@davidthomasmorton: not only did Peter deny Jesus 3 times but the rest of the apostles ran and hid from the Roman soldiers when they looked for Jesus' followers. Were the rest of the apostles "sifted out like wheat by Satan?" Why are you singling out Peter?
@LeuntenantZero A Los Angeles bishop stepped down from his duties with the Catholic church on Wednesday after acknowledging he fathered two children. Auxiliary Bishop Gabino Zavala, 60, told the archdiocese in December that he was the father of two teenagers who live out of the state with their mother, the Associated Press reported. Zavala submitted his resignation with the Vatican shortly thereafter. "Pastors today are clowns" Yes I agree, especially those you named, but so are priests.
All have sinned and greatly offended the holy God of the bible. The just punishment is death then hell. That's not Gods will. He suffered and died on the cross paying for the law you broke in His life's blood so He could legally dismiss your case. You must repent turn from your sin and trust alone in Jesus Christ for your salvation.
So the pope represent Christ on earth that is what i called white supremacy so why there are many black men in that congregation but has never been ordained as pope. all this is a cult and fala.
It requires you to abandon Occam's razor to accept a more convoluted interpretation of what the 'rock' is IF it isn't Peter.
Consequently one has to ask: If Protestants didn't have to much to gain by denying this most obvious, simple interpretation, would their membership really stop to question it's validity?
Peter was never a "Pope", the title is totaly unchristian, Matthew 23:9. And even if Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, it means nothing, Jesus doesnt care about traditions. Read the Bible what Jesus did with the jewish Highpriests and the jewish traditions, Jesus is radical when it is about God's righteousness, Jesus said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s.”
The beginning of the show explained it. Petros=a little stone, Petra=a big rock, and the Lord said, "Upon this rock I'll build My church". The rock is who He is from the Father, as is evidenced by what He says, saying that it was the Father who revealed that to Peter. Plus, Peter erred when he said that the Lord wouldn't suffer the crucifixon, and the Lord said, "Get behind me, Satan!" Peter erred, therefore he was fallible, and so is the pope. Gregory the Great was the first pope.
Jesus says, according to more perfect translation from the Greek copies we have today: You are Little rock, and upon this (Jesus points at himself) Bedrock I will build my assembly.
The body of believers in the Church of Jesus Christ, is made up of Evangelists, Pastors, Teachers, Apostles and Prophets, never a Pope, Priests, etc.. which were done away with because of the One Sacrafice of Christ which was able to atone for all sin, making void Purgatory.Hebrews 10:18 (ch 8,9,10) Ephesians 4:11-16, 1 John 2:2. Today God still calls Christians refered to as Saints to continue to fill these positions. From heaven Goddirects His Church on earth through His Spirit.
Peter never claimed to be head over other apostles, the gathering of apostles and elders at Jerusalemaround 45-50 A.D. in Acts 15:4-29 was convened on Paul's initiative, not Peter's. Peter never acted like a "pope" nor was treated by others, Gal 2:11-14.The statement in Matt 28:20 can't be exclusively to a leadership hierarchy. Christs promises where to all the apostles not only to some elite class, John 14;13, 16:23 Matt 18:19. Peter was a rock not "thee" Rock, John 1:42, a stone not the Rock
The Bible declares God as being the only Rock, Psalm 18:31 ,62:1-2, Ih 44:8, Deut 32:3-4.Peter points to Christ as the Chief cornerstone upon which the Church is built, those who trust in Christ, as the scripture reveals.1 Peter 2:6-8. Built upon all the apostles & prophets, Eph 2:20, Christ as head Eph 1:22. they all had the "keys" to unlock the gospel of salvation and bind and loose people from sins through the gospel. Peter refered to himself as a fellow elder,1 Peter 5:1-2.
@sgal88 So why attribute heretical status to the man? First Mary, now Peter. Prayer to dead people, angels; prayer for souls in purgatory etc. The RCC preaches another gospel and Gal 1:8 has a name for her.
@73geneva Something is heretical only because the person does not understand what it is. Praying for the dead have always been a tradition in the early church and even Jews. To the Virgin Mary, to pray to her is far better than to pray directly to Jesus because Jesus can deny you everything while he can not deny nothing to the Virgin Mary.
@sgal88 Satan is the master of deceit and he is doing a perfect job deceiving you into these practises. Show me where Jesus or any of His disciples either prayed to dead people or taught anyone else so. Why not obey God's commandments, instead of the tradition of your church?
@73geneva Didn't the Pharisees accuse Jesus of working with the devil? You are just like them. Attacking what you don't know. Even if I showed you, you would just disagree and not wish to hear the truth.
@sgal88 Very funny. The Pharisees attacked Jesus; that is your excuse to justify yourself because I told you your religion is not of God.
Show me what? You have absolutely nothing to show me; you're spiritually blind and a blind man cannot even see, let alone show someone else the way. ...the god of this world has BLINDED them...
Read the Bible and flee the Catholic organization before it's too late.
@73geneva LooL! A ignorant fool who doesn't know what Scripture actually says. You are like a Pharisees for like the Church have had their miracles to prove it is divine, so did Jesus to prove he was God. You attack what you don't know and i be best to stay quiet for your judgment can be harsh if you insist attacking the Church which he founded. You are the blind men. How many ppl have read Scripture and interpreted so many things...33K different interpretations, while the Church is one.
@sgal88 It's ok, but if it means I have to be a fool in order to show you and other Roman Catholics the truth, then so be it. Again, I say to you; flee the Catholic Church before it's too late.
So, you're saying that Mary, a fully human woman, can deny God the Son? Also, the opening of this show explained it: Petros, a little stone, Petra, a big rock, a big rock that He'll build His church on, which is the revelation of who He is from the Father. Plus, the pope is supposed to be infallible, right? Then how about the next bit of scripture where Peter errs and the Lord says, "Get behind me, Satan!"? The pope is fallible.
@munku121 Mary, a creature does not deny the will of God EVER! Second, both Jesus and Peter are the Rock of the Church. Thirdly, yes, the Blessed Lord did tell him to get behind him and scolded him by calling him Satan. Unlike the temptation in the desert, he does not ask to flee from him. He wants Peter to learn to humble himself and follow Jesus. That is what that means.
You completely missed the point. He called Peter a little stone 'Petros'. He said upon this rock 'Petra' meaning 'big rock' He'll build His church. It is the revelation of who Christ is from the Father that is the rock that the church is built upon. Also, if the pope is infallible, then how is it that Peter erred? Also, Christianity was not made a state Rome religion until AFTER Peter was crucified. The first pope was Gregory the Great.
@munku121 Ur and IDIOT! Pope is just a title of Honor Peter was the 1st Pope in the sense that he was the Visible (SEEN) leader of the Church (rep by the Apostles who were the 1st Bishops)!!!!!!
Also Gregory the Great was NOT the 1st Pope b/c position of the the Pope is to be the Head of the Church and Bishop of Rome until the Day of Judgement.
@sgal88 "Unlike the temptation in the desert, he does not ask to flee from him. He wants Peter to learn to humble himself and follow Jesus. That is what that means" My Lord. Talk about reading something into the text of scripture that's not even there. Who told you all of this, the church of Rome? You do realize that church fathers, whom RC's love to quote, didn't agree amongst themselves as to Peter being pope?
@TheJpgr1958 It was a church Father that many have mostly agreed upon and it makes sense in the context of how Jesus did it. My gosh. Protestants! Assuming that they are somewhat intelligent without authority.
@sgal88 "It was a church Father that many have mostly agreed upon" Really? How about this church father? "I have somewhere said of St. Peter that the church is built upon him as the Rock...But I know that I have since frequently said that the word of the Lord, "Thou art Petrus, and on this petra I will build my church," must be understood of him, who Peter confessed as Son of the living God; and Peter, so named after this rock, represents the person of the church, which is founded on this...
rock and has received the keys of the kingdom of heaven. For it was not said to him: "Thou art a rock" (petra), but, "Thou art Peter" (Petrus); and the rock was Christ, through confession of whom Simon received the name Peter. Yet the reader may decide which of the two interpretations is the more probable." This church father was the great Augustine. HE left his readers to decide how they would interpret Matthew 16. You should think seriously about what it means that Augustine.....
the great bishop of Hippo, could think that how one views this passage is a matter of freedom, when Vatican 1 tells us it is a matter upon which the anathema can and should be used. You should also notice the huge movement in thought that has taken place between the early part of the 5th century and the latter part of the 19th. So who ever this "one church father that many have mostly agreed upon," it is certainly not Augustine. Was he wrong, and has the church anathematized him?
@TheJpgr1958 You have no proof of them not agreeing , in ACts they followed Peter . Christ gave authority to Peter on earth in Matt 16 (I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven..)and John 21 (feed my lambs , feed my sheep) and he confirms that he was chosen in 1Peter 5:13 "The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting". It seems scripture confirms our teaching , no matter how one who opposes it, tries to spin it .Christ intended for peter to be Pope .
@CAtholic29 "You have no proof of them not agreeing" There is, but you will not consider the evidence. "Christ gave authority to Peter on earth in Matt 16" Again, VERY DEBATABLE, but you will not listen to the evidence, and if you have listened, you just state that it's wrong. "John 21 (feed my lambs , feed my sheep)" See previous comment. "The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting". What? "It seems scripture confirms our teaching" Just your opinion, just like what Mormons or JWS state.
@TheJpgr1958 Not debatable when you factor in MAtt 16, the only one to be given the keys is Peter and he was the rock. In John 21 Christ tells him to feed his sheep and lamb . In 1Peter 5 he confirms himself as the chosen one .You could not counter me here obviously "yes it is " no it is not " arguments are not gonna hold up .
"no matter how one who opposes it, tries to spin it" You sound like a Mormon here. Perhaps you are one?? Or a Jehovah Witness? "Christ intended for peter to be Pope." Much like God intended to use Joseph Smith to restore the true gospel on earth, right? You all suffer from the "true church syndrome, and you also suffer from the "Peter" syndrome. Very sad.
@TheJpgr1958 Mormons are in outer space as far as I am concerned and copied off of muslims with the prophet angel BS . Christ intended for peter to be Pope evidence = Matt 16, John 21, 1Peter 5:13 = CHECK MATE ! You suffer from brainwashed ways , scripture proof is right there if your so blinded you cannot see it then that is SAD . OPEN YOUR EYES . Concrete scripture says Peter was the chosen leader by Christ chosen to lead the leaders and you know that.Come with something real or step out
@CAtholic29 (OH BOY) You and I have been down this road before. Still on that porno web site "mighty tighty," on which you pretend to defend your sin filled popes and your homo priests? Still trying to be the puesdo-intellectual on Roman Catholicism eh? I believe I told you before, that when you are in a REAL scholastic debate that follows the rules of debate, and have it recorded and posted so that all can see it, then you might have a leg to stand on. Having a debate on youtube means nothing.
@TheJpgr1958 WE have been down this road so you should know better then to try and pull the wool over my eyes. Mightyrighty -conservative site . What is your religion (its not Christian because Christians do not speak as you do ) . I am here to once again straighten you out . I came with scripture you came with mockery who wins ? (Oh BOy ) me.I thought you left , you snuck back here I can see.
@CAtholic29 "WE have been down this road so you should know better then to try and pull the wool over my eyes" (rolls eyes). And YOU should know that your debate skills, which you believe are superior to any one, is nothing more than you being a narcissistic fool. Prove yourself as a valid debater and engage in a REAL debate with debate rules, or are you afraid that you would be laughed out of the building? "I thought you left" I never left, but you being so cosmic should of known that, right?
@TheJpgr1958 Mockery will get you another loss . I proved myself already now prove yourself to have any debate skills whatsoever. I will keep hammering the points here . You keep mocking them . Either way, I win with the truth while you have not an argument against me . I am here now ,get used to it sir.
@CAtholic29 "Mockery will get you another loss" I'm just giving back to you what you give to those who don't agree with Rome. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander type thing. "I proved myself already" Boy are you deranged!! You think that, because you have never had a real debate with real debate rules. Just commenting on your gay porn web site and Starbucks. "I will keep hammering the points here." As will I and others will keep doing. "You keep mocking them" See first comment.
@TheJpgr1958 You proved nothing . You proved that have no scripture education and that was your loss right there . You had beef to back up your claims . SO Prove me wrong ! Otherwise we remain or you remain in check mate .
"I win with the truth" No. You just spew the same evasive answers like a good little catholic fanboy, much like what Mormons, JWS, Moonies, Muslims, Oneness, and all other groups who state the exact same thing you do, and who will defend their worthless leaders and prophets to no end. "I am here now" Must be sad to have no life except your porn web sites and the internet where you think you are the best there is in defending Rome, which is not worth defending anyway. "Here there and everywhere"
@TheJpgr1958Yes I win with the truth and you know it and I proved it with scripture.THey have beef to back up their claims as you have no beef . Your almost like an atheist with your mockery comments. I have filled life of charities I partake in and run while you mock God and his faith I take care of those in need.I win,why?because I made a claim about peter being the first Pope and leader and that Christ appointed him to be so.I used scriptrue to back me up .You provided no argument YOU LOSE!
@CAtholic29 "I win with the truth" And once again, no you don't. "THey have beef to back up their claims as you have no beef" By "they,' are you referring to Mormons, JWS, Moonies, Oneness, Muslims etc? But you don't agree with them, so how can these groups have any "beef?" Makes no sense. "I have filled life of charities I partake in and run while you mock God and his faith I take care of those in need." Wow my friend, sounds like your boasting!! Tell you what. Since the death rate is still...
@TheJpgr1958 4 messages really ? here we go lets see:Once again YES I DO WIN . I am refering to all of those groups you mention . I do not agree with them it makes perfect sense as to why I say they have no beef get it ? Boasting ? nope just stating facts .
@TheJpgr1958 HE will make you render an account for every careless word you spoke , all the bad things you said about his church you will have to render an account for (Matt 12:36-37 ) AND Boasting about good works to Christ wont do anyone any good of course . But Matt 25:31-46, James 2:24 , and etc says that good works is a requirement for a Christian . SO get a grip
one per person, and we all are going to make it, you can stand before God, and boast to Him about all of the charity work you have done. I, on the other hand, will bow my head in reverence, and state to Him that all the work I ever did for Him was like soiled rags, and that I didn't deserve His mercy and grace, and to accept me into His kingdom, a sinner. I will stand cloaked in the righteousness of Christ and Him alone. Then He will say "well done my good and faithful servant...
enter into your rest." You see, Roman Catholics don't have any good news, for you don't know if you have peace with God. I, according to Christ, can know NOW that I have peace with God. No works of any kind, including works done with any merit, will give me or any one true peace with God. And that my friend is a big issue. So keep boasting all you want about all the woks of charity you are doing. It will mean bupkis in the end. Christ is all one needs, just like the thief on the cross.
@TheJpgr1958 WE have the greatest news . He built our church after all (Matt 16) Your denomination whatever it may be is a splinter off of us any way . You would not have a bible (not like you use it anyway) if it were not for us . WE are to consistently work out our salvation with fear and trembling as Paul tell us to in Phil 2:12 . Read scripture feed your brain you might stat agreeing with me.Just as it says in James 2 "a body without a spirit is dead just as faith without works is dead .
And if you are going to come back with the same argument that Mormons, JWS, Moonies, Oneness, and other groups use, which is keep the commandments, or "Faith without works is dead," to be right with God, you would have to keep every commandment, 100% of the time, with 100% of your being, and never fail in ANY of them. And this my friend, if you were honest, you, I nor anyone can do. And this includes Mary, priest, cardinals, bishops, and your popes. Christ and Him alone did that.
@TheJpgr1958 CHECK MATE I am here for now so you wont get around by your lies . I straightened you out and cleaned this place out before so I will do it again . I though you left otherwise I would have never left. I know your here and still uneducated as before about scripture so I will stay for a while . God Bless
@CAtholic29 WOW, what a bunch of drivel. If you speak like you write, I can now understand why you won't do any public debates. You just throw out a whole buch of statements, much like a lawyer, and hope something sticks. "I straightened you out" Lie. You didn't nor can you straighten anyone out. I suppose you believe you are the Holy Spirit? "(I) cleaned this place out before" I think you watch too much "Hazel" on tv. "still uneducated as before about scripture" Well pot meet kettle then.
@TheJpgr1958 No one would last in a public debate without a mediator that is for sure but I would most certainly give anyone a run for their money. I straightened you out! . Still you are uneducated about scripture then!
@CAtholic29 "No one would last in a public debate without a mediator that is for sure" Speak for yourself there my friend. You have NO room to speak on this because you have never done a public debate, and you never will, and apparently from this response, you have never seen a public debate, because this is so far from reality, much like your so-called debating skills which you don't have. "but I would most certainly give anyone a run for their money." GREAT!! Prove it. See, it's so easy...
@CAtholic29 "I have done public debates" Really? All right, if this is true, prove it. Post these "public debates" on line so that we can see and hear you in action. Also give information about them such as what topics were discussed, where were they held, the names of your opponents, the time and dates, the name of the moderators, you know, all of the crucial info one would have at their disposal. Again,a public debate does not mean internet discussion groups or sitting at a Starbucks.
@TheJpgr1958 I have discussed all of the topic for the most part against the faith. I have defended it all . You obviously bhave not engaged in any debates and if you have , it would be an easy victory for your opponent as it was for me against you . A protestant who does not know scripture or does not pretend to know scripture ? and your going up against Catholics?Your too easy
@CAtholic29 Oh well. I asked for prove to back up your assertion that you have engaged in public debates, namely where they were held, names of the venues, the topic/topics discussed, the names of your opponents, who the moderator was, things of this nature. I also asked you to post these events. And yet I knew that the term "public debate" to you means discussions over the internet, Starbucks, the gym, any place but in a real debate setting. And then you go off in your usual rants. Your a joke.
@TheJpgr1958 YOU LOSE , you cannot come up with a debate but you mock my debate technique? Get lost The Chief is in town and you are guilty of Blasphemy with no argument . The real Joke is you who is just here to bicker and not achieve anything in debate . You don't even know scripture ? What are you on here for anyway ? Grow up kid and get lost
@CAtholic29 Still can't prove your assertion about being involved in public debates. I thought so. You make these assertions, then when asked to prove it by uploading a video or audio of even one of them, with the proper info to accompany the debate, name of venue, topic discussed, name of the moderator, etc, you scream childish things such as "You Lose." What garbage. This is all you got? All you do is speak out of a certain part of your anatomy. "You don't even know scripture " Really now.
Let's see...I quoted the thief on the cross...scripture, I quoted James 2 "Who so ever keeps the whole law, yet fails in one point is guilty of all." Scripture again. I quoted the women, who when she saw Jesus sitting at the table, washed His feet with her tears, and dried His feet with her hair. Oh yes, this is scripture. I've quoted several scripture passages to you, but you just ignore them and then state I don't quote scripture. This is the problem with trying to have a debate on youtube.
@TheJpgr1958 You quoted nothing . You fail to give chapter and verse . Its not feeling good to have a CAtholic demae the quote and exact chapter and verse ? Its not good . Just do it . These half scriptures you quote contradict nothing of the church so don't waist your time
One can't, or doesn't, want to go back and re-read everything someone has posted on a topic. You have to sort through other people's comments, and then one gets side tracked trying to answer those, and it becomes one big mess. That's why, if you would, post your debates on line so we can see them, then perhaps we can see how you do. But public debates means to you the internet, Starbucks, and the gym, which are really not debates but discussions, hopefully friendly ones. .
@TheJpgr1958 Look kid you can type me 100 meaningless responses with mockery I will come back with the facts kid and fact is you lost and will continue to look bad . I stopped in your tracts upon arrival and now your stopped and done .
"Get lost" Sorry, but you are not in charge of this or any other thread. Me thinks you boast too much, which you have done in previous posts. "The Chief is in town" This is your lame opinion about yourself my friend. The only thing you may be the "Chief" of, are your bowl movements, and that is given to you by the grace of God. So stop all of this. You impress no one, except your parents, and yourself.
Oh yes. Would you like me to give you links to what real debates should be like? I believe once you see them, you would have a change of heart and realize that you are no debater my friend. Let me know, or are you going to state your usual "YOU LOSE," or "You don't know scripture" rants at me. Time will only tell. "Oh I get by with a little help from my friends."
@TheJpgr1958 Its about me and you not debates about others or with others right now you can't handle me and that is what I need to stop is you now and i have so mission accomplished kiddo so get out or here because I am here to stay and you can no longer complete your task while I am here
@TheJpgr1958 YOUR a joke kid, you lost the debate here a long time ago . Now your comments consist of comments about my debate skills . I have stopped you from speaking badly about the church through misinterpretation by using proper interpretation . and yes YOU LOSE AGAIN . You have nothing more to contribute . If got your tail handed to you (by me of course) here you could not stand a chance in regular debate . GEt LOSt KID
@CAtholic29 Ummm, if you would like for me to show you an example of what I mean by a real moderated debate, I can give you a link to some. Would you be willing to look at them?
@TheJpgr1958 I would be be willing to continue to beat you in debate care for a rematch kid . Its ok I will take it easier on you this time and not give you such a beating as the last one . UMMMM get a grip son.
for you to "think" you are debating people on youtube, or on your websites which you boast about, or in a Starbucks, but to make your assertion true, then you have to prove it. And this you will never do because you would be laughed out of the building. And from reading your responses, I can see why, you can't speak correctly! "I straightened you out!" Oh good grief. That seems to be you mantra. And if this is what you would say in a real debate, be sure to cover your ears from all...
@TheJpgr1958 I am debating and winning Still no scripture from you what kind of a protestant bible thumper wannabe are you ? Get lost if you have nothing to contribute but mockery .
of the laughter that would be coming in your direction. "Still you are uneducated about scripture then!" (sigh). More drivel from you as always. Again, prove yourself and let us see you in action in a real debate. Also, keep protecting your homo and pedophile priests, as well as your sinful popes. "WE have the greatest news" No you don't. Because you believe your meritorious works will help you in the end, how do you you have done enough of those works? You don't. Remember, your works are....
@TheJpgr1958 Proved myself that is why you ran for a while , your not a Christian that is for sure telling by your language towards priest (stereo typing ) you do realize that preachers and youth ministers in the protestant churches at times do the same thing? climb out of your hole and read a news paper kid and they can get married proving it to be a mental illness and not because of celibant reasons kiddo . WE have the church Christ started while you belong to a splinter church.WELCOME BACK!
as soiled rags, just like mine are. So on the day of judgment, you can stand before God, boasting about all the goods works you did, while I, like the thief on the cross, will bow my head in repentance and ask for mercy. That's the difference between us. I know NOW that there is nothing I can do to merit anything from God. It's a free gift. So keep boasting in your works and your websites. I will boast in nothing but Jesus and Him crucified, just like the Apostle Paul did. No popes needed.
@TheJpgr1958Just as a body without a spirit is dead faith without works is dead end of story(James 2) I already stated that boasting top Christ about the work you did for him won't do. Your the goat in Matt 25:31-46( read it ,it may open your eyes)I am the sheep of course.What you did for the least of Christs people you for him,YOU remember that.Peter was appointed by Christ to be pope(Matt 16, John 21, 1Peter 5:13 ) And He needed a successor (the Pope) For Judas had a successor (Acts ) Wake up!
Oh yes, are you still mad about your vicar of Christ on earth allowing a pro-abortionist to speak at a Roman Catholic university, or is Notre Dame not Roman Catholic any more? "God Bless" Same to you friend.
@TheJpgr1958 He had no say in that . An American priest did and so he it happened and now I remember you as the lost soul who keeps bringing that up . Oh poor The Jpgr Bless your heart .
@williemetoyer1 --They "spiritualize" the literal and "literalize" the spiritual; aint you glad we have a church that has God-given teaching authority?
I love the fact in this debate is that Ankerberg quotes about 1500 words of extremely in-depth information, that requires years of understanding, and expects Fr. Pacwa to come up with an answer TO ALL of it within 3 minutes. Great Job of you, Ankerberg. What a fool, I bet if Ankerberg himself debated the Jesuit he would be minced.
You are amazing. You spew RC nonsense and insist it's true because you believe it. The "Bible only" argument is IN THE BIBLE and what the first church understood. "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel that was ONCE AND FOR ALL DELIVERED unto the Saints"...this proves that the Gospel WAS COMPLETE during the lifetime of the Apostles. It does not say "...and a bunch of other crap made up by others 150 - 300 years from now that we don't know about", does it? You are incapable of rational thought.
What difference does it make? Regarding who was the first Pope, or who has been Pope since, or who is Pope now? The Pope is an ordinary man, elected to office by other ordinary men. It's a non-issue.
@southernpreacher I disagree. The Catholic position is based on reason and truth. If you watch the rest of the debate, you will see that the Jesuit destroyed the protestant position, even when outnumbered 2 to 1 with most of his decisive points edited out. Oh what deceivers anti-catholic protestants are.
If the "most decisive points" were edited out, how do you know what they were or even that they were? This link thoroughly destroys the RC position and shows how another "Simon Peter" was the first pope. Please read.
@Bigrich104 Actually no it doesn't. He did a very good job defending the Catholic position and it's only protestants that say it got destroyed. This isn't even a debate, as the 'host' is required to be indifferent, rather this is more a 2-on-1. I'm sorry if you disagree with orthodox Christianity and 2000 years of Sacred Tradition established by Christ on Peter. Better stick with sola scriptura, your man made tradition.
@assasincomedy Sola Scriptura is a man made tradition? Jesus said "man does not live by bread alone, but every word that proceeds from the mouth of God", which can only be found in the Bible. That says it all and says nothing about what your church calls "tradition". Wow...elevating admitted tradition to be equal to Scripture while reducing actual Scripture to "tradition" is sad.
@Bigrich104 That verse you quoted is taken out of context and has nothing to do with sola scriptura. Sola Scriptura is not in the Bible, and nowhere does it imply it. 'That says it all' Oh really? In your opinion? So you are saying the rest of the Holy Scriptures are unimportant? 2 Thess 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. Paul is very clear here. Find me 1 Church father that believes in Sola Scriptura.
@assasincomedy It is NOT out of context. Jesus said "The vain traditions of man will pass away, by MY WORD will last forever". HIS WORDS can ONLY be found in Scripture. "In the beginning was THE WORD, and THE WORD was God and THE WORD was with God and THE WORD became flesh and dwelt among us." Jesus is THE WORD, it will never pass away and proceeds from the mouth of God AND can ONLY be found in Scripture. After Paul spoke to the Bereans, "they searched the scripture to see if (cont'd)...
@Bigrich104 Apostolic tradition is not man made. It was the passed down teaching given to us by the apostles, don't get confused. When Paul was searching the 'scriptures' he was searching through the Old Testament. I have nothing more to tell you. There is only so much an original Christian (Catholic and Orthodox) can do to try and convince a 'Bible only' Christian that the Bible is not the only Authority. You take Scripture out of context to attempt to prove your own point.
@assasincomedy A cultist's mind is impossible to reason with. The Apostolic tradition referred to WAS the scriptures delivered in verbal form before they were written down. Paul's mission trips were to preach the Gospel. He later wrote the epistles to those churches after he had established them with spoken word evangelism. There was a 15 year period at least after the ascension and before the first books where scripture was spoken word only. I'm amazed at how little you know.
@Bigrich104 Actually, I'm surprised at how little you know. The scriptures were written 20-30 years after Christs ascension into heaven, but they were not compiled and accepted until the Council of Hippo in AD393. That's 350 years after Christ. Have it ever occurred to you that the Bible, is not big enough to be sufficient for our Faith? There is only a few letters, and many were left out. Only a few letters were included in the Canon/
@assasincomedy The scriptures were not all written in a 10 year period. From about 45 to about 70 except for Revelation. You made my point....for the first 20 years (by your count), the Gospel was verbal, spoken word that became the written word and that is the tradition the apostles said to hold fast to, not Virgin Mary heresies that came 100s or 1000s of years later. "Gospel...once an for all delivered"...it was complete during the Apostles life, all later stuff is heresy.
@Bigrich104 You are not understanding anything of what I have tried to explain to you. Jesus' teachings were taught by the apostles to their students, which continued, this is called sacred tradition. There were more teachings than just what is highlighted in the Bible. The Bible is the inspired Word, not a Catechism or history book. The other teachings were handed down and written about by the Early Church fathers, and included in the early Doctrines of the Church.
@assasincomedy ...to continue my previous remarks, Paul didn't search the scriptures, the Bereans did to validate his message which makes my point that the Bible is the only template of truth the TRUE church has ever recognized. Also you are right that they were using the OT to validate because every argument made that Jesus was Messiah was in the OT. None of your RC nonsense about Popes, Mary, transubstantiation, purgatory and the rest has any basis in the OT, further proof it is false.
@Bigrich104 Actually, those things were always believed, they just didn't quite understand how. Things were believed for a long time until they were sometimes declared a doctrine - formal declaration of a fundamental belief. An example of this is the Blessed Trinity. The word 'Trinity' is not used in the Bible, but it was revealed to us how the Trinity works later on through more understanding.
@assasincomedy "The word 'Trinity' is not used in the Bible, but it was revealed to us how the Trinity works later on through more understanding. ". Understanding OF THE SCRIPTURES! THE BIBLE! Gen 1:1 uses the word Elohim which is plural, "Gods". BIBLICAL scholars had to reconcile the BIBLE verses that said there was one God that revealed Himself using a plural word. It's all about GOD'S WORD and not the heresies of "the church fathers".
@Bigrich104 You are misunderstanding the Holy Trinity. The Holy Trinity is not 'Gods', it is 'God in Three Persons; The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit.' Also, 'Elohim' in Gen. 1:1 is singular. Please take into mind that 'Elohim' is a grammatically singular or plural noun for "god" or "gods" in both modern and ancient Hebrew language. 'It's all about God's Word' Yes it is, it is not about your own personal interpretation.
@Bigrich104 Cont... At the Lateran Council, the word “transubstantiation” was used. The word refers to a movement or a change of substance – it was now understood that the physical presence of Christ involved a change in substance. At the Council of Trent, the doctrine was formally defined and the understanding of the Church grew.
This is an example of both doctrinal proclamation (in the face of denial and opposition by Protestants) but also doctrinal development. It was known that Jesus was really physically present, but it was not known precisely how this occurred. Cont...
@assasincomedy Roman Catholic "church father" St. Jerome on Scripture - "As we accept those things that are written, so we reject those things that are not written (in Scripture)" (Adv. Helvid). & "These things which they invent, as if by Apostolic tradition, without the authority of Scripture, the sword of God smites." (In Aggari Proph. Cap. I, II).
@Bigrich104 I would be more respectful If I were you. St. Jerome is a very popular Saint of the Church. He is best known for his translation of the Bible into Latin (the Vulgate), and his list of writings is extensive. He is not referring to solely the Bible, he is referring to the teachings handed down by Apostolic Tradition. Don't take things out of context to suit your own argument.
@assasincomedy "...these things were true". Paul had no authority unto himself, he had to be validated by the scriptures. So If Paul or Peter says they saw an "apparition" of Mary and she tells them she lived a sinless life, which scripture do you search to see if Mary was sinless and makes ghostly appearances? Bible says to "Test the spirits". The ONLY thing you can to test them against is Scripture. How is that not obvious to you? Can you show me one verse that says Peter went to Rome?
@Bigrich104 "The ONLY thing you can to test them against is Scripture" Another Bible Only argument. Please acknowledge that all Christians up until the 16th century knew that Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are both Authority, not 'Bible Alone'. Let me ask you this: Who compounded the Bible? When? What did the Christians do for 400 YEARS without a Bible? Even then it was not until the printing press that everyone could own a Bible. Yet another question a protestant can't answer.
@assasincomedy 2Thess. 2:15 makes my point, not yours. Scripture started as spoken instruction before it was written down. He's talking about that which was God breathed, inspired by the Holy Spirit, not of any personal opinion, which is why he says by "word or epistle". How do you hold fast to "tradition, word or epistle" when 1800 years later some clown says a ghost of Mary says she lived a sinless life? Which "tradition, by word or epistle" are you holding fast to believing that?
@Bigrich104 It is John Ankerberg, one of the biggest anti-Catholic deceivers around. Along with this not even fitting the definition of a 'debate', Ankerberg took out large chunks of the Catholic position, as you can see with the Jesuit having less than half the amount of talking time. In a real debate both sides get the exact same time/word limit to defend their position. This debate was unlawfully edited, without authorization from BOTH sides of the argument. He is a deceiver.
@assasincomedy You didn't answer my question. The only way you could know Pacwa was edited out is if you saw both versions, the edited and unedited and compared. You didn't. You can't refute an argument by merely calling it anti-Catholic. His suggestion that Paul understood Peter to be a superior because he called him Cephas is laughable. The website I gave you documents from God's Word that Peter never went to Rome...why would he, he was Apostle to Jews and already in Israel. Bye.
@Bigrich104 We emailed the organisation and they said it had been edited. Your opinion on the Catholic position has no authority on the truth. "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Matthew 16:18. Notice the singulars. Not 30,000 Churches.
@assasincomedy Sure it was edited for TV time, but you don't know what or how much, do you? Yet you falsely said Pacwa's best stuff was edited out. The video id's the many times Jesus is called the corner stone and you ignore it. It is Peter's confession of faith and its revelation by God above that is the rock because that is what makes a new believer / member and adds another 'rock' to the church. Each believer is a singular rock. The RC's 'authority' comes from itself, not God or Bible.
@assasincomedy You're like a JW or Mormon. The church began at Pentecost and the fathers were the Apostles. Your guys came 150+ years later and started the pagan church at ROME. Your "early church writings" were opinion not based on facts or Bible. You don't respond to any point, just spew RC propaganda. Even though Jesus condemned "vain repetition of prayer" you chant your Rosary nonsense and we'll see you on Judgement Day! Anti-Christ lives in Rome!
@Bigrich104 Ok, no need to go off in a tangent. I'm obviously upsetting you if you need to bring up fallacious anti-catholic lies and allegations. Perhaps open up your mind, rather than be brainwashed by anti-catholicism.
@assasincomedy OK. By your definition anything the RC says is true and anything else is "fallacious". I ask you to tell me where the Word of God say Mary will make appearances and you say what? Oh, "the writings of the church fathers" as if that settles it. I have the Word of God and you have the RC lies of "the church fathers".
All things being equal, whatever these men wrote down as accurate teachings of the Church (especially if there is agreement among them) is going to be what Jesus Christ taught directly to the Apostles. It is certainly more likely to be the truth than a modern notion or idea which does not appear anywhere until much later.
@assasincomedy "All things being equal, whatever these men wrote down as accurate teachings of the Church (especially if there is agreement among them) is going to be what Jesus Christ taught directly to the Apostles."??? The fact that you could write and believe something so evil is proof that you can't be talked to. How do you know it's "accurate" unless you test it by the Scriptures?
@Bigrich104 The Early Church fathers: These men were living in the very early years of the Church – some of them (called the Apostolic Fathers) were living at the same time as many of the Apostles themselves. These men were taught by the Apostles, or by men the Apostles taught. They lived very close to the time when Jesus walked on the earth and was teaching His followers the truth. Cont...
@assasincomedy Wrong. These guys came around 100+ years after the resurrection. Who CARES what they wrote when you have the teachings of the Lord Himself and his disciples in the Bible? You have the pure word in the Bible but you desperately want the watered down writings of flawed sinful men who came at least a100 years later? It's like you have a choice between a freshly cooked meal or that meal after it has been eaten and vomited up. You choose the vomit. I choose the original meal.
@Bigrich104 'Wrong'? That's interesting, perhaps post me a step by step refutation for all the historical information I have provided about the Early Church fathers, then proceed to say that I am 'Wrong'. Anyone can act like a child screaming 'no!' when the mother tells him that candy is not healthy. The Truth hurts. Sure, you personally can not care about the early Church fathers, and rely solely on your private interpretation of scripture. We can see how far that gets, 33000 denominations?
@assasincomedy The refutations are on a 1000 websites by ex-Catholics. You won't go to any of them. The Bible is Jesus himself teaching his students about himself later recorded by the students under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The "church fathers" were not Jesus nor were they taught by Jesus himself about himself, yet you want to elevate 3rd/4th/5th generation man made tradition to be equal with first generation God breathed truth. It's sad. Goodbye.
@Bigrich104 Friend, those 'websites' are not truth. They consist of made up lies and deceit by former 'Catholics' (although that is questionable from their lack of knowledge about the Church and her teachings), and are used as brainwashing material for many fundamentalist Christians.
@assasincomedy There are no lies on them. Remember they believed just like you until they opened their minds and saw the truth. Mary was not sinless and she did not ascend into heaven. I quoted you the "church father" who said so and you ignored it. That is proof but in your cult mind it is a lie solely because it exposes the RC lie. If there were lies, you could track down the quotes and find they were made up. Peter was never in Rome...Paul would have mentioned him when he was there.
@Bigrich104 Yes, there are lies on them. Don't try to argue that point with me. I know their arguments, and they are fruitless and based on lies and misconceptions about Church teachings. You don't even know the Catholic Church's teachings, just bits and pieces that you probably got off anti-catholic websites. You can keep denying our droctrines, it has no effect on my belief. I have complete trust in the Church as it was founded by Christ. That is fact. Only fundamentalists disagree.
@assasincomedy Document one lie! John 6:51 makes it clear he was talking about His crucifixion. The Jews were used to sacrificing and eating a goat , lamb or calf and he was trying to use their understanding of the Passover to explain that He was God's Passover Lamb and anyone who believes on Him after the cross ("give my flesh...for the life of the world") will live forever. He uses their language ("whosoever eats me") to explain something new to them. It's obvious. RC is evil. Sorry but true.
@Bigrich104 You don't understand John 6:51. He says that if we eat this bread, we will live forever (The Eucharist). He confirms the real presence when He says "The bread that I will give you is my flesh". That is quite clear. He then proceeds to say that it is this very flesh that he gives (his) so that the world may live (Referring to the Crucifixion). Your interpretation is incorrect. He is the Lamb, the Perfect Sacrafice, which we offer to the Father, through the Spirit, each Sunday.
@assasincomedy "You don't understand John 6:51. He says that if we eat this bread, we will live forever (The Eucharist). He confirms the real presence when He says "The bread that I will give you is my flesh". That is quite clear. He then proceeds to say that it is this very flesh that he gives (his) so that the world may live (Referring to the Crucifixion)."
You said Jesus is also a Lamb. If you happen to see a lamb on the street eating some grass. Do you see the real Jesus also?
@assasincomedy If you say His real presence appears when the bread and wine is held by the priest. Can I bring a lamb to your church so the priest could raise it too? Then, I'll asked you if you see the real presence of Chirst. Let's try with the lamb to see if it will transubstantiated.
@assasincomedy Well, what about the water in your faucet. Jesus Christ says His the Living Water. So, do Catholic parishioners sees the real presence of Christ everytime they open the faucet and see water gushing out? Or, it has to be a priest who should open the faucet in order to see the presence of Jesus Christ? If that so, can we offer free rent and board to a priest so they could open the faucet and shower so I could feel the presence of Jesus Christ while taking a bath?
@abukid I have absolutely no idea where you are trying to head with your argument. We celebrate the Eucharist because Christ told us to, and in the context of his instructions, he specifically says 'This is my Body' and 'This is my Blood'.
@assasincomedy So, what about Christ body and blood? Why did Christ said while holding the bread that it was His body and the wine as His blood? If it is a context to you. What is the context then?
@abukid --Big dif; while Jesus said "I am the living water" he did not hold a glass of water and say "this is my body"; but he did say "I am the living bread", and @ the Last Sup., he did hold up bread and declare "this is my body".
@TheExorcist445 So, what does the body got to do with the bread? And what does the wine got to do with the His blood? Did you get good grades in elementary on english? "I am" and "this is my" is in a first-person narrative. Everyone eats bread during meal and sometimes drink wine. What's the big deal with your bread and wine?
@Bigrich104 You failed to consider anything I stated about the early Church fathers. They were the early Christians who were taught and instructed by the Apostles themselves, or who the Apostles taught. You have the teachings of the Catholic Church in the Bible, you just don't agree with our interpretation.
@assasincomedy Polycarp was the last disciple of an Apostle (John). Irenaeus claimed to have heard Polycarp when Irenaeus was a child and also claimed to be an apostle of John like Polycarp which isn't likely since Polycarp died in 150 and Irenaeus didn't hear Polycarp until he was very old well past John's death. Polycarp recognized none of RC heresies.
@Bigrich104 Stop referring to 'RC heresies'. That is offensive and is obviously intentional. St. Irenaeus never claimed to be an apostle of John. He was a hearer of Polycarp, who in turn was a disciple of John the Evangelist. I have no idea where you are getting your facts from.
@assasincomedy I'm sorry for offending you. I stick by my hostility to RC doctrine. There are 1000s of websites that document everything I said as true, mostly by former Catholics, and your only response is it's anti-Catholic or out of context. In Hebrew, the "im" suffix on a word makes it plural (cherub/cherubim), just like an 's' in English. I know about the Trinity...a few verses later it says "Let US make man in OUR IMAGE". Us & our are plural and image is singular. Good luck & good bye.
@Bigrich104 The 'ex-catholic' websites you talk about are just about the most anti-catholic websites you can find, with their 'credible' information. Most of them weren't Catholic in the first place, or suffered from extremely bad catechesis, with them barely knowing the Catholic faith. I come across them all the time. The majority get hooked in with the protestant belief of 'Once saved always saved'.
@Bigrich104 As an example, the truth that Jesus Christ is really and physically present in the Eucharist has been a teaching of the Church since the apostolic age. References to this are found in the writings of the Church Fathers and the Scripture is very clear on this matter. However, it was not until the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 that the word “transubs
@davidthomasmorton: not only did Peter deny Jesus 3 times but the rest of the apostles ran and hid from the Roman soldiers when they looked for Jesus' followers. Were the rest of the apostles "sifted out like wheat by Satan?" Why are you singling out Peter?
sinugba4u 3 weeks ago
@sinugba4u cause peter was not a pope
Jesus said to Peter are you still so dull
Get thee behind me satan ( peter )
Peter calls himself only a fellow elder
RCC is most corrupt , decietful controlling , and murderous MAN MADE CULT in the hisstory of creation jesuit = assassin ...read Jesuit Oath
davidthomasmorton 1 week ago
Pastors today are clowns, check out Kerney Thomas, Eddie Long or Dollar
LeuntenantZero 3 weeks ago
@LeuntenantZero A Los Angeles bishop stepped down from his duties with the Catholic church on Wednesday after acknowledging he fathered two children. Auxiliary Bishop Gabino Zavala, 60, told the archdiocese in December that he was the father of two teenagers who live out of the state with their mother, the Associated Press reported. Zavala submitted his resignation with the Vatican shortly thereafter. "Pastors today are clowns" Yes I agree, especially those you named, but so are priests.
TheJpgr1958 3 weeks ago
All have sinned and greatly offended the holy God of the bible. The just punishment is death then hell. That's not Gods will. He suffered and died on the cross paying for the law you broke in His life's blood so He could legally dismiss your case. You must repent turn from your sin and trust alone in Jesus Christ for your salvation.
mamainmancj 1 month ago
when Peter denied Christ 3 times that was the start of peter being sifted like wheat by satan
anyway the catholic church and its dogmas and traditions of men belongs to satan now
davidthomasmorton 1 month ago
So the pope represent Christ on earth that is what i called white supremacy so why there are many black men in that congregation but has never been ordained as pope. all this is a cult and fala.
MrNanabrobbey 2 months ago
Comment removed
5355vbxjbj76rvn 2 months ago
It requires you to abandon Occam's razor to accept a more convoluted interpretation of what the 'rock' is IF it isn't Peter.
Consequently one has to ask: If Protestants didn't have to much to gain by denying this most obvious, simple interpretation, would their membership really stop to question it's validity?
I think not.
MrWildbill20056 2 months ago
I think St Peter was and is the first Pope
nyguy88L71 3 months ago
@nyguy88L71 You Know he was the first pope (thumbs up) Matt 16, John 21, 1Peter 5:13
CAtholic29 2 months ago
Those opening quotes just made me throw up a little.
HolyMisfit 3 months ago
Pacwa is a Jesuit. Nuff said.
HolyMisfit 3 months ago
Peter was never a "Pope", the title is totaly unchristian, Matthew 23:9. And even if Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, it means nothing, Jesus doesnt care about traditions. Read the Bible what Jesus did with the jewish Highpriests and the jewish traditions, Jesus is radical when it is about God's righteousness, Jesus said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s.”
jeshualivesforever 3 months ago
The beginning of the show explained it. Petros=a little stone, Petra=a big rock, and the Lord said, "Upon this rock I'll build My church". The rock is who He is from the Father, as is evidenced by what He says, saying that it was the Father who revealed that to Peter. Plus, Peter erred when he said that the Lord wouldn't suffer the crucifixon, and the Lord said, "Get behind me, Satan!" Peter erred, therefore he was fallible, and so is the pope. Gregory the Great was the first pope.
munku121 3 months ago
Aren't there any other Protestants besides Martin. I know he is good, but there aren't others?
sgal88 4 months ago
Jesus says, according to more perfect translation from the Greek copies we have today: You are Little rock, and upon this (Jesus points at himself) Bedrock I will build my assembly.
chanses2 4 months ago
The body of believers in the Church of Jesus Christ, is made up of Evangelists, Pastors, Teachers, Apostles and Prophets, never a Pope, Priests, etc.. which were done away with because of the One Sacrafice of Christ which was able to atone for all sin, making void Purgatory.Hebrews 10:18 (ch 8,9,10) Ephesians 4:11-16, 1 John 2:2. Today God still calls Christians refered to as Saints to continue to fill these positions. From heaven Goddirects His Church on earth through His Spirit.
MMr7777 4 months ago
Peter never claimed to be head over other apostles, the gathering of apostles and elders at Jerusalemaround 45-50 A.D. in Acts 15:4-29 was convened on Paul's initiative, not Peter's. Peter never acted like a "pope" nor was treated by others, Gal 2:11-14.The statement in Matt 28:20 can't be exclusively to a leadership hierarchy. Christs promises where to all the apostles not only to some elite class, John 14;13, 16:23 Matt 18:19. Peter was a rock not "thee" Rock, John 1:42, a stone not the Rock
MMr7777 4 months ago
The Bible declares God as being the only Rock, Psalm 18:31 ,62:1-2, Ih 44:8, Deut 32:3-4.Peter points to Christ as the Chief cornerstone upon which the Church is built, those who trust in Christ, as the scripture reveals.1 Peter 2:6-8. Built upon all the apostles & prophets, Eph 2:20, Christ as head Eph 1:22. they all had the "keys" to unlock the gospel of salvation and bind and loose people from sins through the gospel. Peter refered to himself as a fellow elder,1 Peter 5:1-2.
MMr7777 4 months ago
I don't get it, whats wrong with calling Peter the first Pope, I mean we won't go to hell for it.
xhemexx 4 months ago
@xhemexx Friend, simply obey the word of God. Peter was never a pope. He was a saved sinner like you and I.
73geneva 4 months ago
@73geneva Who denies that Peter was a sinner?
sgal88 4 months ago
@sgal88 So why attribute heretical status to the man? First Mary, now Peter. Prayer to dead people, angels; prayer for souls in purgatory etc. The RCC preaches another gospel and Gal 1:8 has a name for her.
73geneva 3 months ago
@73geneva Something is heretical only because the person does not understand what it is. Praying for the dead have always been a tradition in the early church and even Jews. To the Virgin Mary, to pray to her is far better than to pray directly to Jesus because Jesus can deny you everything while he can not deny nothing to the Virgin Mary.
sgal88 3 months ago
@sgal88 Satan is the master of deceit and he is doing a perfect job deceiving you into these practises. Show me where Jesus or any of His disciples either prayed to dead people or taught anyone else so. Why not obey God's commandments, instead of the tradition of your church?
73geneva 3 months ago
@73geneva Didn't the Pharisees accuse Jesus of working with the devil? You are just like them. Attacking what you don't know. Even if I showed you, you would just disagree and not wish to hear the truth.
sgal88 3 months ago
@sgal88 Very funny. The Pharisees attacked Jesus; that is your excuse to justify yourself because I told you your religion is not of God.
Show me what? You have absolutely nothing to show me; you're spiritually blind and a blind man cannot even see, let alone show someone else the way. ...the god of this world has BLINDED them...
Read the Bible and flee the Catholic organization before it's too late.
73geneva 3 months ago
@73geneva LooL! A ignorant fool who doesn't know what Scripture actually says. You are like a Pharisees for like the Church have had their miracles to prove it is divine, so did Jesus to prove he was God. You attack what you don't know and i be best to stay quiet for your judgment can be harsh if you insist attacking the Church which he founded. You are the blind men. How many ppl have read Scripture and interpreted so many things...33K different interpretations, while the Church is one.
sgal88 3 months ago
@sgal88 It's ok, but if it means I have to be a fool in order to show you and other Roman Catholics the truth, then so be it. Again, I say to you; flee the Catholic Church before it's too late.
73geneva 3 months ago
@73geneva Join it before you die outside of the ark.
sgal88 3 months ago
@sgal88 Very very funny. YOurs is the Ark of the Catholic Church; I am already inside the True Ark, the Lord Jesus Christ.
73geneva 3 months ago
So, you're saying that Mary, a fully human woman, can deny God the Son? Also, the opening of this show explained it: Petros, a little stone, Petra, a big rock, a big rock that He'll build His church on, which is the revelation of who He is from the Father. Plus, the pope is supposed to be infallible, right? Then how about the next bit of scripture where Peter errs and the Lord says, "Get behind me, Satan!"? The pope is fallible.
munku121 3 months ago
@munku121 Mary, a creature does not deny the will of God EVER! Second, both Jesus and Peter are the Rock of the Church. Thirdly, yes, the Blessed Lord did tell him to get behind him and scolded him by calling him Satan. Unlike the temptation in the desert, he does not ask to flee from him. He wants Peter to learn to humble himself and follow Jesus. That is what that means.
sgal88 3 months ago
You completely missed the point. He called Peter a little stone 'Petros'. He said upon this rock 'Petra' meaning 'big rock' He'll build His church. It is the revelation of who Christ is from the Father that is the rock that the church is built upon. Also, if the pope is infallible, then how is it that Peter erred? Also, Christianity was not made a state Rome religion until AFTER Peter was crucified. The first pope was Gregory the Great.
munku121 3 months ago
@munku121 Ur and IDIOT! Pope is just a title of Honor Peter was the 1st Pope in the sense that he was the Visible (SEEN) leader of the Church (rep by the Apostles who were the 1st Bishops)!!!!!!
Also Gregory the Great was NOT the 1st Pope b/c position of the the Pope is to be the Head of the Church and Bishop of Rome until the Day of Judgement.
eljunior98 3 months ago
@sgal88 "Unlike the temptation in the desert, he does not ask to flee from him. He wants Peter to learn to humble himself and follow Jesus. That is what that means" My Lord. Talk about reading something into the text of scripture that's not even there. Who told you all of this, the church of Rome? You do realize that church fathers, whom RC's love to quote, didn't agree amongst themselves as to Peter being pope?
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 It was a church Father that many have mostly agreed upon and it makes sense in the context of how Jesus did it. My gosh. Protestants! Assuming that they are somewhat intelligent without authority.
sgal88 3 months ago
@sgal88 "It was a church Father that many have mostly agreed upon" Really? How about this church father? "I have somewhere said of St. Peter that the church is built upon him as the Rock...But I know that I have since frequently said that the word of the Lord, "Thou art Petrus, and on this petra I will build my church," must be understood of him, who Peter confessed as Son of the living God; and Peter, so named after this rock, represents the person of the church, which is founded on this...
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
rock and has received the keys of the kingdom of heaven. For it was not said to him: "Thou art a rock" (petra), but, "Thou art Peter" (Petrus); and the rock was Christ, through confession of whom Simon received the name Peter. Yet the reader may decide which of the two interpretations is the more probable." This church father was the great Augustine. HE left his readers to decide how they would interpret Matthew 16. You should think seriously about what it means that Augustine.....
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
the great bishop of Hippo, could think that how one views this passage is a matter of freedom, when Vatican 1 tells us it is a matter upon which the anathema can and should be used. You should also notice the huge movement in thought that has taken place between the early part of the 5th century and the latter part of the 19th. So who ever this "one church father that many have mostly agreed upon," it is certainly not Augustine. Was he wrong, and has the church anathematized him?
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 LOL!You quote they very Church Father who believed in Apostolic Succession. And can you please quote that sentence from V1.
sgal88 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 You have no proof of them not agreeing , in ACts they followed Peter . Christ gave authority to Peter on earth in Matt 16 (I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven..)and John 21 (feed my lambs , feed my sheep) and he confirms that he was chosen in 1Peter 5:13 "The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting". It seems scripture confirms our teaching , no matter how one who opposes it, tries to spin it .Christ intended for peter to be Pope .
CAtholic29 3 months ago in playlist CAtholic29's favorites
@CAtholic29 "You have no proof of them not agreeing" There is, but you will not consider the evidence. "Christ gave authority to Peter on earth in Matt 16" Again, VERY DEBATABLE, but you will not listen to the evidence, and if you have listened, you just state that it's wrong. "John 21 (feed my lambs , feed my sheep)" See previous comment. "The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting". What? "It seems scripture confirms our teaching" Just your opinion, just like what Mormons or JWS state.
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 Not debatable when you factor in MAtt 16, the only one to be given the keys is Peter and he was the rock. In John 21 Christ tells him to feed his sheep and lamb . In 1Peter 5 he confirms himself as the chosen one .You could not counter me here obviously "yes it is " no it is not " arguments are not gonna hold up .
CAtholic29 3 months ago
"no matter how one who opposes it, tries to spin it" You sound like a Mormon here. Perhaps you are one?? Or a Jehovah Witness? "Christ intended for peter to be Pope." Much like God intended to use Joseph Smith to restore the true gospel on earth, right? You all suffer from the "true church syndrome, and you also suffer from the "Peter" syndrome. Very sad.
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 Mormons are in outer space as far as I am concerned and copied off of muslims with the prophet angel BS . Christ intended for peter to be Pope evidence = Matt 16, John 21, 1Peter 5:13 = CHECK MATE ! You suffer from brainwashed ways , scripture proof is right there if your so blinded you cannot see it then that is SAD . OPEN YOUR EYES . Concrete scripture says Peter was the chosen leader by Christ chosen to lead the leaders and you know that.Come with something real or step out
CAtholic29 3 months ago
@CAtholic29 (OH BOY) You and I have been down this road before. Still on that porno web site "mighty tighty," on which you pretend to defend your sin filled popes and your homo priests? Still trying to be the puesdo-intellectual on Roman Catholicism eh? I believe I told you before, that when you are in a REAL scholastic debate that follows the rules of debate, and have it recorded and posted so that all can see it, then you might have a leg to stand on. Having a debate on youtube means nothing.
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 WE have been down this road so you should know better then to try and pull the wool over my eyes. Mightyrighty -conservative site . What is your religion (its not Christian because Christians do not speak as you do ) . I am here to once again straighten you out . I came with scripture you came with mockery who wins ? (Oh BOy ) me.I thought you left , you snuck back here I can see.
CAtholic29 3 months ago
@CAtholic29 "WE have been down this road so you should know better then to try and pull the wool over my eyes" (rolls eyes). And YOU should know that your debate skills, which you believe are superior to any one, is nothing more than you being a narcissistic fool. Prove yourself as a valid debater and engage in a REAL debate with debate rules, or are you afraid that you would be laughed out of the building? "I thought you left" I never left, but you being so cosmic should of known that, right?
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 Mockery will get you another loss . I proved myself already now prove yourself to have any debate skills whatsoever. I will keep hammering the points here . You keep mocking them . Either way, I win with the truth while you have not an argument against me . I am here now ,get used to it sir.
CAtholic29 3 months ago
@CAtholic29 "Mockery will get you another loss" I'm just giving back to you what you give to those who don't agree with Rome. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander type thing. "I proved myself already" Boy are you deranged!! You think that, because you have never had a real debate with real debate rules. Just commenting on your gay porn web site and Starbucks. "I will keep hammering the points here." As will I and others will keep doing. "You keep mocking them" See first comment.
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 You proved nothing . You proved that have no scripture education and that was your loss right there . You had beef to back up your claims . SO Prove me wrong ! Otherwise we remain or you remain in check mate .
CAtholic29 3 months ago
"I win with the truth" No. You just spew the same evasive answers like a good little catholic fanboy, much like what Mormons, JWS, Moonies, Muslims, Oneness, and all other groups who state the exact same thing you do, and who will defend their worthless leaders and prophets to no end. "I am here now" Must be sad to have no life except your porn web sites and the internet where you think you are the best there is in defending Rome, which is not worth defending anyway. "Here there and everywhere"
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958Yes I win with the truth and you know it and I proved it with scripture.THey have beef to back up their claims as you have no beef . Your almost like an atheist with your mockery comments. I have filled life of charities I partake in and run while you mock God and his faith I take care of those in need.I win,why?because I made a claim about peter being the first Pope and leader and that Christ appointed him to be so.I used scriptrue to back me up .You provided no argument YOU LOSE!
CAtholic29 3 months ago
@CAtholic29 "I win with the truth" And once again, no you don't. "THey have beef to back up their claims as you have no beef" By "they,' are you referring to Mormons, JWS, Moonies, Oneness, Muslims etc? But you don't agree with them, so how can these groups have any "beef?" Makes no sense. "I have filled life of charities I partake in and run while you mock God and his faith I take care of those in need." Wow my friend, sounds like your boasting!! Tell you what. Since the death rate is still...
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 4 messages really ? here we go lets see:Once again YES I DO WIN . I am refering to all of those groups you mention . I do not agree with them it makes perfect sense as to why I say they have no beef get it ? Boasting ? nope just stating facts .
CAtholic29 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 HE will make you render an account for every careless word you spoke , all the bad things you said about his church you will have to render an account for (Matt 12:36-37 ) AND Boasting about good works to Christ wont do anyone any good of course . But Matt 25:31-46, James 2:24 , and etc says that good works is a requirement for a Christian . SO get a grip
CAtholic29 3 months ago
one per person, and we all are going to make it, you can stand before God, and boast to Him about all of the charity work you have done. I, on the other hand, will bow my head in reverence, and state to Him that all the work I ever did for Him was like soiled rags, and that I didn't deserve His mercy and grace, and to accept me into His kingdom, a sinner. I will stand cloaked in the righteousness of Christ and Him alone. Then He will say "well done my good and faithful servant...
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
enter into your rest." You see, Roman Catholics don't have any good news, for you don't know if you have peace with God. I, according to Christ, can know NOW that I have peace with God. No works of any kind, including works done with any merit, will give me or any one true peace with God. And that my friend is a big issue. So keep boasting all you want about all the woks of charity you are doing. It will mean bupkis in the end. Christ is all one needs, just like the thief on the cross.
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 WE have the greatest news . He built our church after all (Matt 16) Your denomination whatever it may be is a splinter off of us any way . You would not have a bible (not like you use it anyway) if it were not for us . WE are to consistently work out our salvation with fear and trembling as Paul tell us to in Phil 2:12 . Read scripture feed your brain you might stat agreeing with me.Just as it says in James 2 "a body without a spirit is dead just as faith without works is dead .
CAtholic29 3 months ago
And if you are going to come back with the same argument that Mormons, JWS, Moonies, Oneness, and other groups use, which is keep the commandments, or "Faith without works is dead," to be right with God, you would have to keep every commandment, 100% of the time, with 100% of your being, and never fail in ANY of them. And this my friend, if you were honest, you, I nor anyone can do. And this includes Mary, priest, cardinals, bishops, and your popes. Christ and Him alone did that.
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 CHECK MATE I am here for now so you wont get around by your lies . I straightened you out and cleaned this place out before so I will do it again . I though you left otherwise I would have never left. I know your here and still uneducated as before about scripture so I will stay for a while . God Bless
CAtholic29 3 months ago
@CAtholic29 WOW, what a bunch of drivel. If you speak like you write, I can now understand why you won't do any public debates. You just throw out a whole buch of statements, much like a lawyer, and hope something sticks. "I straightened you out" Lie. You didn't nor can you straighten anyone out. I suppose you believe you are the Holy Spirit? "(I) cleaned this place out before" I think you watch too much "Hazel" on tv. "still uneducated as before about scripture" Well pot meet kettle then.
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 No one would last in a public debate without a mediator that is for sure but I would most certainly give anyone a run for their money. I straightened you out! . Still you are uneducated about scripture then!
CAtholic29 3 months ago
@CAtholic29 "No one would last in a public debate without a mediator that is for sure" Speak for yourself there my friend. You have NO room to speak on this because you have never done a public debate, and you never will, and apparently from this response, you have never seen a public debate, because this is so far from reality, much like your so-called debating skills which you don't have. "but I would most certainly give anyone a run for their money." GREAT!! Prove it. See, it's so easy...
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 I have done public debates and you MY FRIEND would lose because you know no scripture and that is what is needed here sir.
CAtholic29 2 months ago
@CAtholic29 "I have done public debates" Really? All right, if this is true, prove it. Post these "public debates" on line so that we can see and hear you in action. Also give information about them such as what topics were discussed, where were they held, the names of your opponents, the time and dates, the name of the moderators, you know, all of the crucial info one would have at their disposal. Again,a public debate does not mean internet discussion groups or sitting at a Starbucks.
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 I have discussed all of the topic for the most part against the faith. I have defended it all . You obviously bhave not engaged in any debates and if you have , it would be an easy victory for your opponent as it was for me against you . A protestant who does not know scripture or does not pretend to know scripture ? and your going up against Catholics?Your too easy
CAtholic29 2 months ago
@CAtholic29 Oh well. I asked for prove to back up your assertion that you have engaged in public debates, namely where they were held, names of the venues, the topic/topics discussed, the names of your opponents, who the moderator was, things of this nature. I also asked you to post these events. And yet I knew that the term "public debate" to you means discussions over the internet, Starbucks, the gym, any place but in a real debate setting. And then you go off in your usual rants. Your a joke.
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 YOU LOSE , you cannot come up with a debate but you mock my debate technique? Get lost The Chief is in town and you are guilty of Blasphemy with no argument . The real Joke is you who is just here to bicker and not achieve anything in debate . You don't even know scripture ? What are you on here for anyway ? Grow up kid and get lost
CAtholic29 2 months ago
@CAtholic29 Still can't prove your assertion about being involved in public debates. I thought so. You make these assertions, then when asked to prove it by uploading a video or audio of even one of them, with the proper info to accompany the debate, name of venue, topic discussed, name of the moderator, etc, you scream childish things such as "You Lose." What garbage. This is all you got? All you do is speak out of a certain part of your anatomy. "You don't even know scripture " Really now.
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 Your over kid you cannot defend your position using scripture son so get lost . Moderator or no one , you lose .
CAtholic29 2 months ago
Let's see...I quoted the thief on the cross...scripture, I quoted James 2 "Who so ever keeps the whole law, yet fails in one point is guilty of all." Scripture again. I quoted the women, who when she saw Jesus sitting at the table, washed His feet with her tears, and dried His feet with her hair. Oh yes, this is scripture. I've quoted several scripture passages to you, but you just ignore them and then state I don't quote scripture. This is the problem with trying to have a debate on youtube.
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 You quoted nothing . You fail to give chapter and verse . Its not feeling good to have a CAtholic demae the quote and exact chapter and verse ? Its not good . Just do it . These half scriptures you quote contradict nothing of the church so don't waist your time
CAtholic29 2 months ago
One can't, or doesn't, want to go back and re-read everything someone has posted on a topic. You have to sort through other people's comments, and then one gets side tracked trying to answer those, and it becomes one big mess. That's why, if you would, post your debates on line so we can see them, then perhaps we can see how you do. But public debates means to you the internet, Starbucks, and the gym, which are really not debates but discussions, hopefully friendly ones. .
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 Look kid you can type me 100 meaningless responses with mockery I will come back with the facts kid and fact is you lost and will continue to look bad . I stopped in your tracts upon arrival and now your stopped and done .
CAtholic29 2 months ago
"Get lost" Sorry, but you are not in charge of this or any other thread. Me thinks you boast too much, which you have done in previous posts. "The Chief is in town" This is your lame opinion about yourself my friend. The only thing you may be the "Chief" of, are your bowl movements, and that is given to you by the grace of God. So stop all of this. You impress no one, except your parents, and yourself.
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
Oh yes. Would you like me to give you links to what real debates should be like? I believe once you see them, you would have a change of heart and realize that you are no debater my friend. Let me know, or are you going to state your usual "YOU LOSE," or "You don't know scripture" rants at me. Time will only tell. "Oh I get by with a little help from my friends."
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 Its about me and you not debates about others or with others right now you can't handle me and that is what I need to stop is you now and i have so mission accomplished kiddo so get out or here because I am here to stay and you can no longer complete your task while I am here
CAtholic29 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958
show me the links. And i believe that you dint even read it but only the Title and thinks it can change people.
Kankai1 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 YOUR a joke kid, you lost the debate here a long time ago . Now your comments consist of comments about my debate skills . I have stopped you from speaking badly about the church through misinterpretation by using proper interpretation . and yes YOU LOSE AGAIN . You have nothing more to contribute . If got your tail handed to you (by me of course) here you could not stand a chance in regular debate . GEt LOSt KID
CAtholic29 2 months ago
@CAtholic29 Ummm, if you would like for me to show you an example of what I mean by a real moderated debate, I can give you a link to some. Would you be willing to look at them?
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 I would be be willing to continue to beat you in debate care for a rematch kid . Its ok I will take it easier on you this time and not give you such a beating as the last one . UMMMM get a grip son.
CAtholic29 2 months ago
for you to "think" you are debating people on youtube, or on your websites which you boast about, or in a Starbucks, but to make your assertion true, then you have to prove it. And this you will never do because you would be laughed out of the building. And from reading your responses, I can see why, you can't speak correctly! "I straightened you out!" Oh good grief. That seems to be you mantra. And if this is what you would say in a real debate, be sure to cover your ears from all...
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 I am debating and winning Still no scripture from you what kind of a protestant bible thumper wannabe are you ? Get lost if you have nothing to contribute but mockery .
CAtholic29 2 months ago
of the laughter that would be coming in your direction. "Still you are uneducated about scripture then!" (sigh). More drivel from you as always. Again, prove yourself and let us see you in action in a real debate. Also, keep protecting your homo and pedophile priests, as well as your sinful popes. "WE have the greatest news" No you don't. Because you believe your meritorious works will help you in the end, how do you you have done enough of those works? You don't. Remember, your works are....
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 Proved myself that is why you ran for a while , your not a Christian that is for sure telling by your language towards priest (stereo typing ) you do realize that preachers and youth ministers in the protestant churches at times do the same thing? climb out of your hole and read a news paper kid and they can get married proving it to be a mental illness and not because of celibant reasons kiddo . WE have the church Christ started while you belong to a splinter church.WELCOME BACK!
CAtholic29 2 months ago
as soiled rags, just like mine are. So on the day of judgment, you can stand before God, boasting about all the goods works you did, while I, like the thief on the cross, will bow my head in repentance and ask for mercy. That's the difference between us. I know NOW that there is nothing I can do to merit anything from God. It's a free gift. So keep boasting in your works and your websites. I will boast in nothing but Jesus and Him crucified, just like the Apostle Paul did. No popes needed.
TheJpgr1958 2 months ago
@TheJpgr1958Just as a body without a spirit is dead faith without works is dead end of story(James 2) I already stated that boasting top Christ about the work you did for him won't do. Your the goat in Matt 25:31-46( read it ,it may open your eyes)I am the sheep of course.What you did for the least of Christs people you for him,YOU remember that.Peter was appointed by Christ to be pope(Matt 16, John 21, 1Peter 5:13 ) And He needed a successor (the Pope) For Judas had a successor (Acts ) Wake up!
CAtholic29 2 months ago
Oh yes, are you still mad about your vicar of Christ on earth allowing a pro-abortionist to speak at a Roman Catholic university, or is Notre Dame not Roman Catholic any more? "God Bless" Same to you friend.
TheJpgr1958 3 months ago
@TheJpgr1958 He had no say in that . An American priest did and so he it happened and now I remember you as the lost soul who keeps bringing that up . Oh poor The Jpgr Bless your heart .
CAtholic29 3 months ago
Father Mitch Pacwa is GREAT and we are so blessed to have him as a guide. Thanks to Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.
mkamoski1 5 months ago
protestants keep saying that they are bible believers and yet do notbelive the very words of christ
williemetoyer1 6 months ago
@williemetoyer1 --They "spiritualize" the literal and "literalize" the spiritual; aint you glad we have a church that has God-given teaching authority?
TheExorcist445 6 months ago
@TheExorcist445 AMEN
williemetoyer1 5 months ago
I love the fact in this debate is that Ankerberg quotes about 1500 words of extremely in-depth information, that requires years of understanding, and expects Fr. Pacwa to come up with an answer TO ALL of it within 3 minutes. Great Job of you, Ankerberg. What a fool, I bet if Ankerberg himself debated the Jesuit he would be minced.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
You are amazing. You spew RC nonsense and insist it's true because you believe it. The "Bible only" argument is IN THE BIBLE and what the first church understood. "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel that was ONCE AND FOR ALL DELIVERED unto the Saints"...this proves that the Gospel WAS COMPLETE during the lifetime of the Apostles. It does not say "...and a bunch of other crap made up by others 150 - 300 years from now that we don't know about", does it? You are incapable of rational thought.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@thetorvasal The Church came first, then came the Bible.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
What difference does it make? Regarding who was the first Pope, or who has been Pope since, or who is Pope now? The Pope is an ordinary man, elected to office by other ordinary men. It's a non-issue.
JeffersonDinedAlone 6 months ago
Wow this really made the Catholic arguments look utterly ridiculous even preposterous beyond belief. These video's are a nightmare for a Catholic.
southernpreacher 7 months ago
@southernpreacher I disagree. The Catholic position is based on reason and truth. If you watch the rest of the debate, you will see that the Jesuit destroyed the protestant position, even when outnumbered 2 to 1 with most of his decisive points edited out. Oh what deceivers anti-catholic protestants are.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy
If the "most decisive points" were edited out, how do you know what they were or even that they were? This link thoroughly destroys the RC position and shows how another "Simon Peter" was the first pope. Please read.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 Actually no it doesn't. He did a very good job defending the Catholic position and it's only protestants that say it got destroyed. This isn't even a debate, as the 'host' is required to be indifferent, rather this is more a 2-on-1. I'm sorry if you disagree with orthodox Christianity and 2000 years of Sacred Tradition established by Christ on Peter. Better stick with sola scriptura, your man made tradition.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy Sola Scriptura is a man made tradition? Jesus said "man does not live by bread alone, but every word that proceeds from the mouth of God", which can only be found in the Bible. That says it all and says nothing about what your church calls "tradition". Wow...elevating admitted tradition to be equal to Scripture while reducing actual Scripture to "tradition" is sad.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 That verse you quoted is taken out of context and has nothing to do with sola scriptura. Sola Scriptura is not in the Bible, and nowhere does it imply it. 'That says it all' Oh really? In your opinion? So you are saying the rest of the Holy Scriptures are unimportant? 2 Thess 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. Paul is very clear here. Find me 1 Church father that believes in Sola Scriptura.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy The same could be said of the trinity also. Would you deny that?
xomiszdaniii 6 months ago
@assasincomedy It is NOT out of context. Jesus said "The vain traditions of man will pass away, by MY WORD will last forever". HIS WORDS can ONLY be found in Scripture. "In the beginning was THE WORD, and THE WORD was God and THE WORD was with God and THE WORD became flesh and dwelt among us." Jesus is THE WORD, it will never pass away and proceeds from the mouth of God AND can ONLY be found in Scripture. After Paul spoke to the Bereans, "they searched the scripture to see if (cont'd)...
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 Apostolic tradition is not man made. It was the passed down teaching given to us by the apostles, don't get confused. When Paul was searching the 'scriptures' he was searching through the Old Testament. I have nothing more to tell you. There is only so much an original Christian (Catholic and Orthodox) can do to try and convince a 'Bible only' Christian that the Bible is not the only Authority. You take Scripture out of context to attempt to prove your own point.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy A cultist's mind is impossible to reason with. The Apostolic tradition referred to WAS the scriptures delivered in verbal form before they were written down. Paul's mission trips were to preach the Gospel. He later wrote the epistles to those churches after he had established them with spoken word evangelism. There was a 15 year period at least after the ascension and before the first books where scripture was spoken word only. I'm amazed at how little you know.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 Actually, I'm surprised at how little you know. The scriptures were written 20-30 years after Christs ascension into heaven, but they were not compiled and accepted until the Council of Hippo in AD393. That's 350 years after Christ. Have it ever occurred to you that the Bible, is not big enough to be sufficient for our Faith? There is only a few letters, and many were left out. Only a few letters were included in the Canon/
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy The scriptures were not all written in a 10 year period. From about 45 to about 70 except for Revelation. You made my point....for the first 20 years (by your count), the Gospel was verbal, spoken word that became the written word and that is the tradition the apostles said to hold fast to, not Virgin Mary heresies that came 100s or 1000s of years later. "Gospel...once an for all delivered"...it was complete during the Apostles life, all later stuff is heresy.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 You are not understanding anything of what I have tried to explain to you. Jesus' teachings were taught by the apostles to their students, which continued, this is called sacred tradition. There were more teachings than just what is highlighted in the Bible. The Bible is the inspired Word, not a Catechism or history book. The other teachings were handed down and written about by the Early Church fathers, and included in the early Doctrines of the Church.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy ...to continue my previous remarks, Paul didn't search the scriptures, the Bereans did to validate his message which makes my point that the Bible is the only template of truth the TRUE church has ever recognized. Also you are right that they were using the OT to validate because every argument made that Jesus was Messiah was in the OT. None of your RC nonsense about Popes, Mary, transubstantiation, purgatory and the rest has any basis in the OT, further proof it is false.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 Actually, those things were always believed, they just didn't quite understand how. Things were believed for a long time until they were sometimes declared a doctrine - formal declaration of a fundamental belief. An example of this is the Blessed Trinity. The word 'Trinity' is not used in the Bible, but it was revealed to us how the Trinity works later on through more understanding.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy "The word 'Trinity' is not used in the Bible, but it was revealed to us how the Trinity works later on through more understanding. ". Understanding OF THE SCRIPTURES! THE BIBLE! Gen 1:1 uses the word Elohim which is plural, "Gods". BIBLICAL scholars had to reconcile the BIBLE verses that said there was one God that revealed Himself using a plural word. It's all about GOD'S WORD and not the heresies of "the church fathers".
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 You are misunderstanding the Holy Trinity. The Holy Trinity is not 'Gods', it is 'God in Three Persons; The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit.' Also, 'Elohim' in Gen. 1:1 is singular. Please take into mind that 'Elohim' is a grammatically singular or plural noun for "god" or "gods" in both modern and ancient Hebrew language. 'It's all about God's Word' Yes it is, it is not about your own personal interpretation.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 Cont... At the Lateran Council, the word “transubstantiation” was used. The word refers to a movement or a change of substance – it was now understood that the physical presence of Christ involved a change in substance. At the Council of Trent, the doctrine was formally defined and the understanding of the Church grew.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@Bigrich104
Cont...
This is an example of both doctrinal proclamation (in the face of denial and opposition by Protestants) but also doctrinal development. It was known that Jesus was really physically present, but it was not known precisely how this occurred. Cont...
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy Roman Catholic "church father" St. Jerome on Scripture - "As we accept those things that are written, so we reject those things that are not written (in Scripture)" (Adv. Helvid). & "These things which they invent, as if by Apostolic tradition, without the authority of Scripture, the sword of God smites." (In Aggari Proph. Cap. I, II).
Repent or perish!
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 I would be more respectful If I were you. St. Jerome is a very popular Saint of the Church. He is best known for his translation of the Bible into Latin (the Vulgate), and his list of writings is extensive. He is not referring to solely the Bible, he is referring to the teachings handed down by Apostolic Tradition. Don't take things out of context to suit your own argument.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy "...these things were true". Paul had no authority unto himself, he had to be validated by the scriptures. So If Paul or Peter says they saw an "apparition" of Mary and she tells them she lived a sinless life, which scripture do you search to see if Mary was sinless and makes ghostly appearances? Bible says to "Test the spirits". The ONLY thing you can to test them against is Scripture. How is that not obvious to you? Can you show me one verse that says Peter went to Rome?
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 "The ONLY thing you can to test them against is Scripture" Another Bible Only argument. Please acknowledge that all Christians up until the 16th century knew that Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are both Authority, not 'Bible Alone'. Let me ask you this: Who compounded the Bible? When? What did the Christians do for 400 YEARS without a Bible? Even then it was not until the printing press that everyone could own a Bible. Yet another question a protestant can't answer.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy 2Thess. 2:15 makes my point, not yours. Scripture started as spoken instruction before it was written down. He's talking about that which was God breathed, inspired by the Holy Spirit, not of any personal opinion, which is why he says by "word or epistle". How do you hold fast to "tradition, word or epistle" when 1800 years later some clown says a ghost of Mary says she lived a sinless life? Which "tradition, by word or epistle" are you holding fast to believing that?
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 It is John Ankerberg, one of the biggest anti-Catholic deceivers around. Along with this not even fitting the definition of a 'debate', Ankerberg took out large chunks of the Catholic position, as you can see with the Jesuit having less than half the amount of talking time. In a real debate both sides get the exact same time/word limit to defend their position. This debate was unlawfully edited, without authorization from BOTH sides of the argument. He is a deceiver.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy You didn't answer my question. The only way you could know Pacwa was edited out is if you saw both versions, the edited and unedited and compared. You didn't. You can't refute an argument by merely calling it anti-Catholic. His suggestion that Paul understood Peter to be a superior because he called him Cephas is laughable. The website I gave you documents from God's Word that Peter never went to Rome...why would he, he was Apostle to Jews and already in Israel. Bye.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 We emailed the organisation and they said it had been edited. Your opinion on the Catholic position has no authority on the truth. "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Matthew 16:18. Notice the singulars. Not 30,000 Churches.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy Sure it was edited for TV time, but you don't know what or how much, do you? Yet you falsely said Pacwa's best stuff was edited out. The video id's the many times Jesus is called the corner stone and you ignore it. It is Peter's confession of faith and its revelation by God above that is the rock because that is what makes a new believer / member and adds another 'rock' to the church. Each believer is a singular rock. The RC's 'authority' comes from itself, not God or Bible.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 More of your opinion, yet no facts or early Church writings to back it up.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy You're like a JW or Mormon. The church began at Pentecost and the fathers were the Apostles. Your guys came 150+ years later and started the pagan church at ROME. Your "early church writings" were opinion not based on facts or Bible. You don't respond to any point, just spew RC propaganda. Even though Jesus condemned "vain repetition of prayer" you chant your Rosary nonsense and we'll see you on Judgement Day! Anti-Christ lives in Rome!
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 Ok, no need to go off in a tangent. I'm obviously upsetting you if you need to bring up fallacious anti-catholic lies and allegations. Perhaps open up your mind, rather than be brainwashed by anti-catholicism.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy OK. By your definition anything the RC says is true and anything else is "fallacious". I ask you to tell me where the Word of God say Mary will make appearances and you say what? Oh, "the writings of the church fathers" as if that settles it. I have the Word of God and you have the RC lies of "the church fathers".
Bigrich104 6 months ago
Comment removed
assasincomedy 6 months ago
Comment removed
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@Bigrich104
All things being equal, whatever these men wrote down as accurate teachings of the Church (especially if there is agreement among them) is going to be what Jesus Christ taught directly to the Apostles. It is certainly more likely to be the truth than a modern notion or idea which does not appear anywhere until much later.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@assasincomedy "All things being equal, whatever these men wrote down as accurate teachings of the Church (especially if there is agreement among them) is going to be what Jesus Christ taught directly to the Apostles."??? The fact that you could write and believe something so evil is proof that you can't be talked to. How do you know it's "accurate" unless you test it by the Scriptures?
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 The Early Church fathers: These men were living in the very early years of the Church – some of them (called the Apostolic Fathers) were living at the same time as many of the Apostles themselves. These men were taught by the Apostles, or by men the Apostles taught. They lived very close to the time when Jesus walked on the earth and was teaching His followers the truth. Cont...
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy Wrong. These guys came around 100+ years after the resurrection. Who CARES what they wrote when you have the teachings of the Lord Himself and his disciples in the Bible? You have the pure word in the Bible but you desperately want the watered down writings of flawed sinful men who came at least a100 years later? It's like you have a choice between a freshly cooked meal or that meal after it has been eaten and vomited up. You choose the vomit. I choose the original meal.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 'Wrong'? That's interesting, perhaps post me a step by step refutation for all the historical information I have provided about the Early Church fathers, then proceed to say that I am 'Wrong'. Anyone can act like a child screaming 'no!' when the mother tells him that candy is not healthy. The Truth hurts. Sure, you personally can not care about the early Church fathers, and rely solely on your private interpretation of scripture. We can see how far that gets, 33000 denominations?
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy The refutations are on a 1000 websites by ex-Catholics. You won't go to any of them. The Bible is Jesus himself teaching his students about himself later recorded by the students under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The "church fathers" were not Jesus nor were they taught by Jesus himself about himself, yet you want to elevate 3rd/4th/5th generation man made tradition to be equal with first generation God breathed truth. It's sad. Goodbye.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 Friend, those 'websites' are not truth. They consist of made up lies and deceit by former 'Catholics' (although that is questionable from their lack of knowledge about the Church and her teachings), and are used as brainwashing material for many fundamentalist Christians.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy There are no lies on them. Remember they believed just like you until they opened their minds and saw the truth. Mary was not sinless and she did not ascend into heaven. I quoted you the "church father" who said so and you ignored it. That is proof but in your cult mind it is a lie solely because it exposes the RC lie. If there were lies, you could track down the quotes and find they were made up. Peter was never in Rome...Paul would have mentioned him when he was there.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 Yes, there are lies on them. Don't try to argue that point with me. I know their arguments, and they are fruitless and based on lies and misconceptions about Church teachings. You don't even know the Catholic Church's teachings, just bits and pieces that you probably got off anti-catholic websites. You can keep denying our droctrines, it has no effect on my belief. I have complete trust in the Church as it was founded by Christ. That is fact. Only fundamentalists disagree.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy Document one lie! John 6:51 makes it clear he was talking about His crucifixion. The Jews were used to sacrificing and eating a goat , lamb or calf and he was trying to use their understanding of the Passover to explain that He was God's Passover Lamb and anyone who believes on Him after the cross ("give my flesh...for the life of the world") will live forever. He uses their language ("whosoever eats me") to explain something new to them. It's obvious. RC is evil. Sorry but true.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
Comment removed
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 You don't understand John 6:51. He says that if we eat this bread, we will live forever (The Eucharist). He confirms the real presence when He says "The bread that I will give you is my flesh". That is quite clear. He then proceeds to say that it is this very flesh that he gives (his) so that the world may live (Referring to the Crucifixion). Your interpretation is incorrect. He is the Lamb, the Perfect Sacrafice, which we offer to the Father, through the Spirit, each Sunday.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy "You don't understand John 6:51. He says that if we eat this bread, we will live forever (The Eucharist). He confirms the real presence when He says "The bread that I will give you is my flesh". That is quite clear. He then proceeds to say that it is this very flesh that he gives (his) so that the world may live (Referring to the Crucifixion)."
You said Jesus is also a Lamb. If you happen to see a lamb on the street eating some grass. Do you see the real Jesus also?
abukid 6 months ago
@abukid What is that supposed to mean? We call him the Lamb of God, because that is what he is, the perfect sacrifice.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy If you say His real presence appears when the bread and wine is held by the priest. Can I bring a lamb to your church so the priest could raise it too? Then, I'll asked you if you see the real presence of Chirst. Let's try with the lamb to see if it will transubstantiated.
abukid 6 months ago
@abukid No, it has to be Bread and Wine.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy Well, what about the water in your faucet. Jesus Christ says His the Living Water. So, do Catholic parishioners sees the real presence of Christ everytime they open the faucet and see water gushing out? Or, it has to be a priest who should open the faucet in order to see the presence of Jesus Christ? If that so, can we offer free rent and board to a priest so they could open the faucet and shower so I could feel the presence of Jesus Christ while taking a bath?
abukid 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@abukid I have no idea what your argument is.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@abukid I have absolutely no idea where you are trying to head with your argument. We celebrate the Eucharist because Christ told us to, and in the context of his instructions, he specifically says 'This is my Body' and 'This is my Blood'.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy So, what about Christ body and blood? Why did Christ said while holding the bread that it was His body and the wine as His blood? If it is a context to you. What is the context then?
abukid 6 months ago
@abukid --Big dif; while Jesus said "I am the living water" he did not hold a glass of water and say "this is my body"; but he did say "I am the living bread", and @ the Last Sup., he did hold up bread and declare "this is my body".
TheExorcist445 6 months ago
@TheExorcist445 So, what does the body got to do with the bread? And what does the wine got to do with the His blood? Did you get good grades in elementary on english? "I am" and "this is my" is in a first-person narrative. Everyone eats bread during meal and sometimes drink wine. What's the big deal with your bread and wine?
abukid 6 months ago
@abukid --"The bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world." + "My flesh is true food and my blood is real drink" = The Eucharist.
WorldBibleUnion454 4 months ago
@WorldBibleUnion454 So, which one saves you. Is it the bread or the body. Is it the wine or the blood?
abukid 4 months ago
@abukid --The bread becomes the Body, and the wine becomes the Blood; "And the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin". --Paul
-----------
There is no "or" to consider.
WorldBibleUnion454 4 months ago
@Bigrich104 Friend, I pray that you consider the Catholic position and you pursue the fullness of the truth sometime in your life. God Bless †
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 You failed to consider anything I stated about the early Church fathers. They were the early Christians who were taught and instructed by the Apostles themselves, or who the Apostles taught. You have the teachings of the Catholic Church in the Bible, you just don't agree with our interpretation.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy Polycarp was the last disciple of an Apostle (John). Irenaeus claimed to have heard Polycarp when Irenaeus was a child and also claimed to be an apostle of John like Polycarp which isn't likely since Polycarp died in 150 and Irenaeus didn't hear Polycarp until he was very old well past John's death. Polycarp recognized none of RC heresies.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 Stop referring to 'RC heresies'. That is offensive and is obviously intentional. St. Irenaeus never claimed to be an apostle of John. He was a hearer of Polycarp, who in turn was a disciple of John the Evangelist. I have no idea where you are getting your facts from.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@assasincomedy I'm sorry for offending you. I stick by my hostility to RC doctrine. There are 1000s of websites that document everything I said as true, mostly by former Catholics, and your only response is it's anti-Catholic or out of context. In Hebrew, the "im" suffix on a word makes it plural (cherub/cherubim), just like an 's' in English. I know about the Trinity...a few verses later it says "Let US make man in OUR IMAGE". Us & our are plural and image is singular. Good luck & good bye.
Bigrich104 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 The 'ex-catholic' websites you talk about are just about the most anti-catholic websites you can find, with their 'credible' information. Most of them weren't Catholic in the first place, or suffered from extremely bad catechesis, with them barely knowing the Catholic faith. I come across them all the time. The majority get hooked in with the protestant belief of 'Once saved always saved'.
assasincomedy 6 months ago
@Bigrich104 As an example, the truth that Jesus Christ is really and physically present in the Eucharist has been a teaching of the Church since the apostolic age. References to this are found in the writings of the Church Fathers and the Scripture is very clear on this matter. However, it was not until the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 that the word “transubs