This god of the bible is funny . One day he decides to go and save mankind. He choses a people to help him with his plan . He desperately wants to be killed for mankind`s salvation. He prepares his chosen people(for many centennia) with many prophecies. but these have to be misunderstood, because if they see he is the Messiah, they will not kill him, and spoil his salvation plan. So his chosen people execute his plan by not recognizing their messiah. I admit it`s a WONDERFUL script
@Gazdo01 The "GIMME A BREAK" comment he made was about a text that has been proven to be written between 300-400 years after Christ, and contains many things that conflict the Word of God... Therfore (to anyone who understands that reference in question and wondering if it should have been included in the cannon of scripture) GIMME A BREAK! lol.
1. Historians say that the Gospel of Thomas was written between AS EARLY AS 60 AD (before any of the Gospels in the Bible) or AS LATE as 140 AD. I suggest you be more careful in the future.
2. Harmony and internal validity doesn't prove anything. Do you believe the Qu'ran is the Word of God?
The ONLY reason why we believe the Bible is reliable and can be called "Word of God" is because the CATHOLIC CHURCH had (and still has) the authority to say so when she assembled it.
@Gazdo01 1. The Gospel of Thomas was not accepted as cannon by Christianity prior to the official cannonization of scripture, therefore left out. (Be careful of what? You have most of the resources I have available use them).
2. God is not a God of confusion. God cannot lie and the GoT is known to be heresay refuting the rest of scripture. Qu'ran? No. Ramblings of a false prophet.
The Catholic church has no authority other than self appointed. It is a Chritianese cult.
@Moving2U 1. Not accepted by...? The BISHOPS of the Catholic Church. The primary purpose of the texts we find today in the Bible was LITHURGY. What are the criteria used for accepting texts? Why don't you follow the Marcion Canon, for example?
2. Who said anything about God lying? What you call "heresay refuting the rest of scripture" is not AT ALL evident. Jews would argue that the Trinity refutes the Old Testament (Deu 6.4). It's all a matter of interpretation.
@Gazdo01 The Christians for the 1st three centuries had and taught the scriptures handed down and understood what was accepted vs gnostic garbage. You're mearely talking about when it was assembled into one collection. GoT was never accepted. Jesus did not build His church on Peter nor was he a pope. He built His church on what Peter rightly identified "That Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God". Catholicism was born when men men in power wanted to control Christianity and the masses.
@Gazdo01 Peter, petra = stone. The Petros (Foundation/bed rock) Jesus built His church on was Peter's confession, and 4 verses later called him Satan.
In Matt 18:19 Jesus gives the authority to bind and loose to the others so no personal privlege there.
Jesus was asked afterward "who will be the greatest in the kingdom?" If the other apostles understood Peter to be so they would not have asked, and Jesus did not answer "Peter".
@Moving2U Why did he changed SIMON into ROCK, if this ROCK (Peter) was not the fondation of his Church?
Mt 18.18... I didn't say anything about the power to bind and loose (that's the basis for the bishop's authority, i.e. Apostle Successors), I mentioned the KEYS of HEAVEN.
That is not the only Scriptural basis for the primacy of Peter. Plus, historical evidence shows, by reading the oldest christian texts, that the bishop of Rome was recognised as "First Among Equals".
@Gazdo01 I left many out that refute your claims to Peter. You only really have three that you can attempt but you are blindly following what you have been told. (Matthew 16:13-19, Luke 22:31, 32, and John 21:15-17) Context context context (important concept) Proper Scriptural hermanutics (very hany also), Lose your pride in your chosen cult and read and study for yourself what it says vs what you are told (key).
As far as Mary being the greatest? More Catholic non Biblical fluff.
As Bishop Fulton Sheen wrote, "It may be objected: 'Our Lord is enough for me. I have no need of her.' But He needed her, whether we do or not. God, Who made the sun, also made the moon. The moon does not take away from the brilliance of the sun. All its light is reflected from the sun. The Blessed Mother reflects her Divine Son; without Him, she is nothing. With Him, she is the Mother of Men."
@Gazdo01 "Why did he change SIMON into ROCK, if this ROCK (Peter) was not the fondation of his Church?" "I didn't say anything about the power to bind and loose"
That's your propblem, you don't see the link between the keys to the kingdom BEING the binding and loosing that Jesus also gave to the others. Hermautics.
How can you build a complete doctrine AND church system out of one out-of-context verse that is nowhere else supported? So as to abuse the usurped power. For greed, lust & power.
@Moving2U "Jesus was asked afterward "who will be the greatest in the kingdom?" If the other apostles understood Peter to be so they would not have asked, and Jesus did not answer "Peter". "
Catholicism doesn't teach that Peter is the "greatest in the kingdom"...
If you ask any Catholic who is the greatest saint in Heaven, the answer is The Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God.
@Gazdo01 Cont: Matt 19:27,28 Jesus places all apostles on equality. John and James asked to be seated on each side of Jesus, He did not tell them the position was filled. Paul had to rebuke Peter.
You are blindly mistaken. Worst part is this; The whole of the Catholic church's self proclaimed authority rests on this one false claim. Once it is knocked down the rest is invalid.
@Moving2U The Catholic Church doesn't teach that the pope is perfect, nor that he is omniscient. The pope is entitled to his PERSONNAL opinion. He's infaillable when he speaks EX CATHEDRA.
Acts 15.18: Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. (??????)
Paul did reproach how Peter behaved among jewish people. That's doesn't equate that Peter taught something false.
@Moving2U "Catholicism was born when men in power wanted to control Christianity and the masses"
Heretical teachers pervert Scripture and try to get into Heaven with a false key, for they have formed their human assemblies later than the CATHOLIC CHURCH. From this PREVIOUSLY-EXISTING and MOST TRUE Church, it is very clear that these LATER HERESIES, and others which have come into being since then, are COUNTERFEITS and NOVEL INVENTIONS." (St Clement, Epistle to the Corinthians, c. 88-96 AD)
@Gazdo01 The Catholic church presents (and always has) a false or another gospel other than that which was handed down. You appear to appreciate the Greek, read it for yourself the difference between what is written in the original Greek (not translated to Latin then English) and see that what Cathicism teaches and practices are nothing more than Bible-lite and man's traditions (not God's). Try convincing Muslim's Hindu's witches or anyone that God will judge them. Isn't that our commision?
@Moving2U "The Catholic church presents (and always has) a false or another gospel"
You read Greek? Please give me specific verses.
"nothing more than Bible-lite and man's traditions"
Like what ? I'm sure I can convince you of your mistake. That being said, the Bible teaches we must follow oral tradition (2 Th 2.15), and that we should accept human testimony (1 Jn 5.9). That is only possible through Apostollic Succession.
Friend, you might find this insightfull: /watch?v=aBb3644HCmc
@Gazdo01 Your oral tradition has been proven to be untrustworthy. Paul applauded the Bereans for willingly receiving his words, but verifying that scripture backed them up. Scripture does not back up Cathicism period, not even closely. Pray to your dead men, worship your statues and ask yourself, does this sound like the God I read about in the Bible.
Apostolic succession? Why doesn't your pope clean out the hospitals? Ohh, no power to heal.
@Moving2U "Your oral tradition has been proven to be untrustwo"
As?
"Scripture does not back up Cathicism period, not even closely"
Friend, there is no Church on Earth that is more strongly anchored in the Bible than the Church. How WELL do you know the Catholic Church's teaching? Is it possible that you know have learned comed from false propaganda and bigotry?
"Ohh, no power to heal"
It's time to grow up, friend... Leave the playground and the puerile talk.
Problem is, we do not pray "to" them. Plus, we believe that the soul is eternal. Unless you're a Jehovah Witness, I don't think you disagree.
"worship your statues"
Problem is... we don't worship statues... Sorry.
Why don't you try and UNDERSTAND what the Catholic Church actually teaches? You're only making a fool of yourself by showing how ignorant you are about what we REALLY believe (to the well informed people that is). Are you an HONEST person?
@Gazdo01 Worship = to adore and revere. Your idols are worshipped my friend.
You as mere men elevate dead men, glorifying them and giving them the title of Saint (which title is given to all of God's children already).
I do understand Catholicism. I understand that there are plenty of genuinely sincere devout lover's of Jesus who trust in Him and follow Him. I also understand that that fact is in spite of the churchs' structure and teaching. Your traditions are unbiblical, yes i'm being honest
"You as mere men elevate dead men, glorifying them and giving them the title of Saint"
We honor and remember these people who litteraly were temples of God in their flesh. They were Christ's best friend and most sincere disciples. A "Saint" is someone in Heaven. We do honor some of them, as they were GREAT EXAMPLES.
"Your traditions are unbiblical" We ASSEMBLED the Bible. Learn with an OPEN MIND and be HONEST.
@Gazdo01 The trinity is found in the Old Testiment, just not spelled out as clearly as in the new. David had and recognised the Spirit of God, Father God, and the Son of God. "Then the Lord said to my Lord..." "Do not remove your Spirit from me..."
@Moving2U "The trinity is found in the Old Testiment, just not spelled out as clearly as in the new"
That is what Catholicism teaches, yes. Nontheless, one could perfectly argue that the word "Trinity" is not a God given word, or concept, since it is nowhere to be found. Plus, it SEEMS to contradict Deu 6.4. Like I said, it's all a matter of interpretation. That interpretation is Catholic, who first proclaimed the Trinity dogma. Every criticism made against us is comes from incomprehension.
@Gazdo01 Trinity comment? If you agree (and I am glad that you do) I don't see your point in the original question about it. The Jews don't see it there but you and I know different. I could make a similar comment on you and Catholicism. You can't see from inside the box. The great reformation happened BECAUSE Catholicism both abused power wealth and people, AND did not teach the word of God as laid out by the original transcripts they posessed. Wolves in sheeps clothing preying on the innocent.
@Gazdo01 "Like what?" 95 thesis, Salvation by works. No mediator between man and God. The saints' elevated position. Purgatory. Pray the rosary. Transubstantiation. Worship/praise of Mary. Confession of sin to a priest. Praying to dead saints. Kissing the popes feet or ring. Saying "hail mary" .
"Catholics are being told that the early church passed things down orally that are not in our Bible--so we gotta listen to the Catholic religion.
So where do you really want me to begin? Theres more
@Moving2U "Salvation by works" Show me where the Church teaches such a thing.
"No mediator between man and God" There is no mediator except for Jesus,
"The saints' elevated position" Yes, we do honor the great example they set.
"Purgatory" It's only a matter of justice. It wouldn't be right that a terrible sinner reach heaven as quickly as a saint does. Do you know how the CC justifies purgatory?
"Pray the rosary" What exactly do you reproach in the "Hail Mary"? The words come from the Bible
@Gazdo01 "Where is the verse that support SOLA SCRIPTURA?"
Rev 1:3, 3:3,11, 22:7, 9,18,19, Psalm 119:160, 2 Timothy 3:15-16, 2 Peter 1:20-21, John 10:35, Acts 17:11, Joshua 1:8.
"Praying to dead saints..." Couldn't tell you where it's taught, but my mother grew up Catholic from before she was in school, Catholic school from K through 12th and remained in the church into adulthood in Boston Ma. She was taught throughout school to pray to differents saints depending on the need.
@Gazdo01 When The eye witnesses who wrote God's word died and there were none left. Unless and until God raises up another prophet (who's speach will not conflict the word of God) In Revelation God wrote that no man shall add to or remove from the book. You think He didn't know or plan for the books that are cannonized to be one collection? Or do you think that verse only applies to Revelation?
@Moving2U "When The eye witnesses who wrote God's word died and there were none left."
You haven't seriously considered the video I've previously sent you. If you had, then you would not be asking this question. Here's why:
The christian Church in Corinth wrote a letter to pope Clement of Rome around the year 88 AD so that he could help them solve a theological problem. Why adress the question to THE POPE, while St John the Apostle was still alive?
@Moving2U "Or do you think that verse only applies to Revelation?"
It is obvious the verse applies only to Revelation. The Bible is not A book, it's a library, it's a collection of books, written over a thousand year, by hundred of different men.
That remins me: it's funny when you quote Paul about the Scriptures, yet the Gospels didn't even exist by the time he died.
It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books.
@Gazdo01 "It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books." That's similar to what I saidnumerous posts ago. It's why the gospel of Thomas did not make it.
Friend is it at least POSSIBLE she didn't fully understand Catholic theology? I care about THE TRUTH. I care about what the Church ACTUALLY teaches, and so should you.
See, you are not HONEST. You base your FINAL opinion (so it seems) on propaganda, hearsay, bigotry, media, etc... EVERYTHING EXCEPT official Catholic Teachings.
So, are you going to be HONEST, or is this yet another empty protestant debate?
@Moving2U Praying to dead saints... Go to catholic(dot)com/tracts/praying-to-the-saints It's right on your webpage:
"The historic Christian practice of asking our departed brothers and sisters in Christ—the saints—for their intercession has come under attack in the last few hundred years."
You tell ME where you teach it. It is on your cult's website and I know more than a few Catholics who can attest to it.
@Gazdo01 How can I even intelligently debate you when you deny a standard Catholic practice, ask for proof of it and when it's given you say, "I know all of that".
@Gazdo01 Contantine appointed himself head of church and in 331AD persecuted all Christians not under Rome control. Pope ordained the inquisition as official church doctrine. Ex Cathedra? God ordered the slaughter of Christian's? In order to control the masses, popes outlawed the reading of the Bible punishable by death. Keep em ignorant and you can feed them anything. The church of Rome is built on the ancient precepts of Babylon.
@Gazdo01 You are brainwashed all I can say. Before Constantine there was no Roman Catholic church. He is the one who set up the hierachry of leadership that we see today. Then he persecuted and killed all Christians who did not bow to the authority of Rome. That was your cult's beggining and it hasn't changed much. Babylon.
@Moving2U "He is the one who set up the hierachry of leadership that we see today"
Care to explain this quote: ``Where the BISHOP is, there let the multitude of believers be; EVEN AS WHERE JESUS IS, there is the CATHOLIC CHURCH." Ignatius of Antioch, 1st c. A.D
You have made yourself pope of your own consciousness. Shame on you.
"Babylon."
As usual... empty debate.
Fortunately, more and more protestants are converting to Catholicism. Stupidity like yours helps a lot. Thx!
@Moving2U What Constantine did was the EDICT OF MILAN (313). Now there's history! FREEDOM of religion!!
That was a great PERMISSION for Catholics to finally COME OUT without the fear of persecution. Don't you know that every pope (or so) up to that point was a martyr?
So SURE, the Catholic Church took a GREATER place in history. Doesn't mean it STARTED there!
It's like the doctrine of the Trinity. It was only professed in 325 (Nicea). Does it mean the Trinity didn't exist BEFORE that??
@Gazdo01 Edict of Milan was in 313, in 331 he revoked it and persecuted all Christian's refusing to bow to Rome's authority, History. Clement was in Rome and so were many other's. They were Christian's. The Roman Catholic church (which is destinctly different from a Christian Church) was not assembled until Constantine. By your logic Paul was part of the roman catholic church, as would be by technicality the thief on the cross. Catholicism was born in tyranny operated in tyranny and will fall.
@Moving2U "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant." - John Henry Cardinal Newman, a convert to Catholicism.
Too bad for you, there are more and more Catholics each day. Plus, it's strange, but usually it's the greatest protestant theologians that convert to Catholicism, not the other way around. I don't know where you get your info from, but all I can say is that it's simply false propanganda, hearsay and bigotry.
Check Scott Hahn or Peter Kreeft, you might find them insightfull.
@Gazdo01 You still do pennance and baptism to be saved or did they fix that yet? You still teach Only a Catholic priest can summon the physical body and blood of Christ during the eucharist and that taking of that communion is required for salvation. Neither are true or supported by Scripture. You crucify again the Son of God. You are blind being lead by the blind, or are doing the leading yourself. Your whole system is blaspemous. You state a salvation by faith but practice one of works. Nice.
Yes, we do teach that only priests by special grace, as they act "in Persona Christi", can perform the Sacrament of Eucharist. We never taught that taking Communion was "required" for salvation.
No, we do NOT crucify the Son of God.That goes against ALL that the Church teaches. Read the Cathechism, articles 1356 throught 1381.
The only time justification by grace through faith ALONE is mentionned in the Bible, it is condemned: James 2.24
Actually, the Catholic Tradition has produced arguably the finest minds of all time (e.g. St Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas, etc). To we are blind is a puerile opinion, at best.
"Your whole system is blaspemous"
Well, that's your opinion, based on non-facts. Notice that for every single objection you raise, we have an intelligent and reasonable explanation. You gravely misunderstand Catholicism.
@Moving2U I've had discussion before about Penance... and no protestant has yet being able to explain what is wrong with confessing sins on a FUNDAMENTAL level.
Ask yourself why did God BECAME MAN? Why didn't he just forgive my sins magically from Heaven? Realize that you have been saved by a MAN.
Jesus gave authority to his Apostles to forgive sins.(Jn 20.23) But it's not the human per se that do the forgiving, rather it is Christ THROUGH them. The same principle applies with modern priests.
@Moving2U And I can see your objection in advance, so I'll just say that acting "in Persona Christi" DOESN'T mean that the priest is actually Christ, nor that there are many Christs, nor that the priest is a "special" human being, nor that he has been "elevated" in the flesh, etc.
Just as in Jn 20.23 the Apostles recieve the power to forgive and retain sins... but we also know that only God can forgive sins (Mk 2.7). Are the Apostles suddenly being compared to God. No. Same here with priests.
@Gazdo01 regarding No Apologies #98 - Confession video, I can appreciate and agree with the key scripture used to support this. My issue is not with holy men not being able to lead a person to Christ but rather the many Catholic writings that indicate that without a Catholic priest presiding over, there can be no true salvation. ALL true believers are priests, not just the Catholic order of priests. (1 Pet 2:9). This is just one issue that points to eilism.
@Moving2U "regarding No Apologies #98 - Confession video, I can appreciate and agree with the key scripture used to support this"
Now we're talking. A sensical protestant... finally.
However, the issue has nothing to do with "holy" men. That's what you have to understand. Read St Augustine's response to Donatius, who claimed that the validity of sacraments was subject to the moral excellency of the priest.
God is not bound by sacraments. He can operate even through the bad and wicked.
@Moving2U Jesus gave specific people the authority to forgive sins, namely the Apostles. If anyone could do it, there would have been no need in instauring this Sacrament to begin with.
It is a grace that is recieved, only through Apostollic Succession. Why do you fear this concept? It is not evil. It historically dates back to the Apostles themselves... As in Judaism not everyone is to because a priest, so it is in Christianity.
@Moving2U Being a "true believe" is not enough. That's ressembles to Pelagianism, an old heresy that dates to the 4th century, that claims that mortal will is capable of perfectly choosing good or evil without special Divine aid.
Not everybody can just decide to become priest, just as they can't decide to simply speak up in the name of Christ. Only properly appointed bishops can do that. That was the case in the first century, and still is. Reject that and you'll get anarchy.
@Gazdo01 Regarding Dec 23 - Homily: Habit of Confession video. It builds on a premise that is not Biblical. Penance is not in the Bible except for the Douay-Rheims mistranslation. "Repentence" is a condition of the heart, "penance" is a dead work and wherever the NT scripture uses metanoeo (repent = to turn around, change ones mind) the Catholics mistranslate it to penance, which carries an enterirely different meaning and then build further improper doctrine upon it.
@Gazdo01 Regarding Confession. Catholic practice must be to a priest. Biblical practice = confess your sins one to another i.e. a Catholic priest is not required as we are all priests. The idea is to have a spiritual brother close enough to you to be able to openly share your sins with for the purpose of accountability, prayer, and honesty not giving the devil a foothold. Confessing to a priest is not wrong, but in no means mandatory for salvation as it has become in Catholicism.
@Moving2U Nobody ever said that confessing to one another is not good. We just say that your sins won't be forgiven that way. Again, John 20.19-23: He gave HIS APOSTLES this authority. He didn't say: anyone can confess anything to anyone, and it will magically be forgiven.
"The idea is to have a spiritual brother"
That's a priest.
Last thing: the Church never taught that Confession was necessayer for salvation, but is used to expiate temporal effects of sin.
@Gazdo01 "That was a great PERMISSION for Catholics to finally COME OUT "
Is that what they tell you? I mean take a breath and think clearly. Look at all of the evil twisted and wicked things that have always been done under the guise if Christ in Chatholicism from it's very conception, all the way through time until the present... Why defend evil, call it good and say "but they've changed?" Just read the Bible and be a disciple of Christ instead of one to man. Cathocism exalts man over God.
@Gazdo01 The pope's ordination of the inquisition as church doctrine is history, not "An ocean of ignorance, hearsay, propaganda, bigotry". You belong to an ancient cult in a modern society, man up and deal with it. You deny Catholicism practices that are standard and published by your church (you are unaware or ashamed?). You believe only what they tell you and refuse to research yourself. Sorry about your ignorance.
@Moving2U "The pope's ordination of the inquisition as church doctrine is history"
DOCTRINE OF WHAT? You're so confused, it's horrible. You don't even know what DOCTRINE means! You're mixing EVERYTHING up, it's just sad. Really. Read a book, go to school, Do something. As a debater, you're terrible.
"You belong to an ancient cult in a modern society"
@Gazdo01 So the word "trinity" is not in the Bible. Neither is the word rapture. Neither are 1000s of other words. I don't understand your point. Trinity is a term that we use today to describe a concept that we see and recognise in the Bible. Rapture is a term we wouldn't even have if it weren't for the Catholics translating the Bible into Latin but is the word we use today in place of harpazo which you won't find in an English version either. All our words are different from other languages.
@Moving2U "So the word "trinity" is not in the Bible"
That's the basis for heresies, like arianism (and it's modern variants). That is also why the Muslims will NEVER admit that the Bible holds even a trace of what we call "Trinity".
My point is: it is not because something is not CLEARLY and TEXTUALLY written in the Bible that it is false or doesn't exist.
Mariology, for example, has biblical basis, even if they are not laid out as clearly as the rest.
It was the Catholic Church who put the stamp on it and made the canon. Like a typical Protestant bias, he misses this important historical point. The Catholic Church bishops debates and held councils/synods until finally they decided... the book of Revelation was hotly contested, until the end. Pax.
Why not the gospel of Thomas? Is the church not fallible? If Thomas was in there you would go on about how beautiful they unite and say they are being misrepd. by misunderstaning.
'the early Christians had a canon as soon as those books were written' - there is no need to explain the illogic. it is too blatant. i can hear scholarly people laughing at this. very embarassing.
One very big question on my mind is why there in not a gospel of mary in the bible mary of course the mother of jesus may be pleased with both of them she looked after jesus from the day he was born till he grew up as a fine young man surely she must have seen some miracle performed by her son. no bothered to ask his mother if she got to say any thing about her son as she is completlely ignored.but in Quran a whole chapter is dedicated to mary called surah Maryium (mary) shame on christians.
The truth is the Bible arose from the Catholic Church. The scribes who copied the manuscripts, the church fathers, the councils, the history and practice of which books were accepted as Sacred Scripture were mostly Catholic. During the Reformation some books were dropped from the Bible by the reformers. Luther grouped the OT books he didnt like together at the end of the OT. He grouped the NT books he didnt like together at the end of the NT....Hebrews, James, Jude ,Revelation.
@prairiemark i had the council of nicaea and trent mixed up. i had forgot where i had placed this comment, and thank you for responding. Totally different - sorry!
here is a further documentary into the origin of the old testament
they had a functional canon as soon as the books were written? lol. they were automatically accepted? i find it funny that you quote second peter, since it was a disputed book along with other apocrypha, until accepted by the catholic church.
how about the shepard of hermas? LOL. i would like to see this guy talk at a university instead of a church. lets see him talk to religious studies professors. and the gospels dont fit together "beautifully," they contradict. what a dumb ass. next video
What's so wrong with Thomas? Seriously, can you imagine what god incarnate would be like during the terrible twos? Why is there such a large gap in the narrative? What would I suggest be in the new testament that is not there you ask? How about the years between birth and 30. as a parent I am curious what Jesus was like as a child. Did the son of god ever misbehave? This is just bad story telling all around.
"A council has never taken out a book or added one in" What was their purpose then? The truth is that the councils chose from texts that would have the best mass appeal. That is why there are so many overlapping themes with pre-Christian narratives. Miraculous birth, 12 apostles, Surviving death... this is basic marketing designed to strike a familiar chord in a new way. Think Disney. This also explains why there are so many contradictions. These were stand alone narratives cobbled together.
What Greek, Hebrew, etc, etc MSS are superior than the Original Greek, Hebrew, etc, etc MSS that the KJV translators use? Moreover, could you name a translator that is more superior in the languages than the translators of the KJV 1611 MSS? TKS: Pastor David Skakun
Lots of comments by folks that don't seem to understand Dr. Lutzer was giving a two minute answer to a question that he has presented as a college course and written books about.
@charliep777 I suspect that added time to respond would only prove that he has approached the topic with a preconceived idea and will only look at evidence in a way that supports that hypothesis. Any evidence to the contrary is ignored or vilified, but never analyzed.
This guy is full of contradictions.he defends the earliest christians books...then says gospel of thomas..GIVE ME A BREAK Is he serious?? Thats his reasoning?
This guy is an idiot."Did they chose what will go in the bible? no! they only ratified what was there"....lol That was picking and choosing!!!! and "it all goes together so perfectly" ...uuummm because they chose the books that would do that!!!
so about 200+ white men 1500 years old decided what you would believe this day. They brush over 'was Jesus God or a Prophet?' its such a minor matter for Christians it bogles my mind!
Oh the hate. It shoots off the webpage. No amount of truth could convince one who's hearts are hardened toward the idea of God.(or just no YOUR idea of Him). Everything Lutzer has said is true. Nicea only added things because the catholic church(the black version of truth) wanted the Apocryphal in there.And they had more power over the Gnostic's. Take your atheism and doubt's somewhere else.The only lies here are the ones you convince yourselves of.
Dr Martin Loser said that he would like to "throw Jimmy into the stove" and also tried to remove Rev. And this guy was the "Father" of the reformation.
This guy contradicts himself, he says no council every decided on a hot friday afternoon what books were going to be in the canon then says they ratified what was already there?? How did it get there. What a simpleton, its a shame to see Strobel sit there and listen to his made up history
The collection of New Testament books was finally settled at the Council of Carthage 397. There is a good historical account on my web site onlyonechurch.yolasite.com
I will pray for men like Dr. Lutzer who despite historical facts continue to perpetuate fairytale about how the bible was put together.
The council of Nicea(?) was responsible for the offical cannon. There were books that they said weren't allowed because they either too "new" or they went against the view of God and Jesus that they wanted to project. To say otherwise is an outright lie.
Protestantism pits the "Word" (the Bible, preaching) against "sacraments." Protestantism sets up "inner devotion" and "piety" against the "Liturgy." Protestantism opposes "spontaneous worship" to "form prayers." Protestantism separates "the Bible" from "the Church." Protestantism creates the false dichotomy of "Bible" vs. "Tradition." Protestantism pits "Tradition" against the "Holy Spirit." Protestantism considers "Church authority" and "individual liberty and conscience" contradictory.
Protestantism arose in 1517, and is a "Johnny-come-lately" in the history of Christianity. Therefore it cannot possibly be the "restoration" of "pure", "primitive" Christianity, since this is ruled out by the fact of its absurdly late appearance. Christianity must have historic continuity or it is not Christianity. Protestantism is necessarily a "parasite" of Catholicism, historically and doctrinally speaking.
This man has zero teaching authority. Catholicism retains apostolic succession, necessary to know what is true Christian apostolic Tradition. It was the criterion of Christian truth used by the early Christians. Protestantism, due to lack of real authority and dogmatic structure, is tragically prone to accommodation to the spirit of the age, and moral faddism.
The gospel of thomas, how ridiculous! What a silly book! Explain how it is any less absurd than genesis with the tower of babel and talking serpents and yahweh throwing tantrums.
By the way it doesn't matter if a formal council put the bible together or if the church did, there still isn't any evidence to believe the supernatural claims. When I stopped being a christian I realized I had to trust that the people who wrote the books were telling the truth. It's not convincing.
@mfentruck U R not a christian, U will never understand even when U R in hell, U will not believe. U should not be commenting on Christian faith, if U R not a christian. Go somewhere in this pagan world, you will find a lot of company out there. Bible 66 books are well researched and proved with internal evidence, external evidence and archeological proof. Bye, U will be on the otherside when we die.
@jesuriah, He said : The Council only ratified those 66 books which were widely accepted in those early christian Churches. The whole idea of cannonizing the 66 books was to separate those 66 widely accepted books from the rest of the psuedopedigraphal, apocryphal and deutro-apocryphal books existent during that time. 66 books were well-researched, proved and then authenticated with external and internal evidences.
@Mac6524 Actually it was 73 books that were accepted in the early church which originally was taken from the greek (septuagint) text for the old testament. For protestants, it became 66 books only in the 16th century after the protestant reformation because they decided to separate from the catholic church and follow the hebrew (masoretic) text which didn't include 7of the books.
@Mac6524 Before Christ, both texts were accepted in the jewish community. At the end of the 1st century, the hebrew text was set by jewish scholars in reaction to the christian use of the greek text. Also because the text in the greek version helped greatly to prove Jesus was the messiah which they didn't not want to accept.
It's 100% clear by watching this video, that Dr. Erwin Lutzer has an anti Catholic agenda. The whole protestant reformation turned into a complete mess. Over 33,000 protestant churches and growing. This is PROOF the the reformation was a flop! Christ did not attend for this at all!! Who in the world gave Luther the authority to add to and remove from the Bible which was forbidden in Duet 4:2!? He wasn't an apostolic successor!
@baredd79 Jesus didn't build a divided church ...no real student can deny that (1Cor 1; Mt 16:18). No serious bible student can deny the RCC meets all criteria of the apostasy prophesied in the NT (2Thes 2; 1Tim 4:3). The trouble is in understanding the Church / Kingdom relationship. It is spiritual ...not of this earth according to Christ. The RCC AND the Reformers (little popes / priests) brutally executed true Christians they deemed heretics. "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up" -- Bercot
What is this "Doctor" Irwin Lutzer crap?? The man has no earned doctorate! Read his autobiography carefully: he never actually got that doctorate from Loyola/Chicago.
So what its just a book i dont follow bronze age material i beleve in a neo-way with technology thats stuff doesn't bore me too death or make up myths.
Instead of throwing a temper tantrum why don't you actually read the latter canonical epistles and the early church documents by the Fathers in which each and every book of the New Testament is quoted by them and referred to as canonical Scripture?
-
Ignorance and arrogance is an ugly combination, as evidenced by your comment.
Instead of accusing me of throwing a temper tantrum, why don't you accuse Dr. Lutzer in 0:34 of the same arrogance you accuse me of? Double standards are not an effective way of evangelization, as evidenced by your comment. BTW, I've read the early church documents. They fly in the face of what Lutzer says. God bless you in the name of Jesus Christ.
All he said is "it is such a distortion" and he has the facts and evidence to back him up on that statement. All you said is "wrong wrong wrong"; yeah, that's a tantrum.
-
Since you make the claim that you've read the Early Church writings, I will hold you to that claim: what writings have you read? Name them specifically. And what in those writings "flies in the face," as you put it, of Dr. Lutzer and his claims? Come now and answer if your words have the slightest shred of honesty.
It is impossible to describe canonization of the Scripture in 60 seconds. You choose to listen to historians and you also choose which historians to listen to because the lack of faith really impacts the interpretation and presentation of some facts and omitting the others. Canon was present way before any councils and was used in churches already in 2nd century. "DO NOT LISTEN TO SECULAR HISTORIANS ONLY!". If you talk about faith, you have to have it, reason is limited & insufficient.
the 2 peters book that he talks about is dubious...nobody knows for sure who wrote it....just a bunch of blasphemous assertions from christians as usual
Interesting, Thank you for posting this video.
twowinds 1 week ago
This god of the bible is funny . One day he decides to go and save mankind. He choses a people to help him with his plan . He desperately wants to be killed for mankind`s salvation. He prepares his chosen people(for many centennia) with many prophecies. but these have to be misunderstood, because if they see he is the Messiah, they will not kill him, and spoil his salvation plan. So his chosen people execute his plan by not recognizing their messiah. I admit it`s a WONDERFUL script
ndzoko 3 weeks ago
Is this guy for real?? NO ARGUMENTS WHATSOEVER.
I'm a Catholic, this is outrageous.
The best part is: "GIMME A BREAK..." as if THAT was a valid explanation lol
Talk about a "Dr"...
Gazdo01 1 month ago
@Gazdo01 The "GIMME A BREAK" comment he made was about a text that has been proven to be written between 300-400 years after Christ, and contains many things that conflict the Word of God... Therfore (to anyone who understands that reference in question and wondering if it should have been included in the cannon of scripture) GIMME A BREAK! lol.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U
1. Historians say that the Gospel of Thomas was written between AS EARLY AS 60 AD (before any of the Gospels in the Bible) or AS LATE as 140 AD. I suggest you be more careful in the future.
2. Harmony and internal validity doesn't prove anything. Do you believe the Qu'ran is the Word of God?
The ONLY reason why we believe the Bible is reliable and can be called "Word of God" is because the CATHOLIC CHURCH had (and still has) the authority to say so when she assembled it.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 1. The Gospel of Thomas was not accepted as cannon by Christianity prior to the official cannonization of scripture, therefore left out. (Be careful of what? You have most of the resources I have available use them).
2. God is not a God of confusion. God cannot lie and the GoT is known to be heresay refuting the rest of scripture. Qu'ran? No. Ramblings of a false prophet.
The Catholic church has no authority other than self appointed. It is a Chritianese cult.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U 1. Not accepted by...? The BISHOPS of the Catholic Church. The primary purpose of the texts we find today in the Bible was LITHURGY. What are the criteria used for accepting texts? Why don't you follow the Marcion Canon, for example?
2. Who said anything about God lying? What you call "heresay refuting the rest of scripture" is not AT ALL evident. Jews would argue that the Trinity refutes the Old Testament (Deu 6.4). It's all a matter of interpretation.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 The Christians for the 1st three centuries had and taught the scriptures handed down and understood what was accepted vs gnostic garbage. You're mearely talking about when it was assembled into one collection. GoT was never accepted. Jesus did not build His church on Peter nor was he a pope. He built His church on what Peter rightly identified "That Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God". Catholicism was born when men men in power wanted to control Christianity and the masses.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "Jesus did not build His church on Peter nor was he a pope."
Then care to explain why Jesus changed Simon's original name to ROCK? (Petrus)? Jn 1.42
Care to explain why he gives HIM the kees of Heaven? (Mt 16.18-19)
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Peter, petra = stone. The Petros (Foundation/bed rock) Jesus built His church on was Peter's confession, and 4 verses later called him Satan.
In Matt 18:19 Jesus gives the authority to bind and loose to the others so no personal privlege there.
Jesus was asked afterward "who will be the greatest in the kingdom?" If the other apostles understood Peter to be so they would not have asked, and Jesus did not answer "Peter".
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U Why did he changed SIMON into ROCK, if this ROCK (Peter) was not the fondation of his Church?
Mt 18.18... I didn't say anything about the power to bind and loose (that's the basis for the bishop's authority, i.e. Apostle Successors), I mentioned the KEYS of HEAVEN.
That is not the only Scriptural basis for the primacy of Peter. Plus, historical evidence shows, by reading the oldest christian texts, that the bishop of Rome was recognised as "First Among Equals".
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 I left many out that refute your claims to Peter. You only really have three that you can attempt but you are blindly following what you have been told. (Matthew 16:13-19, Luke 22:31, 32, and John 21:15-17) Context context context (important concept) Proper Scriptural hermanutics (very hany also), Lose your pride in your chosen cult and read and study for yourself what it says vs what you are told (key).
As far as Mary being the greatest? More Catholic non Biblical fluff.
Moving2U 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Moving2U "More Catholic non Biblical fluff"
As Bishop Fulton Sheen wrote, "It may be objected: 'Our Lord is enough for me. I have no need of her.' But He needed her, whether we do or not. God, Who made the sun, also made the moon. The moon does not take away from the brilliance of the sun. All its light is reflected from the sun. The Blessed Mother reflects her Divine Son; without Him, she is nothing. With Him, she is the Mother of Men."
Gazdo01 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Moving2U "As far as Mary being the greatest? More Catholic non Biblical fluff."
PLEASE, read this short introduction on the subject. If you COMPLETELY REJECT what is written there, then I won't waste another minute of your time .
fisheaters (dot) com/mary (dot) html
Gazdo01 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Gazdo01 "Why did he change SIMON into ROCK, if this ROCK (Peter) was not the fondation of his Church?" "I didn't say anything about the power to bind and loose"
That's your propblem, you don't see the link between the keys to the kingdom BEING the binding and loosing that Jesus also gave to the others. Hermautics.
How can you build a complete doctrine AND church system out of one out-of-context verse that is nowhere else supported? So as to abuse the usurped power. For greed, lust & power.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "Jesus was asked afterward "who will be the greatest in the kingdom?" If the other apostles understood Peter to be so they would not have asked, and Jesus did not answer "Peter". "
Catholicism doesn't teach that Peter is the "greatest in the kingdom"...
If you ask any Catholic who is the greatest saint in Heaven, the answer is The Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Cont: Matt 19:27,28 Jesus places all apostles on equality. John and James asked to be seated on each side of Jesus, He did not tell them the position was filled. Paul had to rebuke Peter.
Acts 15:18 James had final authority over Peter.
You are blindly mistaken. Worst part is this; The whole of the Catholic church's self proclaimed authority rests on this one false claim. Once it is knocked down the rest is invalid.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U The Catholic Church doesn't teach that the pope is perfect, nor that he is omniscient. The pope is entitled to his PERSONNAL opinion. He's infaillable when he speaks EX CATHEDRA.
Acts 15.18: Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. (??????)
Paul did reproach how Peter behaved among jewish people. That's doesn't equate that Peter taught something false.
/watch?v=RWYwBDqFsuE
/watch?v=utoG7lg-Yss
/watch?v=N7rv3S0dM-Q
/watch?v=qij6Y873Dl8
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U "Catholicism was born when men in power wanted to control Christianity and the masses"
Heretical teachers pervert Scripture and try to get into Heaven with a false key, for they have formed their human assemblies later than the CATHOLIC CHURCH. From this PREVIOUSLY-EXISTING and MOST TRUE Church, it is very clear that these LATER HERESIES, and others which have come into being since then, are COUNTERFEITS and NOVEL INVENTIONS." (St Clement, Epistle to the Corinthians, c. 88-96 AD)
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 The Catholic church presents (and always has) a false or another gospel other than that which was handed down. You appear to appreciate the Greek, read it for yourself the difference between what is written in the original Greek (not translated to Latin then English) and see that what Cathicism teaches and practices are nothing more than Bible-lite and man's traditions (not God's). Try convincing Muslim's Hindu's witches or anyone that God will judge them. Isn't that our commision?
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "The Catholic church presents (and always has) a false or another gospel"
You read Greek? Please give me specific verses.
"nothing more than Bible-lite and man's traditions"
Like what ? I'm sure I can convince you of your mistake. That being said, the Bible teaches we must follow oral tradition (2 Th 2.15), and that we should accept human testimony (1 Jn 5.9). That is only possible through Apostollic Succession.
Friend, you might find this insightfull: /watch?v=aBb3644HCmc
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Your oral tradition has been proven to be untrustworthy. Paul applauded the Bereans for willingly receiving his words, but verifying that scripture backed them up. Scripture does not back up Cathicism period, not even closely. Pray to your dead men, worship your statues and ask yourself, does this sound like the God I read about in the Bible.
Apostolic succession? Why doesn't your pope clean out the hospitals? Ohh, no power to heal.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "Your oral tradition has been proven to be untrustwo"
As?
"Scripture does not back up Cathicism period, not even closely"
Friend, there is no Church on Earth that is more strongly anchored in the Bible than the Church. How WELL do you know the Catholic Church's teaching? Is it possible that you know have learned comed from false propaganda and bigotry?
"Ohh, no power to heal"
It's time to grow up, friend... Leave the playground and the puerile talk.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U "Pray to your dead men"
Problem is, we do not pray "to" them. Plus, we believe that the soul is eternal. Unless you're a Jehovah Witness, I don't think you disagree.
"worship your statues"
Problem is... we don't worship statues... Sorry.
Why don't you try and UNDERSTAND what the Catholic Church actually teaches? You're only making a fool of yourself by showing how ignorant you are about what we REALLY believe (to the well informed people that is). Are you an HONEST person?
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Worship = to adore and revere. Your idols are worshipped my friend.
You as mere men elevate dead men, glorifying them and giving them the title of Saint (which title is given to all of God's children already).
I do understand Catholicism. I understand that there are plenty of genuinely sincere devout lover's of Jesus who trust in Him and follow Him. I also understand that that fact is in spite of the churchs' structure and teaching. Your traditions are unbiblical, yes i'm being honest
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "Your idols are worshipped my friend."
Nop. What is an IDOL?
"You as mere men elevate dead men, glorifying them and giving them the title of Saint"
We honor and remember these people who litteraly were temples of God in their flesh. They were Christ's best friend and most sincere disciples. A "Saint" is someone in Heaven. We do honor some of them, as they were GREAT EXAMPLES.
"Your traditions are unbiblical" We ASSEMBLED the Bible. Learn with an OPEN MIND and be HONEST.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 The trinity is found in the Old Testiment, just not spelled out as clearly as in the new. David had and recognised the Spirit of God, Father God, and the Son of God. "Then the Lord said to my Lord..." "Do not remove your Spirit from me..."
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "The trinity is found in the Old Testiment, just not spelled out as clearly as in the new"
That is what Catholicism teaches, yes. Nontheless, one could perfectly argue that the word "Trinity" is not a God given word, or concept, since it is nowhere to be found. Plus, it SEEMS to contradict Deu 6.4. Like I said, it's all a matter of interpretation. That interpretation is Catholic, who first proclaimed the Trinity dogma. Every criticism made against us is comes from incomprehension.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Trinity comment? If you agree (and I am glad that you do) I don't see your point in the original question about it. The Jews don't see it there but you and I know different. I could make a similar comment on you and Catholicism. You can't see from inside the box. The great reformation happened BECAUSE Catholicism both abused power wealth and people, AND did not teach the word of God as laid out by the original transcripts they posessed. Wolves in sheeps clothing preying on the innocent.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "The great reformation happened BECAUSE Catholicism both abused power wealth and people"
Bad Catholics doesn't equate to bad Catholicism.
We carry this treasure in EARTHEN vessels (2 Cor 4.7)
"AND did not teach the word of God as laid out by the original transcripts they posessed"
Like what?
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 "Like what?" 95 thesis, Salvation by works. No mediator between man and God. The saints' elevated position. Purgatory. Pray the rosary. Transubstantiation. Worship/praise of Mary. Confession of sin to a priest. Praying to dead saints. Kissing the popes feet or ring. Saying "hail mary" .
"Catholics are being told that the early church passed things down orally that are not in our Bible--so we gotta listen to the Catholic religion.
So where do you really want me to begin? Theres more
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "Salvation by works" Show me where the Church teaches such a thing.
"No mediator between man and God" There is no mediator except for Jesus,
"The saints' elevated position" Yes, we do honor the great example they set.
"Purgatory" It's only a matter of justice. It wouldn't be right that a terrible sinner reach heaven as quickly as a saint does. Do you know how the CC justifies purgatory?
"Pray the rosary" What exactly do you reproach in the "Hail Mary"? The words come from the Bible
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U "Praying to dead saints" Show me where the Catholic Church teaches such a thing.
"Kissing the popes feet or ring" So? Ever heard of respect? We believe he is Christ's Vicar after all. He's not joe-blow on the street corner.
Questions for you, since you reject Sacred Tradition:
- Who wrote the Gospels?
- Why do you trust the 27 books in the NT?
- Where is the verse that support SOLA SCRIPTURA?
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 "Where is the verse that support SOLA SCRIPTURA?"
Rev 1:3, 3:3,11, 22:7, 9,18,19, Psalm 119:160, 2 Timothy 3:15-16, 2 Peter 1:20-21, John 10:35, Acts 17:11, Joshua 1:8.
"Praying to dead saints..." Couldn't tell you where it's taught, but my mother grew up Catholic from before she was in school, Catholic school from K through 12th and remained in the church into adulthood in Boston Ma. She was taught throughout school to pray to differents saints depending on the need.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U Very nice... but where is the verse that support SOLA Scriptura.
Catholics know that Scripture is the Word of God, that is authoritative, that it must be followed, that it is infaillable, etc etc...
Where does it say it is the ONLY source??
Because that's what Sola Scriptura means: there is NO authority outside the Scriptures.
I'll help you out: the verse DOESN'T exist. Protestants have been looking for it for the past 500 years...
Tradition: 2 Th 2.15, 1 Jn 5.9... THINK
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 When The eye witnesses who wrote God's word died and there were none left. Unless and until God raises up another prophet (who's speach will not conflict the word of God) In Revelation God wrote that no man shall add to or remove from the book. You think He didn't know or plan for the books that are cannonized to be one collection? Or do you think that verse only applies to Revelation?
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "When The eye witnesses who wrote God's word died and there were none left."
You haven't seriously considered the video I've previously sent you. If you had, then you would not be asking this question. Here's why:
The christian Church in Corinth wrote a letter to pope Clement of Rome around the year 88 AD so that he could help them solve a theological problem. Why adress the question to THE POPE, while St John the Apostle was still alive?
Care to explain why they did such a thing?
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Haven't seen it yet, (they had viseo back then? poke poke)
Moving2U 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Moving2U "God wrote that no man shall add to or remove from the book"
So? Are you claiming that the Catholic Church added or removed something FROM THE BOOK OF REVELATION?
I mean come on, if you take it like that, then ANY WORD or ANYTHING outside the Bible has got to be wrong?
I guess you reject evolution... Ok, so be it. DNA then... that's not IN THE BOOK, so you reject it?? It's silly.
The Bible doesn't contain the WHOLE TRUTH ABOUT ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING. It is a finite object... Geez.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U "Or do you think that verse only applies to Revelation?"
It is obvious the verse applies only to Revelation. The Bible is not A book, it's a library, it's a collection of books, written over a thousand year, by hundred of different men.
That remins me: it's funny when you quote Paul about the Scriptures, yet the Gospels didn't even exist by the time he died.
It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 "It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books." That's similar to what I saidnumerous posts ago. It's why the gospel of Thomas did not make it.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "but my mother grew up Catholic"
Friend is it at least POSSIBLE she didn't fully understand Catholic theology? I care about THE TRUTH. I care about what the Church ACTUALLY teaches, and so should you.
See, you are not HONEST. You base your FINAL opinion (so it seems) on propaganda, hearsay, bigotry, media, etc... EVERYTHING EXCEPT official Catholic Teachings.
So, are you going to be HONEST, or is this yet another empty protestant debate?
fisheaters (dot) com/saints (dot) html
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U Praying to dead saints... Go to catholic(dot)com/tracts/praying-to-the-saints It's right on your webpage:
"The historic Christian practice of asking our departed brothers and sisters in Christ—the saints—for their intercession has come under attack in the last few hundred years."
You tell ME where you teach it. It is on your cult's website and I know more than a few Catholics who can attest to it.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U I know all of that. Read the text I've sent you.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 How can I even intelligently debate you when you deny a standard Catholic practice, ask for proof of it and when it's given you say, "I know all of that".
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U We do not PRAY THE DEAD. READ the text.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 WHAT TEXT?
Moving2U 1 week ago
Comment removed
Moving2U 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Gazdo01 You say you left me a video and a message but I have no idea where to find them, they aren't in my youtube inbox or any of it's folders.
Moving2U 1 week ago
Comment removed
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Contantine appointed himself head of church and in 331AD persecuted all Christians not under Rome control. Pope ordained the inquisition as official church doctrine. Ex Cathedra? God ordered the slaughter of Christian's? In order to control the masses, popes outlawed the reading of the Bible punishable by death. Keep em ignorant and you can feed them anything. The church of Rome is built on the ancient precepts of Babylon.
Get out while you can.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U Sorry, Constantine was NEVER head of any Church. You're deluded buddy.
"Pope ordained the inquisition as official church doctrine"
Ehhh... LOL?
"In order to control the masses"
Sure, it's all a big world wide conspiracy... (sigh)
"Keep em ignorant"
I guess that's why Catholicism produced some of the finest minds in world's history...
"The church of Rome is built on the ancient precepts of Babylon"
An ocean of ignorance, hearsay, propaganda, bigotry...
I have no time to waste.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 You are brainwashed all I can say. Before Constantine there was no Roman Catholic church. He is the one who set up the hierachry of leadership that we see today. Then he persecuted and killed all Christians who did not bow to the authority of Rome. That was your cult's beggining and it hasn't changed much. Babylon.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "You are brainwashed all I can say"
As always... empty protestant debate... ARGUMENTS? You have none.
"Before Constantine there was no Roman Catholic church"
Care to explain why St Clement of Rome writes in his FIRST CENTURY LETTER to the Corinthians about the authority of the CATHOLIC CHURCH?
Care to explain St Ignatius' referenced to the CATHOLIC CHURCH in his epistle which he wrote between 100-110 AD??
Such a pity to listen at such ignorance.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Moving2U "He is the one who set up the hierachry of leadership that we see today"
Care to explain this quote: ``Where the BISHOP is, there let the multitude of believers be; EVEN AS WHERE JESUS IS, there is the CATHOLIC CHURCH." Ignatius of Antioch, 1st c. A.D
You have made yourself pope of your own consciousness. Shame on you.
"Babylon."
As usual... empty debate.
Fortunately, more and more protestants are converting to Catholicism. Stupidity like yours helps a lot. Thx!
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U What Constantine did was the EDICT OF MILAN (313). Now there's history! FREEDOM of religion!!
That was a great PERMISSION for Catholics to finally COME OUT without the fear of persecution. Don't you know that every pope (or so) up to that point was a martyr?
So SURE, the Catholic Church took a GREATER place in history. Doesn't mean it STARTED there!
It's like the doctrine of the Trinity. It was only professed in 325 (Nicea). Does it mean the Trinity didn't exist BEFORE that??
THINK
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Edict of Milan was in 313, in 331 he revoked it and persecuted all Christian's refusing to bow to Rome's authority, History. Clement was in Rome and so were many other's. They were Christian's. The Roman Catholic church (which is destinctly different from a Christian Church) was not assembled until Constantine. By your logic Paul was part of the roman catholic church, as would be by technicality the thief on the cross. Catholicism was born in tyranny operated in tyranny and will fall.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant." - John Henry Cardinal Newman, a convert to Catholicism.
Too bad for you, there are more and more Catholics each day. Plus, it's strange, but usually it's the greatest protestant theologians that convert to Catholicism, not the other way around. I don't know where you get your info from, but all I can say is that it's simply false propanganda, hearsay and bigotry.
Check Scott Hahn or Peter Kreeft, you might find them insightfull.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 You still do pennance and baptism to be saved or did they fix that yet? You still teach Only a Catholic priest can summon the physical body and blood of Christ during the eucharist and that taking of that communion is required for salvation. Neither are true or supported by Scripture. You crucify again the Son of God. You are blind being lead by the blind, or are doing the leading yourself. Your whole system is blaspemous. You state a salvation by faith but practice one of works. Nice.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U Yes, we still have Penance and Baptism.
Yes, we do teach that only priests by special grace, as they act "in Persona Christi", can perform the Sacrament of Eucharist. We never taught that taking Communion was "required" for salvation.
No, we do NOT crucify the Son of God.That goes against ALL that the Church teaches. Read the Cathechism, articles 1356 throught 1381.
The only time justification by grace through faith ALONE is mentionned in the Bible, it is condemned: James 2.24
Gazdo01 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Moving2U About Penance: /watch?v=Cun9F-XCang
"You are blind being lead by the blind"
Actually, the Catholic Tradition has produced arguably the finest minds of all time (e.g. St Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas, etc). To we are blind is a puerile opinion, at best.
"Your whole system is blaspemous"
Well, that's your opinion, based on non-facts. Notice that for every single objection you raise, we have an intelligent and reasonable explanation. You gravely misunderstand Catholicism.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U I've had discussion before about Penance... and no protestant has yet being able to explain what is wrong with confessing sins on a FUNDAMENTAL level.
Ask yourself why did God BECAME MAN? Why didn't he just forgive my sins magically from Heaven? Realize that you have been saved by a MAN.
Jesus gave authority to his Apostles to forgive sins.(Jn 20.23) But it's not the human per se that do the forgiving, rather it is Christ THROUGH them. The same principle applies with modern priests.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U And I can see your objection in advance, so I'll just say that acting "in Persona Christi" DOESN'T mean that the priest is actually Christ, nor that there are many Christs, nor that the priest is a "special" human being, nor that he has been "elevated" in the flesh, etc.
Just as in Jn 20.23 the Apostles recieve the power to forgive and retain sins... but we also know that only God can forgive sins (Mk 2.7). Are the Apostles suddenly being compared to God. No. Same here with priests.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U Maybe these will help too...
/watch?v=RsXlTGNTvpw
/watch?v=7xvpw_XgPS8
/watch?v=zGQzMCm8PSA
I had a couple of French video in mind, but I guess you don't speak that langage.
Pax tecum
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 regarding No Apologies #98 - Confession video, I can appreciate and agree with the key scripture used to support this. My issue is not with holy men not being able to lead a person to Christ but rather the many Catholic writings that indicate that without a Catholic priest presiding over, there can be no true salvation. ALL true believers are priests, not just the Catholic order of priests. (1 Pet 2:9). This is just one issue that points to eilism.
Moving2U 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Moving2U "regarding No Apologies #98 - Confession video, I can appreciate and agree with the key scripture used to support this"
Now we're talking. A sensical protestant... finally.
However, the issue has nothing to do with "holy" men. That's what you have to understand. Read St Augustine's response to Donatius, who claimed that the validity of sacraments was subject to the moral excellency of the priest.
God is not bound by sacraments. He can operate even through the bad and wicked.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U Jesus gave specific people the authority to forgive sins, namely the Apostles. If anyone could do it, there would have been no need in instauring this Sacrament to begin with.
It is a grace that is recieved, only through Apostollic Succession. Why do you fear this concept? It is not evil. It historically dates back to the Apostles themselves... As in Judaism not everyone is to because a priest, so it is in Christianity.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U Being a "true believe" is not enough. That's ressembles to Pelagianism, an old heresy that dates to the 4th century, that claims that mortal will is capable of perfectly choosing good or evil without special Divine aid.
Not everybody can just decide to become priest, just as they can't decide to simply speak up in the name of Christ. Only properly appointed bishops can do that. That was the case in the first century, and still is. Reject that and you'll get anarchy.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Regarding Dec 23 - Homily: Habit of Confession video. It builds on a premise that is not Biblical. Penance is not in the Bible except for the Douay-Rheims mistranslation. "Repentence" is a condition of the heart, "penance" is a dead work and wherever the NT scripture uses metanoeo (repent = to turn around, change ones mind) the Catholics mistranslate it to penance, which carries an enterirely different meaning and then build further improper doctrine upon it.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 Regarding Confession. Catholic practice must be to a priest. Biblical practice = confess your sins one to another i.e. a Catholic priest is not required as we are all priests. The idea is to have a spiritual brother close enough to you to be able to openly share your sins with for the purpose of accountability, prayer, and honesty not giving the devil a foothold. Confessing to a priest is not wrong, but in no means mandatory for salvation as it has become in Catholicism.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U Nobody ever said that confessing to one another is not good. We just say that your sins won't be forgiven that way. Again, John 20.19-23: He gave HIS APOSTLES this authority. He didn't say: anyone can confess anything to anyone, and it will magically be forgiven.
"The idea is to have a spiritual brother"
That's a priest.
Last thing: the Church never taught that Confession was necessayer for salvation, but is used to expiate temporal effects of sin.
A thought: /watch?v=N-mbVFzy5A8
Gazdo01 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Gazdo01 "That was a great PERMISSION for Catholics to finally COME OUT "
Is that what they tell you? I mean take a breath and think clearly. Look at all of the evil twisted and wicked things that have always been done under the guise if Christ in Chatholicism from it's very conception, all the way through time until the present... Why defend evil, call it good and say "but they've changed?" Just read the Bible and be a disciple of Christ instead of one to man. Cathocism exalts man over God.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 The pope's ordination of the inquisition as church doctrine is history, not "An ocean of ignorance, hearsay, propaganda, bigotry". You belong to an ancient cult in a modern society, man up and deal with it. You deny Catholicism practices that are standard and published by your church (you are unaware or ashamed?). You believe only what they tell you and refuse to research yourself. Sorry about your ignorance.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "The pope's ordination of the inquisition as church doctrine is history"
DOCTRINE OF WHAT? You're so confused, it's horrible. You don't even know what DOCTRINE means! You're mixing EVERYTHING up, it's just sad. Really. Read a book, go to school, Do something. As a debater, you're terrible.
"You belong to an ancient cult in a modern society"
Usual bla,bla,bla...
"You deny Catholicism practices"
No sir, not at all
"You believe only what they tell you"
It's a big conspiracy... LOL
Gazdo01 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Gazdo01 "Read the text I've sent you." I've looked in my youtube inbox, cant find a text or video.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Gazdo01 So the word "trinity" is not in the Bible. Neither is the word rapture. Neither are 1000s of other words. I don't understand your point. Trinity is a term that we use today to describe a concept that we see and recognise in the Bible. Rapture is a term we wouldn't even have if it weren't for the Catholics translating the Bible into Latin but is the word we use today in place of harpazo which you won't find in an English version either. All our words are different from other languages.
Moving2U 1 week ago
@Moving2U "So the word "trinity" is not in the Bible"
That's the basis for heresies, like arianism (and it's modern variants). That is also why the Muslims will NEVER admit that the Bible holds even a trace of what we call "Trinity".
My point is: it is not because something is not CLEARLY and TEXTUALLY written in the Bible that it is false or doesn't exist.
Mariology, for example, has biblical basis, even if they are not laid out as clearly as the rest.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
@Moving2U As for the Catholic Church, its authority comes from no other than Jesus Christ Himself.
Tu es Petrus et super hanc petram aedifficado Ecclesiam Meam et TIBI dabo
claves regni Caelorum.
There were already 4 popes before the last Gospel was written down.
The Bible's authority is one thing, but don't forget Sacred Tradition and Magisterium.
Who wrote the Gospels?
Why do you trust the 27 NT books?
"Ramblings of a false prophet." Try and convince a Muslim of that.
Gazdo01 1 week ago
It was the Catholic Church who put the stamp on it and made the canon. Like a typical Protestant bias, he misses this important historical point. The Catholic Church bishops debates and held councils/synods until finally they decided... the book of Revelation was hotly contested, until the end. Pax.
Doyler3 1 month ago
Why not the gospel of Thomas? Is the church not fallible? If Thomas was in there you would go on about how beautiful they unite and say they are being misrepd. by misunderstaning.
HoBustinJopson 1 month ago
hahaha this is my uncle.. :)
bassett22 2 months ago
He means... the CATHOLIC church, the CATHOLIC fathers, the CATHOLIC councils put together the Bible. Matthew 16:18. 1 Timothy 3:15
To be deep in history is to cease being Protestant - J. Newman
geerz007 3 months ago
'the early Christians had a canon as soon as those books were written' - there is no need to explain the illogic. it is too blatant. i can hear scholarly people laughing at this. very embarassing.
gi2bull 4 months ago
@gi2bull Exactly. We only need to compare old texts to new ones.
nake89 3 months ago
Comment removed
gi2bull 3 months ago
One very big question on my mind is why there in not a gospel of mary in the bible mary of course the mother of jesus may be pleased with both of them she looked after jesus from the day he was born till he grew up as a fine young man surely she must have seen some miracle performed by her son. no bothered to ask his mother if she got to say any thing about her son as she is completlely ignored.but in Quran a whole chapter is dedicated to mary called surah Maryium (mary) shame on christians.
16maq 5 months ago
@16maq Mary is by Christians greatly. Maybe not as much as she should be, but the Bible undoubtedly mentions her numerous times in a positive light.
Marinanor 4 months ago
The truth is the Bible arose from the Catholic Church. The scribes who copied the manuscripts, the church fathers, the councils, the history and practice of which books were accepted as Sacred Scripture were mostly Catholic. During the Reformation some books were dropped from the Bible by the reformers. Luther grouped the OT books he didnt like together at the end of the OT. He grouped the NT books he didnt like together at the end of the NT....Hebrews, James, Jude ,Revelation.
prairiemark 5 months ago
Council of Trent 300 AD-ish
Documents were approved and disproved by men to be part of the bible.
apostle Thomas's work was omitted because of the fairy tale style of story of Jesus as a youth
For history channel's actual investigation watch this -
watch?v=l8PQ6_0gJUE
kelbykross1 5 months ago
@kelbykross1 Wasnt the council of Trent near the reformation in 1500s or 1600s?
prairiemark 5 months ago
@prairiemark i had the council of nicaea and trent mixed up. i had forgot where i had placed this comment, and thank you for responding. Totally different - sorry!
here is a further documentary into the origin of the old testament
watch?v=CfzslZ8tFNw
and research into the new testament formation
watch?v=ko3DfS3Of88
kelbykross1 5 months ago
The point is the new testament books were being read and copied before all the apostles were dead.
doobersmanster 5 months ago
they had a functional canon as soon as the books were written? lol. they were automatically accepted? i find it funny that you quote second peter, since it was a disputed book along with other apocrypha, until accepted by the catholic church.
how about the shepard of hermas? LOL. i would like to see this guy talk at a university instead of a church. lets see him talk to religious studies professors. and the gospels dont fit together "beautifully," they contradict. what a dumb ass. next video
taliesin939939 6 months ago
This is just silly.
live4pce 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Harold Camping was RIGHT about May 21, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 7 months ago
What's so wrong with Thomas? Seriously, can you imagine what god incarnate would be like during the terrible twos? Why is there such a large gap in the narrative? What would I suggest be in the new testament that is not there you ask? How about the years between birth and 30. as a parent I am curious what Jesus was like as a child. Did the son of god ever misbehave? This is just bad story telling all around.
AdUtrumquePeratus76 7 months ago
"A council has never taken out a book or added one in" What was their purpose then? The truth is that the councils chose from texts that would have the best mass appeal. That is why there are so many overlapping themes with pre-Christian narratives. Miraculous birth, 12 apostles, Surviving death... this is basic marketing designed to strike a familiar chord in a new way. Think Disney. This also explains why there are so many contradictions. These were stand alone narratives cobbled together.
AdUtrumquePeratus76 7 months ago
Hi: Erwin
Please fill me in on this!!!
What Greek, Hebrew, etc, etc MSS are superior than the Original Greek, Hebrew, etc, etc MSS that the KJV translators use? Moreover, could you name a translator that is more superior in the languages than the translators of the KJV 1611 MSS? TKS: Pastor David Skakun
cmccaable 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Harold Camping was RIGHT about May 21, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 7 months ago
what about 3 corinthians or the book of Jasher writton about in Joshua 10:13 Or the book of enoch Quoted by Jude in 1:14-16? this guy is wrong wrong
elshadiesglory 8 months ago
Lots of comments by folks that don't seem to understand Dr. Lutzer was giving a two minute answer to a question that he has presented as a college course and written books about.
charliep777 8 months ago
@charliep777 I suspect that added time to respond would only prove that he has approached the topic with a preconceived idea and will only look at evidence in a way that supports that hypothesis. Any evidence to the contrary is ignored or vilified, but never analyzed.
AdUtrumquePeratus76 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Proof? This idiot is using scripture to prove scripture? What a joke.
TheBissco 8 months ago
Proof? This idiot is using scripture to prove scripture? What a joke.
TheBissco 8 months ago
@TheBissco very well said.it is a joke and an insult to intelligence
Samura1gamer 8 months ago
This guy is a moron and does not know what happened at the council of Nicea
gnostic8911 8 months ago
This guy is full of contradictions.he defends the earliest christians books...then says gospel of thomas..GIVE ME A BREAK Is he serious?? Thats his reasoning?
maryann799 8 months ago
This guy is an idiot."Did they chose what will go in the bible? no! they only ratified what was there"....lol That was picking and choosing!!!! and "it all goes together so perfectly" ...uuummm because they chose the books that would do that!!!
maryann799 8 months ago
I love the gospel of Thomas!!!
maryann799 9 months ago
@maryann799 ME TOOO!
JunkComa 8 months ago
so about 200+ white men 1500 years old decided what you would believe this day. They brush over 'was Jesus God or a Prophet?' its such a minor matter for Christians it bogles my mind!
sstoicc 9 months ago
Oh the hate. It shoots off the webpage. No amount of truth could convince one who's hearts are hardened toward the idea of God.(or just no YOUR idea of Him). Everything Lutzer has said is true. Nicea only added things because the catholic church(the black version of truth) wanted the Apocryphal in there.And they had more power over the Gnostic's. Take your atheism and doubt's somewhere else.The only lies here are the ones you convince yourselves of.
Graveltown 9 months ago
Liar
esiosan 9 months ago
LIAR
Hamilton111111 10 months ago
Liar
CubsBears1984 11 months ago
talking rubbish.............'give me a break!' and such comments show he simply cannot give a true account
takewhole 11 months ago
So, I'm supposed to believe the Bible, because the Bible says to believe it? Very circular.
CardinalJunky 11 months ago
Dr Martin Loser said that he would like to "throw Jimmy into the stove" and also tried to remove Rev. And this guy was the "Father" of the reformation.
TheUltraHorror559 11 months ago
This guy contradicts himself, he says no council every decided on a hot friday afternoon what books were going to be in the canon then says they ratified what was already there?? How did it get there. What a simpleton, its a shame to see Strobel sit there and listen to his made up history
billyboy630 1 year ago
YAWN
tacotony24 1 year ago
The collection of New Testament books was finally settled at the Council of Carthage 397. There is a good historical account on my web site onlyonechurch.yolasite.com
I will pray for men like Dr. Lutzer who despite historical facts continue to perpetuate fairytale about how the bible was put together.
OnlyOneChurch 1 year ago
This guy has no facts! The Church put the Bible together thats Historical FACT!
OnlyOneChurch 1 year ago
Is that all you GOT? where is your validation to your statement?
Tgaines69 1 year ago
The council of Nicea(?) was responsible for the offical cannon. There were books that they said weren't allowed because they either too "new" or they went against the view of God and Jesus that they wanted to project. To say otherwise is an outright lie.
lautz73 1 year ago
I would like to see John Martignoni debate this guy.
tacotony24 1 year ago
Comment removed
Tgaines69 1 year ago
@Tgaines69
go ahead and give us a clue to his background
tacotony24 1 year ago
@Tgaines69
OK, go ahead and give us a clue to this man's background
tacotony24 1 year ago
@tacotony24
or Scott Hahn....or Fr. John Corapi...or Tim Staples...
LALIRAY 1 year ago
@LALIRAY
I'm referring to this individual dr. lutzer
tacotony24 1 year ago
Protestantism pits the "Word" (the Bible, preaching) against "sacraments." Protestantism sets up "inner devotion" and "piety" against the "Liturgy." Protestantism opposes "spontaneous worship" to "form prayers." Protestantism separates "the Bible" from "the Church." Protestantism creates the false dichotomy of "Bible" vs. "Tradition." Protestantism pits "Tradition" against the "Holy Spirit." Protestantism considers "Church authority" and "individual liberty and conscience" contradictory.
SenatusPopulesQueRom 1 year ago
Protestantism arose in 1517, and is a "Johnny-come-lately" in the history of Christianity. Therefore it cannot possibly be the "restoration" of "pure", "primitive" Christianity, since this is ruled out by the fact of its absurdly late appearance. Christianity must have historic continuity or it is not Christianity. Protestantism is necessarily a "parasite" of Catholicism, historically and doctrinally speaking.
SenatusPopulesQueRom 1 year ago
This man has zero teaching authority. Catholicism retains apostolic succession, necessary to know what is true Christian apostolic Tradition. It was the criterion of Christian truth used by the early Christians. Protestantism, due to lack of real authority and dogmatic structure, is tragically prone to accommodation to the spirit of the age, and moral faddism.
SenatusPopulesQueRom 1 year ago
@SenatusPopulesQueRom
You obviously have no clue of Dr. Lutzers background.
Tgaines69 1 year ago
Wow, could this guy be any more wrong?
SenatusPopulesQueRom 1 year ago
sorry meant to say in my last comment that the jewish community DID NOT want to accept Jesus as the messiah, not "didn't not want to accept"
jannaheilanie 1 year ago
The gospel of thomas, how ridiculous! What a silly book! Explain how it is any less absurd than genesis with the tower of babel and talking serpents and yahweh throwing tantrums.
By the way it doesn't matter if a formal council put the bible together or if the church did, there still isn't any evidence to believe the supernatural claims. When I stopped being a christian I realized I had to trust that the people who wrote the books were telling the truth. It's not convincing.
mfentruck 1 year ago
@mfentruck U R not a christian, U will never understand even when U R in hell, U will not believe. U should not be commenting on Christian faith, if U R not a christian. Go somewhere in this pagan world, you will find a lot of company out there. Bible 66 books are well researched and proved with internal evidence, external evidence and archeological proof. Bye, U will be on the otherside when we die.
Mac6524 1 year ago
Wait, so that guy is telling us that the Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with organizing what was Canon and what was Apocrypha?
Right.....
jesuriah 1 year ago
@jesuriah, He said : The Council only ratified those 66 books which were widely accepted in those early christian Churches. The whole idea of cannonizing the 66 books was to separate those 66 widely accepted books from the rest of the psuedopedigraphal, apocryphal and deutro-apocryphal books existent during that time. 66 books were well-researched, proved and then authenticated with external and internal evidences.
Mac6524 1 year ago
@Mac6524 Actually it was 73 books that were accepted in the early church which originally was taken from the greek (septuagint) text for the old testament. For protestants, it became 66 books only in the 16th century after the protestant reformation because they decided to separate from the catholic church and follow the hebrew (masoretic) text which didn't include 7of the books.
jannaheilanie 1 year ago
@Mac6524 Before Christ, both texts were accepted in the jewish community. At the end of the 1st century, the hebrew text was set by jewish scholars in reaction to the christian use of the greek text. Also because the text in the greek version helped greatly to prove Jesus was the messiah which they didn't not want to accept.
jannaheilanie 1 year ago
the books that should be in the kjv should be the book of jubilees the book of enoch the apocrypha
kaskrew99 1 year ago
Comment removed
tyrelltaylorful 1 year ago
The bible is correct because it says so in the bible, and they think dating with index fossils is circular reasoning.
gregrutz 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think for people who are interested, you ought to watch my video which is a Video Response above.
phil8888 1 year ago
I hope everyone can view my video response. I address this issue.
phil8888 1 year ago
It's 100% clear by watching this video, that Dr. Erwin Lutzer has an anti Catholic agenda. The whole protestant reformation turned into a complete mess. Over 33,000 protestant churches and growing. This is PROOF the the reformation was a flop! Christ did not attend for this at all!! Who in the world gave Luther the authority to add to and remove from the Bible which was forbidden in Duet 4:2!? He wasn't an apostolic successor!
baredd79 1 year ago
@baredd79 Jesus didn't build a divided church ...no real student can deny that (1Cor 1; Mt 16:18). No serious bible student can deny the RCC meets all criteria of the apostasy prophesied in the NT (2Thes 2; 1Tim 4:3). The trouble is in understanding the Church / Kingdom relationship. It is spiritual ...not of this earth according to Christ. The RCC AND the Reformers (little popes / priests) brutally executed true Christians they deemed heretics. "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up" -- Bercot
demcdoug 1 year ago
Comment removed
baredd79 1 year ago
@baredd79 I am not familiar with your reference. If you mean Strom Thurmond, I still don't get the slam. You'll have to be a little more forthcoming.
demcdoug 1 year ago
Gospal of Mary
kingofheartsxyz 1 year ago
“Astronomers looked 8,000 light-years into the cosmos
with the Hubble Space Telescope, and it seemed that
the eye of God was staring back”
—National Geographic, April 1997
robsonlopes777 1 year ago
It seems odd that they chose contradictory accounts
to juxtapose as "gospels."
But then, any efficient editor
would have prevented
mutually exclusive accounts of creation
from being printed side-by-side
in Genesis chapters one and two.
Imaginefree69 1 year ago
What is this "Doctor" Irwin Lutzer crap?? The man has no earned doctorate! Read his autobiography carefully: he never actually got that doctorate from Loyola/Chicago.
BenAliGtor 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BenAliGtor Dr. Irwin Lutzer is one of the smartes men in the church today, and he hit the nail right on the head with this one...Praise God!!!
tyrelltaylorful 1 year ago
@tyrelltaylorful "..smartes men in the church today"?
Let's hope he passed third grade spelling. You might have a new role model.
BenAliGtor 8 months ago
The Bible was written By a Hilbillie named "JETHRO BODINE"
MrGurglegurgle 1 year ago
So what its just a book i dont follow bronze age material i beleve in a neo-way with technology thats stuff doesn't bore me too death or make up myths.
wachnathan 1 year ago
wrong wrong wrong wrong. This guy is a Bible teacher?
LALIRAY 1 year ago 4
@LALIRAY
-
Instead of throwing a temper tantrum why don't you actually read the latter canonical epistles and the early church documents by the Fathers in which each and every book of the New Testament is quoted by them and referred to as canonical Scripture?
-
Ignorance and arrogance is an ugly combination, as evidenced by your comment.
AgApE010 1 year ago
@AgApE010
Instead of accusing me of throwing a temper tantrum, why don't you accuse Dr. Lutzer in 0:34 of the same arrogance you accuse me of? Double standards are not an effective way of evangelization, as evidenced by your comment. BTW, I've read the early church documents. They fly in the face of what Lutzer says. God bless you in the name of Jesus Christ.
LALIRAY 1 year ago
@LALIRAY
-
All he said is "it is such a distortion" and he has the facts and evidence to back him up on that statement. All you said is "wrong wrong wrong"; yeah, that's a tantrum.
-
Since you make the claim that you've read the Early Church writings, I will hold you to that claim: what writings have you read? Name them specifically. And what in those writings "flies in the face," as you put it, of Dr. Lutzer and his claims? Come now and answer if your words have the slightest shred of honesty.
AgApE010 1 year ago
@LALIRAY - please substantiate your concerns in an intelligent way
twikeroo 1 year ago
Simple, READ and TRUST the CATHOLIC Church, as THEY THROUGH GOD put the GREATEST Book we know today as The BIBLE.
DrWagnerCanek 1 year ago
It is impossible to describe canonization of the Scripture in 60 seconds. You choose to listen to historians and you also choose which historians to listen to because the lack of faith really impacts the interpretation and presentation of some facts and omitting the others. Canon was present way before any councils and was used in churches already in 2nd century. "DO NOT LISTEN TO SECULAR HISTORIANS ONLY!". If you talk about faith, you have to have it, reason is limited & insufficient.
anatoliyjax 1 year ago
the 2 peters book that he talks about is dubious...nobody knows for sure who wrote it....just a bunch of blasphemous assertions from christians as usual
sapaha39 1 year ago
wheres the proof we should believe this guy?
FaceOfChangeXIII 2 years ago 5