faith has the title "Catholic" over it that it somehow means you have an exclusive with God.
I will wait for your next empty comment to me filled with all talk and no facts you can support. God Bless.
MarcusMarcusMe 10 months ago
@MarcusMarcusMe LOL You really shouldn't assume you know things. I'm not Christian AT ALL. I just recognize the simple fact that Catholics have at the very least a basic grasp of concepts like history and the relevance of tradition, whereas Protestants- particularly Evangelicals- are COMPLETELY ignorant of such things.
As far as I'm concerned, all three Abrahamic faiths are primitive blood sacrifice religions. If you respected history you could see that. But alas..
Your move, Aquinas.
planetery 10 months ago
@planetery: It was not an assumption at all... One could only infer from your original statement that you were Catholic. However, I find it curious that you would spend your time denouncing something that you find to be beneath you.
I on the other hand do not have time to waste discussing a topic with someone who is clueless on the matters of the spirit, wanting only instead to impress himself with his own intellect; therefore I decline to converse with you any futher.
Moves cancelled.
MarcusMarcusMe 10 months ago
@MarcusMarcusMe Actually, all you have said is that you are too scared to discover something that might challenge your preconceived belief system.
As far as "One could only infer from your original statement that you were Catholic", the very fact that I am not is proof in itself of the idiocy of your statement.
As far as knowing spirit- God is everything that exists. There is nothing that ISN'T part of God. For you to even NEED a book, or a savior, is proof that you know NOTHING about God.
planetery 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MarcusMarcusMe Actually, all you have said is that you are too scared to discover something that might challenge your preconceived belief system.
As far as "One could only infer from your original statement that you were Catholic", the very fact that I am not is proof in itself of the idiocy of your statement.
As far as knowing spirit- God is everything that exists. There is nothing that ISN'T part of God. For you to even NEED a book, or a savior, is proof that you know NOTHING about God.
planetery 10 months ago
@planetery BTW, for you to assume that I was Catholic even after i had JUST SAID that the narratives of a virgin birth and a crucifixion/resurrection were total fiction is HILARIOUS.
If you think that Catholics don't believe in the Virgin Mary, that idiocy speaks for itself.
If you simply did not read my words, you only show that you are prone to pontificating on things you haven't bothered to research, and your actions prove EVERYTHING I said about Christians being illiterate fools...
planetery 10 months ago
the Holy Catholic Church is the only living Church on Earth not the Protestants!
armando1955ify 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@armando1955ify Roman Catholicism is legalism at it's best. Christianity is Jesus Christ, not Roman-Catholicism, Orthodoxism, Protestant or any other religion. True Christianity is based on a relationship with Jesus Christ that results in true repentance and obediance from heart, not forced. And salvation is by faith ALONE through grace ALONE in Jesus ALONE, not by works, least anyone should boast. Salvation > Change of heart > Change of actions, AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND, GET THAT.
fakirJ 1 year ago
If this video is claiming that the Catholic canon was fixed at its present composition prior to the Council of Trent, the contents of the Vulgate (which was developed in stages and included material not considered canon by Catholics) and the widespread use of the Septuagint prior to said council serve as evidence against that.
tifforo1 1 year ago
I said it in your other video and i'll say it again:
Protentant-ism didn't start until the 17th century. Therfore, Catholics did NOT add 7 more books from the protestant bible. The protestants took everything from the catholic bible, and took away 7 books.
Catholisism started in: 32-33 A.D. established by Jesus
Protestantism started in: The 17th century by Henry the 8th and Marting Luther(not martin luther king Jr.)
chessleach 1 year ago
@chessleach
"The protestants took everything from the catholic bible, and took away 7 books."
More like, the Catholics and Protestants both removed stuff from the Septuagint, but Protestants (who followed the Jewish canon) removed 7 more books than Catholics. Did you actually watch the videos, which explained this?
The Protestant Reformation began around 1517, not "the 17th century."
tifforo1 1 year ago
@chessleach absolute nonsense.The Roman catholic church is NOT the one true church.That is dogma and nonsense.read the Holy Bible and then tell me that .
Just repeated nonsense contrary to Scripture.
sealsareopen 10 months ago
@sealsareopen
Your just saying that because they tought you that in sunday school.
Us catholics are just doing what jesus tought Peter
and what peter thought the next Pope
...and the next
...and the next
Until Finally, we were given this Pope that we have today.
The same teaching that Jesus tought us applies.
chessleach 10 months ago
@chessleach I am saying it because it is true.Your teachings are unscriptural.This thing about Peter being the head of the church is nonsense and contrary to Scripture.This business about Jesus ONLY being in the Catholic Church is contrary to Scripture.The vatican collecting Gold and silver is CONTRARY to Scripture.
Worshipping Mary is CONTRARY to Scripture.
sealsareopen 10 months ago 2
@chessleach And I will ask why does the RC church teach a false Gospel?
sealsareopen 10 months ago
By the way the JKIng Of England King Henry burned Tyndale at the stake not the catholic church ROFL
martlut 1 year ago
It is because of the Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called, "The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. thats the reason You have your Bible because of apostolic tradition
martlut 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CATHOLIC TRADITION - Venerating/worshipping images. Pope bows to statues of Mary, people worship the eucharist and have statues/candles in their homes and churches. THE BIBLE SAYS:Exodus
20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God
PianoForteSky 1 year ago
CATHOLIC TRADITION - Pope called Holy Father. BUT THE BIBLE SAYS: John-17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.The term Holy Father is only found one time in the entire Bible. It was when Jesus prayed before He and His disciples went to the garden of Gethsemane. He referred to God the Father as Holy Father.
PianoForteSky 1 year ago
CATHOLIC TRADITION - Mary is the mother of God. BUT THE BIBLE SAYS: Mary is the mother of the earthly Jesus, not God. Jesus pre- existed from everlasting as God (see John 1:1). When He came to redeem mankind, He laid aside His glory and was made like unto sinful man so that He could take our punishment (Hebrew 2:9). God has no mother. He has lived from everlasting which means He had no beginning...No wonder catholics are taught not to believe 100% in the bible "interesting"...
PianoForteSky 1 year ago
Peter was married (remember the pope is supposedly continuing the apostolic line through Peter). So, peter had a wife, huh? how come catholics Popes are forbidden to get married if they claim to be Peter's susessors??? Wich means that the catholic church follows man's traditions...
PianoForteSky 1 year ago
@PianoForteSky popes and roman catholic priests are forbidden to marry because it is a discipline, like fasting during Lent, it is not dogma. But it is very unlikly to change due to the corruption of married priests and bishops in the early church history.
Priests and Popes are married to the Church and like, Paul, claim chastity and single vocation is best.
xukeith33 1 year ago
With so many evidence, acces to information such as the internet, books, news etc..whoever denies the lies , murders, and maipulation of the Catholic church and still believe the catholic church is the one true church is because they chose to be ignorant.
PianoForteSky 1 year ago
@PianoForteSky the god of the protetant is a book!!
shemae25 1 year ago
@PianoForteSky
shemae25 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PianoForteSky the god of the protestant is a book
shemae25 1 year ago
During the Inquisition, the Roman Catholic institution killed millions. Why? Primarily to suppress any and all opposition to her heresies. Side "benefits" included taking the material wealth of its victims and showing the pope's power. The Catholic Inquisitors tortured, crippled, burned, and imprisioned millions of people.What happened to love your enemies? (Matthew 5:44) .... hummm that explains how they got to own the bible...of course they stole it.
PianoForteSky 1 year ago
@PianoForteSky lets see these documents on the Holocaust I need a laugh . they exist only in the minds of dopes
martlut 1 year ago
No matter how "righteous" or "self-righteous" a man may be he is still a sinner and i'd rather believe the words of Jesus Christ than the words of a sinner.
bigboyburnsy 1 year ago
Why is it that those who spread lies and calumny about the Catholic Church never have any authentic historical documents to "prove" their false charges?
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut Oh and by the way even the bible provides you documents but I guess its forbidden to catholics to read about those....catholics followers are spiritually blind, they act like robots they are programed to believe what catholics leader tell them to believe such as confess their sins to them to be saved or forgiven even though the bible says that you have to confess your sins to God...duh
PianoForteSky 1 year ago 2
@PianoForteSky really even the Bible Provides documents really what are they and why did the catholic church include them in the bible. Spiritually blind now tell me where in the Bible did Jesus say confess your sins to him or to God talk about the intellectually spiritually defunct.
martlut 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@martlut CATHOLIC TRADITION - Mary is the queen of heaven.....BUT THE BIBLE SAYS: Jeremiah-7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.7:19 Do they provoke me to anger? saith the LORD: do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of their own faces? Let meknow if you WANT MORE I will happily keep posting them
PianoForteSky 1 year ago
@martlut CATHOLIC TRADITION - Mary is the queen of heaven.....BUT THE BIBLE SAYS: Jeremiah
7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.
7:19 Do they provoke me to anger? saith the LORD: do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of their own faces?...(Bible proof #1)...do you want number 23456789 etcc..??
PianoForteSky 1 year ago
Why is it that Catholics can provide authentic historical documents, which Protestants refuse to read, and yet Protestants in turn, cannot provide any authentic historical documents that Catholics ask of them
martlut 1 year ago
In the years I have asked for proof from scores of those who make these false charges, I have never even once received documented "proof" of what they charge.
The reason for their lack of "evidence" is most certainly that the lie cannot be "proven".
I would suggest that those who make these false charges, to please open their Bibles and read
Revelation 21:27.
martlut 1 year ago
Correction: "out of an absence of any legitimate support for them."
havoc092 1 year ago
Your canon is a late invention. It draws from spurious texts from Alexandria. It includes books which were rejected by the Jews long before Christ came. And books which the Christian church subsequently rejected for the same reasons the Jews had. I understand that you want your claims to be true. Wanting them to be true is substantially different from making claims and then repeating the same claims out of an absence of any support for them.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092 who put the first bible together again you know the one with all the Books under one cover you cant seem to answer it nothing like skirting around these questions and refusing to answer To be versed in history is to cease to be Protestant. ... It's about being intellectually honest - to oneself and to God.
martlut 1 year ago
@havoc092 Gee is that why the Septuagint. According to Jewish Encyclopedia com, the Septuagint is "The oldest and most important of all the [Bible] versions made by Jews" I guess that's why the Ethiopian Jews still use It as well ROFL By the way it ws a bible scioty that deleted them their reason they would not fund any bible written with them because of their catholic hatred
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut It may be important for some specific reasons. That doesn't make the table of contents canon of the jews. You have this misguided notion that if it's in the LXX or some other work, that somehow that makes it canon. Not so. If it was canonized by the Jews, it is canon. You don't seem to have this problem in understanding with your own version of canon; but, that isn't surprising. Playing dumb isn't a mark of authority any more than making claims is.
havoc092 1 year ago
Well, again, we're dealing with your claims, rather than reality. When we examine those claims, they turn out not to hold any water. Catholic claims are backed up by works from later centuries that pretend to be early writings. This is why I put the challenge to you guys to back up your claims. If I weren't certain of what you have to rely upon, doing this would be suicide for my position. Catholicism has no early footprint. It isn't in the Bible anywhere. The apostles never heard of it.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092 those 9th century documents
martlut 1 year ago
.. and it's widely used because most seem to like the language of it and the copyist errors in it are widely known and corrected. Personally, I prefer a good parallel myself or a Thompson chain version of the KJV. Though I have a collection of them after so many years of study
havoc092 1 year ago
And held as authority to be recognized and respected. The Jews have a word for that. Americans do too; but, it's rather more vulgar in the American version. Then you wonder why we question your credibility and rather state that you have none.
Catholics usurped authority over Jewish canon and of no authority, altered it, then tried to force everyone to accept Catholic authority. That isn't how it works.
Usurpation is tyranny, not divine right.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092 Better go tell the Jews in Ethiopia to remove them from their Old testament they still use it to this day sorry and don't forget to remove the Verses Jesus and the Apostles used from it in your KJV ROFL
martlut 1 year ago
@havoc092 Catholics put together the New testament sorry the Jews didn't belive in Christ now did they and have no authority in directing what books are to be in the christian Bible.
martlut 1 year ago
@havoc092 By the way the KJV which contains 2,600 translation errors. Some foundation. Don't believe it? Just google "KJV translation errors". better get rid of that trash book which their was no authority to print it in the first place ROFL
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut So now you're attacking a translation of the Bible to defend your position..
I'll leave that for you to ponder. It's normal that I see catholics shred the bible in defense of philosophy; but, to attack a translation in a desperate attempt at justifying their lack of authority is stunning. Well, not really. It's difficult to gall me anymore.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092 nope Im not attacking the translation your are however
martlut 1 year ago
..if the new candidate revelation conflicts with the known good, the new is fraudulent.
You call this sola scriptura and repudiate it. The jews call this verifying revelation and have done it this way since Moses. You repudiate the standard for judging revelation that has been the measure every prophet and all the Apostles were held to and then pretend that substituting another standard allows you to avoid inspection. Not only that; but, in violating authority, you want your violation raised
havoc092 1 year ago
We already know from the research done by IBRI that your church lied about Jamnia (Yavneh). It isn't even debateable, they made it up. And the records at Yavneh proves they made it up. Just as the pseudo-ignatian text you keep wanting to cite is a 9th century text rather than a 2nd century text. You offer something, we check, and it's not what you offered it to be.
One more thing. The verification of revelation from the time of moses was to compare with prior good revelation..
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092 sorry the catholic church lied about Jamia not in your wildest dreams did you know they also picked a new Messiah to replace Jesus and Built a temple for Him ROFL the ruins are still their and can be visited today
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut The Catholic church provably lied about Jamnia. It isn't even a question at this point because the information is freely available and open to scrutiny. Your own scholars had to fess up to it, and that IS in the IBRI white paper. If you are such a bigot that facts are immaterial to your ideological stance, then perhaps we need to rethink whether dealing in facts is of any use at all. If you are unmoved by facts you generally have a term for that yourself, invincibly ignorant.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092 ell I guess the Jews should throw out that decision that was rendered at Jamia Lie hardly in you case yes you are lying Im surprised you even herd the word Jamia seems you didn't mention the Rabbi's Name or the new messiah's name he chose ask a Jew he will tell you all about it ROFL
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut Well, the jews didn't author the nonsense, so they hardly need to throw anything out. Roman Catholicism authored the lie. But, I doubt any of you will stop parading it about anytime soon. I certainly don't see the author of this video checking his facts and fixing his mistatements. Par for the course.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092 really the Catholic Church didnt give us the Bible that we have today please . who did then who chose the Books of the NT to be Included in the Bible.
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut No, the Catholic Church didn't give us the NT that we have today. The NT as it exists today largely owes its existance to reformeres and early MS. If you would bother doing research, most of the scholarship going into modern Bibles is a direct review of original MS. Who is that owed to? Apparently you're so full of pride in your claims you can't bother to back them up and simply think you're owed something for what you wish to claim. I think the KJV is the most common still today.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092 give me the name of the complete Bible before the catholic church gave it to you you've been studying this stuff since the 80's should be on the tip of your tongue but you never say who it was or what books were in it who put it together
martlut 1 year ago
@havoc092 too bad you read that lie Its called the Bible ROFL
martlut 1 year ago
I have finished researching the claims made by the source which martlut plagarized and tried to pass off as his own words. What he was not aware of was that the claims contradict the Vatican itself.
This is true and proof is found on the vatican's official website. Go there and take a look under "Resource library", then under "The Bible, then under English, then scroll down to "Acts" and click "9" for chapter 9.
ttsqas 1 year ago
When you scroll down to verse “31” this is what you will find,
"The church throughout all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria was at peace. It was being built up and walked in the fear of the Lord, and with the consolation of the holy Spirit it grew in numbers."
ttsqas 1 year ago
What you will not find is what martlut’s source for plagarism Mr. Randy Carson claims is there which is,
“The (Catholic church) all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria was at peace.”
In fact as you can see his own personal transliteration of the text does not make sense grammatically.
ttsqas 1 year ago
Martlut in his extreme ignorance has gone against even the Vatican itself (which like the Pharisees does occasionally get things right). Carson attempts to take two words “throughout all” and twist them to say “Catholic” when they in fact do not. Motney claims that the Greek words found in the Byzantine Greek text for “through all”, were” kath” and “olays” which is true.
ttsqas 1 year ago
However his claim that “kath olays” is rendered “Catholic” in modern English is completely false. In fact this is a proper word for for word transliteration and translation of the portion of verse 31 in question. First this is the 1st part of verse 31 from the Byzantine Greek text
ttsqas 1 year ago
Ist I’ll give the transliteration and translation of each Greek word;
ἡ = ē = the
μὲν = men = then
οὖν = oun = so
ἐκκλησία = ekklēsia = church
καθ' = kath = throughout
ὅλης = olēs = all
ttsqas 1 year ago
So the transliteration for
“ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐκκλησία καθ' ὅλης”, Is “ē men oun ἐκκλησία kath olēs “ which translated into English says
ttsqas 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As you can see, the claim that kath olēs is rendered “Catholic” is an absolute lie and is not even supported by the vatican. Also “throughout all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria does not equate to “universal”, being but is regional.
In the end do not take my word for it there are plenty of free online translators. Select one and
Paste “ καθ' ὅλης” and I guarantee you that you will never get “Catholic” as the translation
ttsqas 1 year ago
In fairness to Russ Montney; he only did a transliteration of Acts 9:31 from the Byzantine Greek text (not a translation). The erroneous translation into English seems to have originated from a Catholic apologist by the name of Randy Carson in a forum called “Catholic Answers” from Sept 22, 2006. In any case the Vatican itself does not support the translation or the claim by martlut. So his claim goes against the view of his own sect.
ttsqas 1 year ago
As you probably know, Catholic Bibles have 73 books, 46 in the Old Testament, and 27 in the New Testament. Protestant Bibles have 66 books with only 39 in the Old Testament. The books missing from Protestant Bibles are: Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and parts of Esther and Daniel
martlut 1 year ago
They are called the 'Deuterocanonicals' by Catholics and 'Apocrypha' by Protestants. Martin Luther, without any authority whatsoever, removed those seven books and placed them in an appendix during the reformation. They remained in the appendix of Protestant Bibles until about 1826, and then they were removed altogether.
Please be mindful of the fact that those seven books had been in Bibles used by all Christians from the very foundation of Christianity.
martlut 1 year ago
Hellenistic Greek was the language of the day during the time of Christ. This was due to the fact that Alexander the Great had conquered the region several hundred years before. The Hebrew language was on its way out, and there was a critical need for a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament for dispersed Greek speaking Jews.
martlut 1 year ago
This translation, called the Septuagint, or LXX, was completed by Jewish scholars in about 148 B.C. and it had all of the books, including the seven removed by Martin Luther over 1650 years later. The New Testament has about 350 references to Old Testament verses.
martlut 1 year ago
By careful examination, scholars have determined that 300 of these are from the Septuagint and the rest are from the Hebrew Old Testament*. They have shown that Jesus Christ Himself, quoted from the Septuagint. Early Christians used the Septuagint to support Christian teachings.
martlut 1 year ago
For the first 300 years of Christianity, there was no Bible as we know it today. Christians had the Old Testament Septuagint, and literally hundreds of other books from which to choose. The Catholic Church realized early on that she had to decide which of these books were inspired and which ones weren't.
martlut 1 year ago
The debates raged between theologians, Bishops, and Church Fathers, for several centuries as to which books were inspired and which ones weren't. In the meantime, several Church Councils or Synods, were convened to deal with the matter, notably, Rome in 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419. The debates sometimes became bitter on both sides
martlut 1 year ago
One of the most famous was between St. Jerome, who felt the seven books were not canonical, and St. Augustine who said they were. Protestants who write about this will invariably mention St. Jerome and his opposition, and conveniently omit the support of St. Augustine. I must point out here that Church Father's writings are not infallible statements, and their arguments are merely reflections of their own private opinions
martlut 1 year ago
When some say St. Jerome was against the inclusion of the seven books, they are merely showing his personal opinion of them. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. However, A PERSONS PRIVATE OPINION DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH AT ALL. There are always three sides to every story, this side, that side, and the side of truth. Whether Jerome's position, or Augustine's position was the correct position, had to be settled by a third party, and that third party was the Catholic Church.
martlut 1 year ago
Now the story had a dramatic change, as the Pope stepped in to settle the matter. In concurrence with the opinion of St. Augustine, and being prompted by the Holy Spirit, Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called,
martlut 1 year ago
The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. He then asked St. Jerome to use this canon and to write a new Bible translation which included an Old Testament of 46 books, which were all in the Septuagint, and a New Testament of 27 books.
ROME HAD SPOKEN, THE ISSUE WAS SETTLED.
"THE CHURCH RECOGNIZED ITS IMAGE IN THE INSPIRED BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. THAT IS HOW IT DETERMINED THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE.
martlut 1 year ago
Comment removed
ttsqas 1 year ago
Comment removed
ttsqas 1 year ago
Comment removed
ttsqas 1 year ago
Comment removed
ttsqas 1 year ago