@medusa210562 You're an unreasoning bigot living in denial who can't engage in structured discussion or even engage with truth and I'm not wasting any more time on you. God help you and anyone you've got any influence over as an elder in your 450 year old church.
@medusa210562 Your argument is that of a bigot and I'm not going to talk to someone who makes out that Catholics are bad people who will do terrible things to you Protestants who are innocent. You've played that card too often and not admitted all the bad things Protestants did when they had the upper hand. God have mercy on your soul for your vile, bigoted teaching. You're beyond reasoning with your "I can/can't argue from history" hypocrisy. I will pray for your release from deception.
@medusa210562 This doctrine of consubstantiation or whatever is a complete man-made innovation. Prove that such a teaching ever existed before the 11th century. Of course if you "have to use history" then you'll go against your beliefs, because your beliefs were made up in the 16th century, just like Mormon beliefs were made up in the 19th century. If they 'had to use history', they'd fall at the same obstacle as you. Where is your honesty? You think Protestants didn't kill Catholics?
2 Peter 2:1 "But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies" Yes, Luther arose among us and broke the unity of the Holy Spirit departing from Catholic and Orthodox doctrine and setting off a ripple effect of schism and division that has resulted in tens of thousands of modern day sects of Christianity. How did he achieve this? Through his own never-heard-before man-made doctrine of 'sola scriptura'.
@nepistepa Any one can be a false prophet, Luther of any pope etc etc. That is why we need the bible. that is why we need the bible. Not apostolic succession. Apostolic succession made of some popes who even had their lovechild became the next pope.
@medusa210562 God forgive you, you should be burning with shame before Him for your bigotry and self-deception, where you select the history that suits you and ignore the history that doesn't. God is truth and when you deny truth, whether Biblical or historical, you deny Him and he sees your heart even more clearly than I do. I'm signing off.
@nepistepa John 6:32-33 "Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." This proves that transubstantiation in not biblical.
@nepistepa John 6:35 I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. This proves that transubstantiation is not biblical.
@medusa210562 John 6:35...how exactly does this disprove transubstantion?...Jesus took bread said the blessing broke it and gave it to his diciples saying "This IS my body"...you see when the bread was mixed with the word of GOD it became what?...His body....this is very biblical and from the unset Christians believed this...the direct apostolic sucessores like Ignatius make it very very clear if there was ever a doubt.
@gtepp031387 Jesus is the bread of life. Bread is just Bread. We don't need transubstantiation to accept Jesus sacrifice by faith.. Sacraments are just magic.
@medusa210562 Jesus himself states transubstantiation:'Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day,For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.'John 6:53-58
@gtepp031387 Yes,nowhere in the Bible does it say the Eucharist is a symbol.And Protestants like Lutherans,Methodists & Church of England also believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
@medusa210562 No your making magic and Idols as you say a symbol can bring judgement on you and make you sick and die. This is Idolotry....If the eucahrist can make one sick and die and bring judgement(as the scripture clearly says) and your saying this is just a symbol then you are guilty of making an Idol.
@gtepp031387 This symbol is a symbol of the true God. The last time I read the bible it says that it is sin to make symbols of gods, I don't see where you get your doctrine from. Read exodus 20 carefully.
@medusa210562 So you admit that you believe a symbol can make people sick and die, and can bring judgement on you?....either the presence of GOD is in the eucharist or you are guilty of the golden claf crime, and have made an idol.
Good thing we don't make images of other gods, not worship them.
@medusa210562 Nope not at all...does not the scripture state that the eucharist can bring judgment and make people sick and die?...tell me can a symbol do these things?....you are guilty of Idolatry plain and clear!
@gtepp031387 where does the scripture state that the Eucharist can bring judgment and make people sick and die? It doesn't say that anywhere. I does talk however about how we approach the Eucharist. And we will be judged accordingly. Judas for example he had his greatest chance to change his heart in the supper with Jesus in the upper room. But he didn't eat the bread with repentance but ruther with dishonesty. You see for protestants is always about faith, for Catholics is magic
@medusa210562 "Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. Therefore are there many inform and weak among you, and many sleep." ~ 1 Cor 11:27-29
@medusa210562 1)"For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself"..you claim this is symbolic and thus have made an idol as you bleieve a symbol can bring judgment on you.
2) "Therefore are there many inform and weak among you, and many sleep."...again you make an idol as you believe a symbol can make you sick(inform and weak) and die(sleep).
@gtepp031387 you are putting words in my mouth, I don't know what you are talking about. I believe if you "if you partake in an unworthy manner, you are persevering in your sins. As did Judas. I still don't believe is transubstantiation.
@medusa210562 If you partake of what?...eating and drinking the eucharist right?....what happens to men and wemon who do so?...Do they not get sick and die as the bible clearly says?....can a symbol that has not the presence of GOD in it do this?...If that answer is yes then you made an Idol...If that answer is no then you must believe in the real presence of GOD in the eucharist...it is that simple there is no way around it.
@medusa210562 I already posted that verse but I will repost it.
"Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord....For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. Therefore are there many INFORM AND WEAK(sick)among you, and many SLEEP(are dead in the flesh)." ~ 1 Cor 11:27-29
@gtepp031387 It is a waste of time talking to an unreasoning and self-deceiving bigot such as medusa210562 who believes in man-made doctrines (eg, sola scriptura) invented in the 16th century. He can prove nothing to us but only make assertions. He either talks history or refuses to talk history in order to fool himself or us or God, which is ultimately unachievable.
@gtepp031387 To illustrate his lack of sound judgement, he quotes the arguments of atheists against the work of God, with the accusation of magic! So healings must be magic too, then, and so must Matt 18:20 "For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them." He's obviously brainwashed, quoting others without seeing through what they're telling him. 2 Tim 4:3 "..having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings".
The Bible itself only exists because its books were preserved by the very successors of St Ignatius who believed in the Real Presence. His successors are the very people who, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, decided which books were inspired and worthy of being canonised. There is no proof of an early Church which did not believe in Eucharistic transformation. Prove such a Church existed, that's what the challenge is here. Unsupported assertion of man-made beliefs isn't enough.
Prove that St Paul did not believe in the changing of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the Lord, when he writes, "The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" or "Whoever ..eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of ..the body and blood of the Lord." You can't prove anything, you can only interpret the passage in your HUMAN opinion and claim to give YOURSELF the authority of GOD. That's just individualism.
WELL. MAN STARTED TO BELIEVE WE ORIGINATED FORM MONKEYS SOON AFTER THE FIRST SON OF ADAM WAS BORN. MAN STARTED TO BELIEVE WE ALWAYS SPOKE MANY LANGUAGES SOON AFTER THE TOWER OF BABEL. MAN STARTED TO BELIEVE THERE WAS NEVER A JESUS SOON AFTER HE LEFT EARTH. MAN STARTED TO BELIEVE IN TRANSUBSTANTIATION SOON AFTER THE APOSTLES DIED. "Do this in memory of me" In memory there in no such think are repeating a sacrifice and need of an alter now. that is catholic magic paganism. And is sinful.
@medusa210562 You write, "Man started to believe in transubstantiation soon after the Apostles died." Mere assertion is not proof. Prove that. Prove that the apostles did not believe in changing of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the Lord. St Ignatius was a pupil of St John. St Ignatius believed the Eucharistic elements were the Flesh of the Lord. Prove St John didn't when his version of the gospel says, "he who eats Me will live because of Me".
@nepistepa If I have to use history to prove my point I will go against my believes. I believe in the bible only for doctrinal dogmas, As I said transubstantiation is not in the bible. The true church was not a power that had kings kill heretics.
@medusa210562 What hypocrisy you write! "If I have to use history to prove my point I will go against my believes." Indeed? So why do you bring up the history of Catholic treatment of heretics? That's history. Isn't that 'using history to prove your point'? Get real with yourself. You're living in denial. Your church did not exist before the Reformation. Your sola scriptura & Eucharistic doctrines did not exist before the Reformation. They are innovations, a departure from Christ.
@medusa210562 Your belief - in a church that always existed and whose adherents never believed in the Real Presence in the Eucharist - is a complete, MAN-MADE fantasy with NO historical evidence. I have challenged you on this before in the "Disproving Transubstantiation/Eucharist" upload comments. You could only come up with the Waldesians who only date from the 12TH CENTURY and who BELIEVED in the Real Presence!
@nepistepa John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life Hebrew 7:27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself
@nepistepa Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect
@nepistepa Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. 9 Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.
@medusa210562 Why on earth are you quoting John 6:35? You think I don't believe Jesus is the bread of life? Why on EARTH are you quoting Heb 13:8 which condemns you for believing doctrines (opposed to Church doctrine) only introduced in the 16th century? Why on earth are you quoting Hebrews 7:27 & 10:1? Of course Christ doesn't offer up sacrifice daily. That's about Jewish sacrifice of animals, not Paul's teaching. As for John 6:63, do you think Christ's flesh 'profiteth' nothing?
@medusa210562@medusa210562 You say, "transubstantiation is not in the bible". Your teaching isn't articulated in the Bible either, come off it. If you think you can pull one over on me, think again. I'm not the one living in denial here. Both teachings are extrapolations from the same evidence. And don't punt videos at me. If you can't make this kind of argument yourself, that tells you something.
God Bless you for your videos--LOVED the one about the letter from St. Justin Martyr--I had heard it before on the radio but seeing the words--wow--so amazing how little has changed since then. Thanks so much for posting --very reinforcing to my new faith (Catholicism).
It's cool how the three largest churches in the world, Roman catholic, Eastern/Orthodox catholics, and the Anglican Communion all believe in the Real Presence. (Anglicans believe it is done by a different process, but it is still the Real Presence).
The majority of Christians do believe in the Real Presence. Pretty neat.
You will remain Roman Catholic so long as the Spirit of Truth allows you to be blinded by the god of this world, same as we all once were. Period. As a papist, you are in GROSS idolatry, and you will have all of your sins to atone for. My suggestion is to pray for true repentance, and not to settle for "penance". May the Holy Spirit make you truly sorrowful for your sin.
"My suggestion is to pray for true repentance, and not to settle for "penance"."
Why does your suggestion or opinion matter ? Who are you ? What moral authority do you or your opinion hold that people should trust you for Salvation ? NONE.
@MrJamesthecatholic You're right. I lack the "authority" of "apostolic succession" and therefore am unable to discern truth from error. The Holy Ghost has definitely NOT come upon me and I definitely do NOT have the mind of Christ, and what is more, I definitely will NOT be responsible for denying the truth and blaspheming the Holy Ghost.
Now, go look into a mirror and repeat. Perhaps you'll fool yourself into believing that, too.
"You're right. I lack the "authority" of "apostolic succession" and therefore am unable to discern truth from error. The Holy Ghost has definitely NOT come upon me and I definitely do NOT have the mind of Christ, and what is more, I definitely will NOT be responsible for denying the truth and blaspheming the Holy Ghost."
Then its time for you to shut and listen to the Church
Read your post, unable to find it herMy answers are just verses after "brood of viper" verse..
Matthew 15:11..but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person.”Matthew 12:33-37 For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and BY YOUR WORDS YOU WILL BE CONDEMNED.”
@lionel3fernandez For your inflammation, MY debt was paid in full at the cross of Calvary. That's what my faith entitles me to. If you are referring to the post which I voluntarily removed, the fact is that I knew it would be taken in the wrong vein. I mean no ill toward any Catholics, but the Roman Catholic Church IS the whore of Babylon. She has been in bed with kings almost since her inception - that is not worth debating, true? Tell me - what business is it of Peter's to crown emperors?
@lionel3fernandez Right. And Shadrach,Meschach, and Abednego were in "rebellion" by refusing to participate in idolatry. Catholics are idolaters. But don't feel too bad - so are the majority of "evangelicals" who promote a gospel of prosperity and freedom from difficulty.
They did not rebel, like Martin luther. But they submitted to the authority and in turn got persecuted. catholic church participates in idol worship if and only if Moses did too. Moses made cherubim out of gold for ark and the israelites revered the ark (example of idolworship; they are bowing down before a manmade structure which is not God.) Moses made a snake and the people had to look at it to be saved. Why did god not heal them without asking to make a snake? why so controversial
@lionel3fernandez These are good questions and worthy of answers. They are both examples of commands from God to Moses, to be done EXACTLY according to instruction, reason being that in both instances, and like every feast and temple observance, they were "types' or foreshadows of Christ. The mercy seat and the temple itself were typical of the tabernacle or dwelling of God which would ultimately be Christ Himself, and the serpents were a type of the crucifixion and sin (Jn. 3:14; 2Cor. 5:21).
You have spoken a lot, but did not answer my question. Why is God eating up his own words in Ex 20:4 he prohibits making any graven images.
But he then asked to make cherubims and a serpent. Also there is no verse in the bible which says the ark represent jesus. So are you saying that God changes his words from time to time?
Also god consecrated Solomons temple1kings9:3 which had idols of pomegrante, bull ox 1 kings 6:18,44.
@lionel3fernandez pt.2 Both these were done by Moses in strict accord with the explicit command of God, not so with the RCC. The word of God explicitly states that you shall not make for yourself any graven images, nor shall you bow down to them; this is idolatry. When a RC walks by the sacristy, what does he do? He bows down to it, as if God were present in it. When he drives past a RC church... he makes the sign of the cross, as if God were in there. I'm sorry, my friend - God is in HERE!
Bowing down before sacristy is cause jesus bread of life exists in the tabernacle of every catholic church. Well i kno yu have doubts regarding that read john ch 6 especialy(51 This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.) jesus never says lies; he did not say bread will be LIKE my flesh. "take and eat this is my body"
@lionel3fernandezThe difference is that in the OT instances, the command was given by God to construct a pre-figuring memorial to be fulfilled in Christ, in order that the testimony of the word might stand in relation to Christ, in advance - let God be proved faithful, and every man a liar. This is why Moses was denied entrance into the Promised Land - he messed up God's prophetic pattern by striking the rock a second time, not speaking to it. Christ as the Rock was not to be stricken but once.
"My blood which is poured out for you" The same blood is being poured out in last supper and in the cross which makes both the same.Both are covenant of Blood of Christ. Knowing this Paul in 1corinth 11;26:So then whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup you are proclaiming the death of the Lord. So paul teaches the last supper, Christ's passion and Breaking of Bread (Eucharitia/Catholic,orthodox mass) are all the same.
@lionel3fernandez My answer to your question is essentially your question itself: if you are saying that God eats His own words, then you are in trouble, because the foundation for anyone's faith is the word spoken by God. So either He sanctions idolatry (per His own definition), which He has prohibited, or your understanding of the command is wanting.
@lionel3fernandez In other words, the OT temple and tabernacle practices were sanctioned by God. The RCC's mass is essentially a return to a type of Levitical, sacrificial priesthood, but without God's sanction. We now HAVE a high priest, whose covenant is BETTER than the Old. We have no need of daily sacrifice by virtue of the ONE sacrifice of Christ, for all. (Heb. 8:22-28)
Catholic mass:Luke 21;19,18"do this in remembrance of me" also "My blood which is poured out for you" The same blood is being poured out in last supper and in the cross which makes both the same. Knowing this Paul in 1corinth 11;26:So then whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup you are proclaiming the death of the Lord.
He clearly knows that Last supper and all Mass celebrated proclaims death of Jesus making it the same sacrifice --Gods Saction (heb 8:22 refers to animal sacc
Well the catholic teachings and practices are all santioned by God. the teachings are all backed by apostles,scripture, tradition and the writing of the church fathers as well. Some protestants say its just the Bible that is inspired text, all other 1st & 2ndcentury fathers are uninspired. saying so they restrict the inspiration of holy spririt up untilthe Apostles only and not the disciples of the apostles and other the martyrs.
you r speakin abt RCC let speak abt prots:protestants r jealous of apostolic succession of Catholics &orthodox, they dont understand scripture needs interpretation Act 8:31. Every protestant church has its own interpretation & proclaim it is frm Holy Spirit. i will become a protestant wen they all become oneEph 4:5& they follow all biblical teachings especialy Act 4:35,the pastors start speaking like apostles Act 2:5. they stop preach their own version of gospel lead HIS sheep astray
Protestants say they are justified by Faith alone. But when i ask the meaning of these verses in the light of faith alone, they give very lame answers math 25 :34-46, math 7;21-27 Luke 6:46-59. Math19:23 who have faith but is also rich. james 2;14 -26. believers Annanias and Saphira had faith. Why did it not save them. Why were they condemned by Peter for their works ?
Catholic church teaches Faith alone NO work alone? NO. Faith and works stemming out faith a big YES. james 2
If ark and the snakes are "types' or foreshadows of Christ" and can be made even long before Christ is in incarnate then why not make and rever the image which is the real shadow of Christ when and after he is incarnate, man has seen him with his naked eye.
If revering a bronze snake just a representation is not idolatory then how is making a crucifix image of crucified and revering it becomes idolatory? for gods sanction we have tradition of the apostles 1Corinth 11:2,2 Thess 2:15
@lionel3fernandez I just love how a RC will take a passage like the 2 Thess. to which you referred, and presume that the "tradition" mentioned is something that ISN'T recorded. Do we find the story of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection in this epistle? Wouldn't it be more sensible to logical to assume that by "tradition", Paul means the story of the Gospel itself, which is the power of God unto salvation? It simply doesn't follow that there is "unrecorded" teaching - who's to say what that is?
Yes tradition means that something which was not recorded. This is the exact problem of the Protestant churches claiming Sola Scriptura. They try to confine the infinite God when he was incarnate and his works into 4 Books (Gospels) and his church and teaching into 27 Books.Jn21:25 St John clearly says you cannot. While you can find salvation story in fullest in the church only and indeed Bible is a church book compiled decades after chruch was born and canonised 300+yrs later.Contd..
@cheagan abt idolatory. You have stil not answerd my question,cause of yur ego to say tat u agre with me or u simply dont know. Yu have absolute literal view of idolatory which make him so controversial in his verses and making any sort of idols against verseEx 20:4.To understand what God meant by idol worship u shud read Ezekiel 14:3-9. When & if u shed ur ego sometime in life, u r welcome to read John of damascus' Against those who decry holy images" he wrote this when same RCC banned images.
@lionel3fernandez Additionally, you have now crossed over into the realm of your own imagination; Paul's message in Col. 2:17 and Heb. 8:5 is clear. We HAVE the shadow in the OT - the reality is Christ. These things were set in place in order that we might recognize the deeper function of His ministry. But wait - are you questioning that the ark and snake-on-a-pole are types of Christ? I want to be clear who it is I'm arguing with here...lest I waste any more time. Have you read the Bible?
Well Paul says the tabernacle was Heaven and not Jesus. incorrect to say God head uses son as his mercy seat. I think, you have read the bible but have understood it very literally and use it wrongfully. And i remember how Jesus was tempted with nothing but bible verses, when people like you take the verses out of context and try tempting His Church.
@cheagan (Continu) Jesus never wrote any books nor did he command to write. He asked to spread the goodnews of salvation.There was only oral tradition in church atleast for some years. Why/whom do you think Mathew/Mark/Luke gospels were writtn. Is there a single word in the whole of the three gospels indicating their names? Who wrote all the other epistles. Do all (some do) bear the names of authors? any verse. Then how do you know? I have the answer "Tradition". What answer do u have?
@lionel3fernandez And you haven't answered mine: do you dispute that the ark and serpent were types of Christ? The fact is, the RCC plays fast and loose with Scripture, all the while dragging its gullible legions along for the ride. Anyone with a mouth can cry "Tradition" - in fact, it was the Jews who did it first, and Jesus had a real problem with it. By the way, the Lord ANSWERED all His temptations with the word! SCRIPTURE!!
@cheagan So you clearly state that idols and made structure represents Word in OT then why not in NT. why then you have a problem with images of Christ &Saints in his new Church with sanction of God. I dont not uderstand what problem you have when you support creating an idol the then unknown not seen Word while you are against creating a known, seen Word1Jn1:1. heard seen looked, touched , Word who have become man. sepent noone disputed but show me verse clearly state ark reps Xrist as Jn 3:14
@lionel3fernandez Let's not split hairs; God was pleased to dwell fully in Christ, the true Tabernacle. It is only by virtue of being "in Christ" that we partake of that indwelling. Now, back on topic: we have the Torah, the Law of God, prescribing a sanctioned representation of the incarnate Word - where do RC's get off prescribing their own, no less IN VIOLATION of that same Torah? And I refer not only to crucifixes, but to the myriad statues and medals to which you idolaters pray.
@lionel3fernandez Let's not split hairs; God was pleased to dwell fully in Christ, the true Tabernacle. It is only by virtue of being "in Christ" that we partake of that indwelling. Now, back on topic: we have the Torah, the Law of God, prescribing sanctioned representations of the incarnate Word - where do RC's get off prescribing their own, no less IN VIOLATION of that same Torah? And I refer not only to crucifixes, but to the myriad statues and medals to which you idolaters pray.
@cheagan This is what i meant that you read but do not understand the scripture. If God is pleased to dwell in a man made tabernacle/serpent, why cant his presence be felt in his representation & crucifixes. All Gods sanctions does not rest in ink of books, but in his words he spoke to his faithfull in all times recorded (scripture)and not (tradition) jn21:25. to think god's teaching just ends with OT and NT is not a true christian thinking and futile work to curtail mysteries heaven in books.
@lionel3fernandez God is NOT pleased to dwell in a man-made tabernacle; He is pleased to dwell in Christ. Your error lies in the need/desire to FEEL His presence, and it is precisely this weakness that the Enemy has exploited in the RCC. If you had the Holy Ghost, you would no longer feel the need to FEEL - you would know by process of FAITH. Sola fida, boyeee.
@lionel3fernandez Wow. I've seen some fancy dancing in my day, but THAT takes it. Sola fida means "by faith alone", btw. I think you mean "sola scriptura", which YES, I claim.
"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." - Col. 2:9. Is that sola scriptura enough for you? You have a man-made religion, and you are an idolater. You wouldn't know the word of God if it came down out of heaven and judged you.
"Enemy has exploited RCC." You forgot these verses Mt 16:18,19 "you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it." I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." All authority in heaven and on earth to RCC. RCC is 2000 yrs old. Wonder how old is your church and what is its state going to be in 200 yrs..
"Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. THEY WENT OUT FROM US, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that it might be made manifest that they were not all of us."
WENT OUT FROM US. That is why i still persist that you do not understand scripture even though you read. Mark8:18 Who went out from Catholic Church and revolting against it?All protestants along wit Martin Luther Calvin etc(that is why it is MANY antichrists denoting many protestant reformers pastors having different conflictingteach)1Jn 2;18 best denotes protestant churches went out communion of the CC. There is your church and pastors (antiXp) in scripture my last coment4u. Mark8:18
@lionel3fernandez Honestly. That's like ending a basketball game on a foul. I cry, "Foul!" What you're saying is that John the Apostle wrote a letter to believers some 1500 years in the future? And for 15 centuries, no one had any idea what he was talking about, because those events had yet to transpire? I guess that explains why he ...wrote it in the past tense...(?)
Do a word study on the Gk. prefix anti-. You'll be surprised to find that it DOESN'T mean "against", like most believe.
@lionel3fernandez Instead, it means, "In place of" or "instead of". It is used many, many times in the NT; go ahead and find out where. It is the OFFICIAL title of every RC priest, bishop, and pope - "Vicar of Christ", whence "vicarious" in the Latin - "In the place of". And here is the heart of your religion. Until the 20th c., RC laity couldn't even partake personally in their "blessed sacrament", but had to settle for WITNESSING their priest doing it FOR THEM. Vicariously. Anti-christ!
So to say that people did not participate is because you dont have a good understand of neither scripture nor Mass. In last supper,if u hav read gospel. Most of verses are said by Jesus. The Apostles just sat listened n witnessed. When the apostles said mass later 1 Corth 11:17-33 everybody listened (made a few responses same as in mass, (we even hav people sleepin during Mass in Act20:9.) Regarding making vicar and anti synonyms "Are you trying to reinvent a new Biblical Greek ????
@lionel3fernandez No - "vicar" is from the Latin (whence the RCC gets all its formal ecclesiastical terminology), "vicarius", meaning a SUBSTITUTE. "Anti" is from the Greek, and it means "instead of" or "in place of" - in other words, they are SYNONYMS. Any grade-school student can see this plainly. It is used in Mt. 2:22, where Herod ruled "IN THE PLACE OF his father"; in Lk. 11:11, "he will not give him a snake INSTEAD OF a fish"; Jas. 4:15, "INSTEAD, you ought to say, 'If the Lord wills.."
@lionel3fernandez Now, according to RCC theology, if one does not LITERALLY eat His LITERAL flesh and LITERALLY drink His LITERAL blood, he cannot be saved. So how were all those RCs saved for all those centuries if they were denied the privilege of partaking in the sacrament? I'm not talking about "listening" to sermons, I'm saying that they were prevented from taking the eucharist and were merely allowed to WITNESS their parish priest doing it for them VICARIOUSLY! Bye-bye, RC house of cards!
@lionel3fernandez That doesn't answer my question about the MILLIONS of RCs who NEVER tasted a host wafer in their life! How can you just wave this off? What kind of spell are you under?
DESCRIPTION of the NT church, not an IMPERATIVE for me to follow.
I was waiting for this answer.... You are a typical greedy protestant who twist the bible according to your lifestyle. Ok so according to you all which you do not follow are for NT church and the other which you do follow are for the entire mankind till the end of time. No wonder we have 30000+ protestant denominations...i get that; remain a protestant for ever.... no more comments
DESCRIPTION of the NT church, not an IMPERATIVE for me to follow.
I was waiting for this answer.... You are a typical greedy protestant who twist the bible according to your lifestyle. Ok so according to you all which you do not follow are for NT church and the other which you do follow are for the entire mankind till the end of time. No wonder we have 30000+ protestant denominations...i get that; remain a protestant for ever.... no more comments
DESCRIPTION of the NT church, not an IMPERATIVE for me to follow.
I was waiting for this answer.... You are a typical greedy protestant who twist the bible according to your lifestyle. Ok so according to you all which you do not follow are for NT church and the other which you do follow are for the entire mankind till the end of time. No wonder we have 30000+ protestant denominations...i get that; remain a protestant for ever.... no more comments
@lionel3fernandez Still not a WORD directed toward my inquiries, only emotional and sensationalistic rhetoric.
Open letter: isn't there ONE Roman Catholic who has the fortitude to answer my honest objections? Look at it this way: what if I'm a POTENTIAL Catholic? Doesn't that make you want to at least ATTEMPT to reason with me? Or is reason itself one of the things the RCC requires that you leave at the door? (Isaiah 1:18)
Potential catholic, you will become one when you understand that your understanding is different from God's. Your ways r different from his. if you want to be so you should have your heart towards Holy spirit scripture, towards tradition, towards early churh fathers, saints and their writing, towards history of the church in all centuries (both good and bad), not just closin urself to the literal interpretation of scripture and trying to redifine XP and salvation thru inks&books
MILLIONS of RCs who NEVER " CC has always given communion to faithful at least during Sundays. Are you day dreaming about the church which you are going to build up ? i think you need to learn more about CC before starting to critise it. By greedy Jews i meant during Jesus' time.
Still not a WORD directed toward my inquiries, only emotional and sensationalistic rhetoric.
None of your post were inquiries, but were all judgements you passed on Catholic church. Also you did not express yourself to believe in the writings of the early church fathers or converts "Scott hahn or Tim staples. Nor hav u taken an effort to the documents i refered "John of damascus"
But you simple cry out sinner sinner sinner.... like the Jews who condemned Jesus
Chanced by another post and its comments. There you are Cheagan. You call others idiot and fool. Hah that reminds me of another verse in the bible....
Chanced by another post and its comments. There you are Cheagan. You call others idiot and fool. Very very unchristian. Hah that reminds me of another verse in the bible....Mt 5:22
@lionel3fernandez Was Jesus being unchristian when He called the Pharisees a "brood of vipers"? You are not worthy of my time in debate; you have been utterly unable to give me ANY answers or viable comments.
Your father is the devil, and your mother is a whore.
You have all the frustration and anger exhibited by those silly people when they loose a debate. They call names and become personal. I have answered all your comments but you did not receive it in you, like seeds sown in between cactus or on rocks..
Very very unchristian again. Yu are not Jesus but a simple human. So how can you call others names and still persist in the same sin you are committing without repenting. You need to learn the example of Michael the archangel. Jude 1:9. Feeling sorry for your soul.
Very very unchristian again. Understand u are not Jesus but a simple human. You need to be meek and humble. So how can you call others names and still persist in the same sin you are committing without repenting. You need to learn the example of Michael the archangel. Jude 1:9. Feeling sorry for your soul.
Jeus can call Pharisees a "brood of vipers" ? Why because he does not have sin in him. Are you without sin ? Are you better than Michael the Archangel.
John 21:15-17 Simon is being assigned new shepherd by Jesus, therefore Peter is the first Vicar of Christ.
Who ever succeeds Peter becomes Vicar of Peter, who is the Vicar of Christ. Therfore, vicar of Christ.
u still not understnd Mt16:19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
@lionel3fernandez But let's not take our eye off the ball, shall we? Are you ready for your logic lesson of the day? It's easy to follow, based on the Law of Non-contradiction, wherein we find:
Making my last post a little more clear. If you have not sold your property (which i bet not) and shared, i call you a Hypocrite and i dont want to talk to you again. If yes lets talk.
@lionel3fernandez Jesus said that to the rich young ruler to illustrate that he had not, in fact, kept all the commandments from his youth, as he claimed; he was holding his possessions in a higher place than his love of God - and this illustrates what we ALL as humans have in common. The man was no better than the rest of us, and just as much in need of Christ's salvation. However, I wouldn't place myself as an example, as he did that day, thus inviting the public rebuke of the Master.
@lionel3fernandez Jesus said that to the rich young ruler to illustrate that he had not, in fact, kept all the commandments from his youth, as he claimed; he was holding his possessions in a higher place than his love of God - and this illustrates what we ALL as humans have in common. The man was no better than the rest of us, and just as much in need of Christ's salvation. However, I would not place myself as an example, as he did that day, thus inviting the public rebuke of the Master.
@lionel3fernandez It is just this sort of confusion that RCs and most evangelicals share - when it comes to Bible exegesis, you literalize where you should spiritualize, and you spiritualize where you should literalize. But what about the content of my posts? Don't they deserve to be addressed?
Only the Holy Ghost can open the Scriptures for you, my friend. I pray this for you now in the Name of Jesus. Amen.
Regarding possession: You sound like the greedy Jews. So you agree that you are camel trying to pass through a needle hole. Similar to Annania and Saphira. It is the verse of the apostles to the early church, so if u really believe in the bible you have to be like the early church. If you are not like Act 4:32-34. then how can you claim that you are following what bible teaches
DESCRIPTION of the NT church, not an IMPERATIVE for me to follow.
I was waiting for this answer.... You are a typical greedy protestant who twist the bible according to your lifestyle. Ok so according to you all which you do not follow are for NT church and the other which you do follow are for the entire mankind till the end of time. No wonder we have 30000+ protestant denominations...i get that ..... no more comments
Only the Holy Ghost can open the Scriptures for you".... For me it is logical to believ Holy spirit is leading a Church 2000 years old than 3000+ number of churchs with 3000+ different doctrines of faith each claimimg to be inspired by the same spirit and the same bible and most of them not even 200 years. Also learning abt life of reformers they did not exhibit any christian virtues in lives, so why should i imitiate them. Instead CC had a number of good saints with Xian virtues
@lionel3fernandez I have never claimed to have anything in common with any "protestant" or "evangelical" denomination; if you really want to play it safe, though, you might consider becoming a Jew yourself (really - GREEDY Jews? a bit antisemitic, doncha think?). Do this: hold the book of the Law up to the mirror, and see if you fall short. My guess is: yes. Or do RCs think it counts if they "try their best"?
Refute THAT!. I can sense anger/frustration in your post .remember telling before was my last post, but 2more answers,giving u the benefit of doubt that u r searching4truth. Two protestant converts u can refer to Scott Hahn and Tim Staples.questions for yu. You said u believe 'Sola Scriptura'. if so hav u sold everythin u hav n shared it among believers in yur chruch like apostles did n asked the early church2do? i bet not. if not i call u a hypocrit n my last post. else lets discus
@lionel3fernandez Jesus said that to the rich young ruler to illustrate that he had not, in fact, kept all the commandments from his youth, as he claimed; he was holding his possessions in a higher place than his love of God - and this illustrates what we ALL as humans have in common. The man was no better than the rest of us, and just as much in need of Christ's salvation. However, I wouldn't place myself as an example, as he did that day, thus inviting the public rebuke of the Master.
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 You're an unreasoning bigot living in denial who can't engage in structured discussion or even engage with truth and I'm not wasting any more time on you. God help you and anyone you've got any influence over as an elder in your 450 year old church.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 have you looked at the response video on this page.
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 Your argument is that of a bigot and I'm not going to talk to someone who makes out that Catholics are bad people who will do terrible things to you Protestants who are innocent. You've played that card too often and not admitted all the bad things Protestants did when they had the upper hand. God have mercy on your soul for your vile, bigoted teaching. You're beyond reasoning with your "I can/can't argue from history" hypocrisy. I will pray for your release from deception.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 This doctrine of consubstantiation or whatever is a complete man-made innovation. Prove that such a teaching ever existed before the 11th century. Of course if you "have to use history" then you'll go against your beliefs, because your beliefs were made up in the 16th century, just like Mormon beliefs were made up in the 19th century. If they 'had to use history', they'd fall at the same obstacle as you. Where is your honesty? You think Protestants didn't kill Catholics?
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
2 Peter 2:1 "But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies" Yes, Luther arose among us and broke the unity of the Holy Spirit departing from Catholic and Orthodox doctrine and setting off a ripple effect of schism and division that has resulted in tens of thousands of modern day sects of Christianity. How did he achieve this? Through his own never-heard-before man-made doctrine of 'sola scriptura'.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa Any one can be a false prophet, Luther of any pope etc etc. That is why we need the bible. that is why we need the bible. Not apostolic succession. Apostolic succession made of some popes who even had their lovechild became the next pope.
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 God forgive you, you should be burning with shame before Him for your bigotry and self-deception, where you select the history that suits you and ignore the history that doesn't. God is truth and when you deny truth, whether Biblical or historical, you deny Him and he sees your heart even more clearly than I do. I'm signing off.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa When I eat the bread I eat the real body of Christ (spiritually) but I eat just bread (phisically)
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa John 6:32-33 "Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." This proves that transubstantiation in not biblical.
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa John 6:35 I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. This proves that transubstantiation is not biblical.
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 John 6:35...how exactly does this disprove transubstantion?...Jesus took bread said the blessing broke it and gave it to his diciples saying "This IS my body"...you see when the bread was mixed with the word of GOD it became what?...His body....this is very biblical and from the unset Christians believed this...the direct apostolic sucessores like Ignatius make it very very clear if there was ever a doubt.
gtepp031387 1 week ago
@gtepp031387 Jesus is the bread of life. Bread is just Bread. We don't need transubstantiation to accept Jesus sacrifice by faith.. Sacraments are just magic.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Jesus himself states transubstantiation:'Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day,For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.'John 6:53-58
Archangelatis 1 week ago
@Archangelatis Yes Jesus is rather clear espeacially in Greek...my flesh is REAL food...clearly is directly against a symbolic interpritation.
gtepp031387 1 week ago
@gtepp031387 Yes,nowhere in the Bible does it say the Eucharist is a symbol.And Protestants like Lutherans,Methodists & Church of England also believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
Archangelatis 1 week ago
@Archangelatis JESUS WAS TALKING ABOUT HIS BLOOD AND BODY NOT BREAD AND VINE. TRANSUBSTANTIATION IS A CATHOLIC INVENTION.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 No your making magic and Idols as you say a symbol can bring judgement on you and make you sick and die. This is Idolotry....If the eucahrist can make one sick and die and bring judgement(as the scripture clearly says) and your saying this is just a symbol then you are guilty of making an Idol.
gtepp031387 1 week ago
@gtepp031387 This symbol is a symbol of the true God. The last time I read the bible it says that it is sin to make symbols of gods, I don't see where you get your doctrine from. Read exodus 20 carefully.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 So you admit that you believe a symbol can make people sick and die, and can bring judgement on you?....either the presence of GOD is in the eucharist or you are guilty of the golden claf crime, and have made an idol.
Good thing we don't make images of other gods, not worship them.
gtepp031387 1 week ago
@gtepp031387 You are putting words in my mouth.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Nope not at all...does not the scripture state that the eucharist can bring judgment and make people sick and die?...tell me can a symbol do these things?....you are guilty of Idolatry plain and clear!
gtepp031387 1 week ago
@gtepp031387 where does the scripture state that the Eucharist can bring judgment and make people sick and die? It doesn't say that anywhere. I does talk however about how we approach the Eucharist. And we will be judged accordingly. Judas for example he had his greatest chance to change his heart in the supper with Jesus in the upper room. But he didn't eat the bread with repentance but ruther with dishonesty. You see for protestants is always about faith, for Catholics is magic
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 "Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. Therefore are there many inform and weak among you, and many sleep." ~ 1 Cor 11:27-29
gtepp031387 1 week ago
@medusa210562 1)"For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself"..you claim this is symbolic and thus have made an idol as you bleieve a symbol can bring judgment on you.
2) "Therefore are there many inform and weak among you, and many sleep."...again you make an idol as you believe a symbol can make you sick(inform and weak) and die(sleep).
gtepp031387 1 week ago
@gtepp031387 you are putting words in my mouth, I don't know what you are talking about. I believe if you "if you partake in an unworthy manner, you are persevering in your sins. As did Judas. I still don't believe is transubstantiation.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 If you partake of what?...eating and drinking the eucharist right?....what happens to men and wemon who do so?...Do they not get sick and die as the bible clearly says?....can a symbol that has not the presence of GOD in it do this?...If that answer is yes then you made an Idol...If that answer is no then you must believe in the real presence of GOD in the eucharist...it is that simple there is no way around it.
gtepp031387 6 days ago
@gtepp031387 please show me this getting sich and diening, where is it in the bible?
medusa210562 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 I already posted that verse but I will repost it.
"Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord....For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. Therefore are there many INFORM AND WEAK(sick)among you, and many SLEEP(are dead in the flesh)." ~ 1 Cor 11:27-29
gtepp031387 4 days ago
@gtepp031387 It is a waste of time talking to an unreasoning and self-deceiving bigot such as medusa210562 who believes in man-made doctrines (eg, sola scriptura) invented in the 16th century. He can prove nothing to us but only make assertions. He either talks history or refuses to talk history in order to fool himself or us or God, which is ultimately unachievable.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@gtepp031387 To illustrate his lack of sound judgement, he quotes the arguments of atheists against the work of God, with the accusation of magic! So healings must be magic too, then, and so must Matt 18:20 "For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them." He's obviously brainwashed, quoting others without seeing through what they're telling him. 2 Tim 4:3 "..having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings".
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa God bless.
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
The Bible itself only exists because its books were preserved by the very successors of St Ignatius who believed in the Real Presence. His successors are the very people who, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, decided which books were inspired and worthy of being canonised. There is no proof of an early Church which did not believe in Eucharistic transformation. Prove such a Church existed, that's what the challenge is here. Unsupported assertion of man-made beliefs isn't enough.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
Prove that St Paul did not believe in the changing of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the Lord, when he writes, "The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" or "Whoever ..eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of ..the body and blood of the Lord." You can't prove anything, you can only interpret the passage in your HUMAN opinion and claim to give YOURSELF the authority of GOD. That's just individualism.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
WELL. MAN STARTED TO BELIEVE WE ORIGINATED FORM MONKEYS SOON AFTER THE FIRST SON OF ADAM WAS BORN. MAN STARTED TO BELIEVE WE ALWAYS SPOKE MANY LANGUAGES SOON AFTER THE TOWER OF BABEL. MAN STARTED TO BELIEVE THERE WAS NEVER A JESUS SOON AFTER HE LEFT EARTH. MAN STARTED TO BELIEVE IN TRANSUBSTANTIATION SOON AFTER THE APOSTLES DIED. "Do this in memory of me" In memory there in no such think are repeating a sacrifice and need of an alter now. that is catholic magic paganism. And is sinful.
medusa210562 3 weeks ago
@medusa210562 You write, "Man started to believe in transubstantiation soon after the Apostles died." Mere assertion is not proof. Prove that. Prove that the apostles did not believe in changing of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the Lord. St Ignatius was a pupil of St John. St Ignatius believed the Eucharistic elements were the Flesh of the Lord. Prove St John didn't when his version of the gospel says, "he who eats Me will live because of Me".
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa If I have to use history to prove my point I will go against my believes. I believe in the bible only for doctrinal dogmas, As I said transubstantiation is not in the bible. The true church was not a power that had kings kill heretics.
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 What hypocrisy you write! "If I have to use history to prove my point I will go against my believes." Indeed? So why do you bring up the history of Catholic treatment of heretics? That's history. Isn't that 'using history to prove your point'? Get real with yourself. You're living in denial. Your church did not exist before the Reformation. Your sola scriptura & Eucharistic doctrines did not exist before the Reformation. They are innovations, a departure from Christ.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 Your belief - in a church that always existed and whose adherents never believed in the Real Presence in the Eucharist - is a complete, MAN-MADE fantasy with NO historical evidence. I have challenged you on this before in the "Disproving Transubstantiation/Eucharist" upload comments. You could only come up with the Waldesians who only date from the 12TH CENTURY and who BELIEVED in the Real Presence!
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life Hebrew 7:27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. 9 Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst John 6:35
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 Why on earth are you quoting John 6:35? You think I don't believe Jesus is the bread of life? Why on EARTH are you quoting Heb 13:8 which condemns you for believing doctrines (opposed to Church doctrine) only introduced in the 16th century? Why on earth are you quoting Hebrews 7:27 & 10:1? Of course Christ doesn't offer up sacrifice daily. That's about Jewish sacrifice of animals, not Paul's teaching. As for John 6:63, do you think Christ's flesh 'profiteth' nothing?
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa When I eat the bread I eat the real body of Christ (spiritually) but I eat just bread (phisically). TRANSUBSTANTIATION IS OF THE DEVIL.
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa look at the vidoe Think -is transubstatiation really true? By csmatyi
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 @medusa210562 You say, "transubstantiation is not in the bible". Your teaching isn't articulated in the Bible either, come off it. If you think you can pull one over on me, think again. I'm not the one living in denial here. Both teachings are extrapolations from the same evidence. And don't punt videos at me. If you can't make this kind of argument yourself, that tells you something.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
God Bless you for your videos--LOVED the one about the letter from St. Justin Martyr--I had heard it before on the radio but seeing the words--wow--so amazing how little has changed since then. Thanks so much for posting --very reinforcing to my new faith (Catholicism).
MMTWorks4me 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's cool how the three largest churches in the world, Roman catholic, Eastern/Orthodox catholics, and the Anglican Communion all believe in the Real Presence. (Anglicans believe it is done by a different process, but it is still the Real Presence).
The majority of Christians do believe in the Real Presence. Pretty neat.
sutherndudetx 5 months ago
Comment removed
sutherndudetx 5 months ago
You will remain Roman Catholic so long as the Spirit of Truth allows you to be blinded by the god of this world, same as we all once were. Period. As a papist, you are in GROSS idolatry, and you will have all of your sins to atone for. My suggestion is to pray for true repentance, and not to settle for "penance". May the Holy Spirit make you truly sorrowful for your sin.
cheagan 7 months ago
@cheagan
"My suggestion is to pray for true repentance, and not to settle for "penance"."
Why does your suggestion or opinion matter ? Who are you ? What moral authority do you or your opinion hold that people should trust you for Salvation ? NONE.
MrJamesthecatholic 6 months ago
@MrJamesthecatholic You're right. I lack the "authority" of "apostolic succession" and therefore am unable to discern truth from error. The Holy Ghost has definitely NOT come upon me and I definitely do NOT have the mind of Christ, and what is more, I definitely will NOT be responsible for denying the truth and blaspheming the Holy Ghost.
Now, go look into a mirror and repeat. Perhaps you'll fool yourself into believing that, too.
cheagan 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cheagan
"You're right. I lack the "authority" of "apostolic succession" and therefore am unable to discern truth from error. The Holy Ghost has definitely NOT come upon me and I definitely do NOT have the mind of Christ, and what is more, I definitely will NOT be responsible for denying the truth and blaspheming the Holy Ghost."
Then its time for you to shut and listen to the Church
MrJamesthecatholic 6 months ago
@cheagan very unchristian words
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
Comment removed
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
Read your post, unable to find it herMy answers are just verses after "brood of viper" verse..
Matthew 15:11..but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person.”Matthew 12:33-37 For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and BY YOUR WORDS YOU WILL BE CONDEMNED.”
Titus 3:2
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez For your inflammation, MY debt was paid in full at the cross of Calvary. That's what my faith entitles me to. If you are referring to the post which I voluntarily removed, the fact is that I knew it would be taken in the wrong vein. I mean no ill toward any Catholics, but the Roman Catholic Church IS the whore of Babylon. She has been in bed with kings almost since her inception - that is not worth debating, true? Tell me - what business is it of Peter's to crown emperors?
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
Romans 13:2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Right. And Shadrach,Meschach, and Abednego were in "rebellion" by refusing to participate in idolatry. Catholics are idolaters. But don't feel too bad - so are the majority of "evangelicals" who promote a gospel of prosperity and freedom from difficulty.
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
They did not rebel, like Martin luther. But they submitted to the authority and in turn got persecuted. catholic church participates in idol worship if and only if Moses did too. Moses made cherubim out of gold for ark and the israelites revered the ark (example of idolworship; they are bowing down before a manmade structure which is not God.) Moses made a snake and the people had to look at it to be saved. Why did god not heal them without asking to make a snake? why so controversial
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez These are good questions and worthy of answers. They are both examples of commands from God to Moses, to be done EXACTLY according to instruction, reason being that in both instances, and like every feast and temple observance, they were "types' or foreshadows of Christ. The mercy seat and the temple itself were typical of the tabernacle or dwelling of God which would ultimately be Christ Himself, and the serpents were a type of the crucifixion and sin (Jn. 3:14; 2Cor. 5:21).
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
You have spoken a lot, but did not answer my question. Why is God eating up his own words in Ex 20:4 he prohibits making any graven images.
But he then asked to make cherubims and a serpent. Also there is no verse in the bible which says the ark represent jesus. So are you saying that God changes his words from time to time?
Also god consecrated Solomons temple1kings9:3 which had idols of pomegrante, bull ox 1 kings 6:18,44.
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez pt.2 Both these were done by Moses in strict accord with the explicit command of God, not so with the RCC. The word of God explicitly states that you shall not make for yourself any graven images, nor shall you bow down to them; this is idolatry. When a RC walks by the sacristy, what does he do? He bows down to it, as if God were present in it. When he drives past a RC church... he makes the sign of the cross, as if God were in there. I'm sorry, my friend - God is in HERE!
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
Bowing down before sacristy is cause jesus bread of life exists in the tabernacle of every catholic church. Well i kno yu have doubts regarding that read john ch 6 especialy(51 This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.) jesus never says lies; he did not say bread will be LIKE my flesh. "take and eat this is my body"
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandezThe difference is that in the OT instances, the command was given by God to construct a pre-figuring memorial to be fulfilled in Christ, in order that the testimony of the word might stand in relation to Christ, in advance - let God be proved faithful, and every man a liar. This is why Moses was denied entrance into the Promised Land - he messed up God's prophetic pattern by striking the rock a second time, not speaking to it. Christ as the Rock was not to be stricken but once.
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
"My blood which is poured out for you" The same blood is being poured out in last supper and in the cross which makes both the same.Both are covenant of Blood of Christ. Knowing this Paul in 1corinth 11;26:So then whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup you are proclaiming the death of the Lord. So paul teaches the last supper, Christ's passion and Breaking of Bread (Eucharitia/Catholic,orthodox mass) are all the same.
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez My answer to your question is essentially your question itself: if you are saying that God eats His own words, then you are in trouble, because the foundation for anyone's faith is the word spoken by God. So either He sanctions idolatry (per His own definition), which He has prohibited, or your understanding of the command is wanting.
My money's on God.
cheagan 6 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez In other words, the OT temple and tabernacle practices were sanctioned by God. The RCC's mass is essentially a return to a type of Levitical, sacrificial priesthood, but without God's sanction. We now HAVE a high priest, whose covenant is BETTER than the Old. We have no need of daily sacrifice by virtue of the ONE sacrifice of Christ, for all. (Heb. 8:22-28)
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
Catholic mass:Luke 21;19,18"do this in remembrance of me" also "My blood which is poured out for you" The same blood is being poured out in last supper and in the cross which makes both the same. Knowing this Paul in 1corinth 11;26:So then whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup you are proclaiming the death of the Lord.
He clearly knows that Last supper and all Mass celebrated proclaims death of Jesus making it the same sacrifice --Gods Saction (heb 8:22 refers to animal sacc
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@cheagan
Well the catholic teachings and practices are all santioned by God. the teachings are all backed by apostles,scripture, tradition and the writing of the church fathers as well. Some protestants say its just the Bible that is inspired text, all other 1st & 2ndcentury fathers are uninspired. saying so they restrict the inspiration of holy spririt up untilthe Apostles only and not the disciples of the apostles and other the martyrs.
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@cheagan
you r speakin abt RCC let speak abt prots:protestants r jealous of apostolic succession of Catholics &orthodox, they dont understand scripture needs interpretation Act 8:31. Every protestant church has its own interpretation & proclaim it is frm Holy Spirit. i will become a protestant wen they all become oneEph 4:5& they follow all biblical teachings especialy Act 4:35,the pastors start speaking like apostles Act 2:5. they stop preach their own version of gospel lead HIS sheep astray
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@cheagan
Protestants say they are justified by Faith alone. But when i ask the meaning of these verses in the light of faith alone, they give very lame answers math 25 :34-46, math 7;21-27 Luke 6:46-59. Math19:23 who have faith but is also rich. james 2;14 -26. believers Annanias and Saphira had faith. Why did it not save them. Why were they condemned by Peter for their works ?
Catholic church teaches Faith alone NO work alone? NO. Faith and works stemming out faith a big YES. james 2
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@cheagan
If ark and the snakes are "types' or foreshadows of Christ" and can be made even long before Christ is in incarnate then why not make and rever the image which is the real shadow of Christ when and after he is incarnate, man has seen him with his naked eye.
If revering a bronze snake just a representation is not idolatory then how is making a crucifix image of crucified and revering it becomes idolatory? for gods sanction we have tradition of the apostles 1Corinth 11:2,2 Thess 2:15
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez I just love how a RC will take a passage like the 2 Thess. to which you referred, and presume that the "tradition" mentioned is something that ISN'T recorded. Do we find the story of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection in this epistle? Wouldn't it be more sensible to logical to assume that by "tradition", Paul means the story of the Gospel itself, which is the power of God unto salvation? It simply doesn't follow that there is "unrecorded" teaching - who's to say what that is?
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
Yes tradition means that something which was not recorded. This is the exact problem of the Protestant churches claiming Sola Scriptura. They try to confine the infinite God when he was incarnate and his works into 4 Books (Gospels) and his church and teaching into 27 Books.Jn21:25 St John clearly says you cannot. While you can find salvation story in fullest in the church only and indeed Bible is a church book compiled decades after chruch was born and canonised 300+yrs later.Contd..
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@cheagan abt idolatory. You have stil not answerd my question,cause of yur ego to say tat u agre with me or u simply dont know. Yu have absolute literal view of idolatory which make him so controversial in his verses and making any sort of idols against verseEx 20:4.To understand what God meant by idol worship u shud read Ezekiel 14:3-9. When & if u shed ur ego sometime in life, u r welcome to read John of damascus' Against those who decry holy images" he wrote this when same RCC banned images.
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Additionally, you have now crossed over into the realm of your own imagination; Paul's message in Col. 2:17 and Heb. 8:5 is clear. We HAVE the shadow in the OT - the reality is Christ. These things were set in place in order that we might recognize the deeper function of His ministry. But wait - are you questioning that the ark and snake-on-a-pole are types of Christ? I want to be clear who it is I'm arguing with here...lest I waste any more time. Have you read the Bible?
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
Well Paul says the tabernacle was Heaven and not Jesus. incorrect to say God head uses son as his mercy seat. I think, you have read the bible but have understood it very literally and use it wrongfully. And i remember how Jesus was tempted with nothing but bible verses, when people like you take the verses out of context and try tempting His Church.
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@cheagan (Continu) Jesus never wrote any books nor did he command to write. He asked to spread the goodnews of salvation.There was only oral tradition in church atleast for some years. Why/whom do you think Mathew/Mark/Luke gospels were writtn. Is there a single word in the whole of the three gospels indicating their names? Who wrote all the other epistles. Do all (some do) bear the names of authors? any verse. Then how do you know? I have the answer "Tradition". What answer do u have?
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez And you haven't answered mine: do you dispute that the ark and serpent were types of Christ? The fact is, the RCC plays fast and loose with Scripture, all the while dragging its gullible legions along for the ride. Anyone with a mouth can cry "Tradition" - in fact, it was the Jews who did it first, and Jesus had a real problem with it. By the way, the Lord ANSWERED all His temptations with the word! SCRIPTURE!!
cheagan 6 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@cheagan So you clearly state that idols and made structure represents Word in OT then why not in NT. why then you have a problem with images of Christ &Saints in his new Church with sanction of God. I dont not uderstand what problem you have when you support creating an idol the then unknown not seen Word while you are against creating a known, seen Word1Jn1:1. heard seen looked, touched , Word who have become man. sepent noone disputed but show me verse clearly state ark reps Xrist as Jn 3:14
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Let's not split hairs; God was pleased to dwell fully in Christ, the true Tabernacle. It is only by virtue of being "in Christ" that we partake of that indwelling. Now, back on topic: we have the Torah, the Law of God, prescribing a sanctioned representation of the incarnate Word - where do RC's get off prescribing their own, no less IN VIOLATION of that same Torah? And I refer not only to crucifixes, but to the myriad statues and medals to which you idolaters pray.
cheagan 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Let's not split hairs; God was pleased to dwell fully in Christ, the true Tabernacle. It is only by virtue of being "in Christ" that we partake of that indwelling. Now, back on topic: we have the Torah, the Law of God, prescribing sanctioned representations of the incarnate Word - where do RC's get off prescribing their own, no less IN VIOLATION of that same Torah? And I refer not only to crucifixes, but to the myriad statues and medals to which you idolaters pray.
cheagan 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez What part of THOU SHALT NOT don't you understand?
cheagan 6 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@cheagan This is what i meant that you read but do not understand the scripture. If God is pleased to dwell in a man made tabernacle/serpent, why cant his presence be felt in his representation & crucifixes. All Gods sanctions does not rest in ink of books, but in his words he spoke to his faithfull in all times recorded (scripture)and not (tradition) jn21:25. to think god's teaching just ends with OT and NT is not a true christian thinking and futile work to curtail mysteries heaven in books.
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez God is NOT pleased to dwell in a man-made tabernacle; He is pleased to dwell in Christ. Your error lies in the need/desire to FEEL His presence, and it is precisely this weakness that the Enemy has exploited in the RCC. If you had the Holy Ghost, you would no longer feel the need to FEEL - you would know by process of FAITH. Sola fida, boyeee.
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
He need not dwell in Christ. Because Christ is God. You dont even understand the basic Christian faith and you claim Sola Fide.
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Wow. I've seen some fancy dancing in my day, but THAT takes it. Sola fida means "by faith alone", btw. I think you mean "sola scriptura", which YES, I claim.
"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." - Col. 2:9. Is that sola scriptura enough for you? You have a man-made religion, and you are an idolater. You wouldn't know the word of God if it came down out of heaven and judged you.
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
"Enemy has exploited RCC." You forgot these verses Mt 16:18,19 "you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it." I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." All authority in heaven and on earth to RCC. RCC is 2000 yrs old. Wonder how old is your church and what is its state going to be in 200 yrs..
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Try these verses: 1 Jn. 2:18,19.
"Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. THEY WENT OUT FROM US, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that it might be made manifest that they were not all of us."
THERE'S your Roman Catholic Church in Scripture.
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
WENT OUT FROM US. That is why i still persist that you do not understand scripture even though you read. Mark8:18 Who went out from Catholic Church and revolting against it?All protestants along wit Martin Luther Calvin etc(that is why it is MANY antichrists denoting many protestant reformers pastors having different conflictingteach)1Jn 2;18 best denotes protestant churches went out communion of the CC. There is your church and pastors (antiXp) in scripture my last coment4u. Mark8:18
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Honestly. That's like ending a basketball game on a foul. I cry, "Foul!" What you're saying is that John the Apostle wrote a letter to believers some 1500 years in the future? And for 15 centuries, no one had any idea what he was talking about, because those events had yet to transpire? I guess that explains why he ...wrote it in the past tense...(?)
Do a word study on the Gk. prefix anti-. You'll be surprised to find that it DOESN'T mean "against", like most believe.
cheagan 6 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Instead, it means, "In place of" or "instead of". It is used many, many times in the NT; go ahead and find out where. It is the OFFICIAL title of every RC priest, bishop, and pope - "Vicar of Christ", whence "vicarious" in the Latin - "In the place of". And here is the heart of your religion. Until the 20th c., RC laity couldn't even partake personally in their "blessed sacrament", but had to settle for WITNESSING their priest doing it FOR THEM. Vicariously. Anti-christ!
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
So to say that people did not participate is because you dont have a good understand of neither scripture nor Mass. In last supper,if u hav read gospel. Most of verses are said by Jesus. The Apostles just sat listened n witnessed. When the apostles said mass later 1 Corth 11:17-33 everybody listened (made a few responses same as in mass, (we even hav people sleepin during Mass in Act20:9.) Regarding making vicar and anti synonyms "Are you trying to reinvent a new Biblical Greek ????
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
Comment removed
cheagan 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lionel3fernandez No - "vicar" is from the Latin (whence the RCC gets all its formal ecclesiastical terminology), "vicarius", meaning a SUBSTITUTE. "Anti" is from the Greek, and it means "instead of" or "in place of" - in other words, they are SYNONYMS. Any grade-school student can see this plainly. It is used in Mt. 2:22, where Herod ruled "IN THE PLACE OF his father"; in Lk. 11:11, "he will not give him a snake INSTEAD OF a fish"; Jas. 4:15, "INSTEAD, you ought to say, 'If the Lord wills.."
cheagan 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Now, according to RCC theology, if one does not LITERALLY eat His LITERAL flesh and LITERALLY drink His LITERAL blood, he cannot be saved. So how were all those RCs saved for all those centuries if they were denied the privilege of partaking in the sacrament? I'm not talking about "listening" to sermons, I'm saying that they were prevented from taking the eucharist and were merely allowed to WITNESS their parish priest doing it for them VICARIOUSLY! Bye-bye, RC house of cards!
cheagan 5 months ago
@cheagan
LITERALLY eat His LITERAL flesh " You sound same like Jews and other desciples in Jn 6:52,60 to which jesus answered Jn 6:53-59.
Jn 6:61 So Jesus asked them, "Did what I say make you lose faith?
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez That doesn't answer my question about the MILLIONS of RCs who NEVER tasted a host wafer in their life! How can you just wave this off? What kind of spell are you under?
For Pete's sake.
cheagan 5 months ago
@cheagan
DESCRIPTION of the NT church, not an IMPERATIVE for me to follow.
I was waiting for this answer.... You are a typical greedy protestant who twist the bible according to your lifestyle. Ok so according to you all which you do not follow are for NT church and the other which you do follow are for the entire mankind till the end of time. No wonder we have 30000+ protestant denominations...i get that; remain a protestant for ever.... no more comments
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
@cheagan
DESCRIPTION of the NT church, not an IMPERATIVE for me to follow.
I was waiting for this answer.... You are a typical greedy protestant who twist the bible according to your lifestyle. Ok so according to you all which you do not follow are for NT church and the other which you do follow are for the entire mankind till the end of time. No wonder we have 30000+ protestant denominations...i get that; remain a protestant for ever.... no more comments
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
DESCRIPTION of the NT church, not an IMPERATIVE for me to follow.
I was waiting for this answer.... You are a typical greedy protestant who twist the bible according to your lifestyle. Ok so according to you all which you do not follow are for NT church and the other which you do follow are for the entire mankind till the end of time. No wonder we have 30000+ protestant denominations...i get that; remain a protestant for ever.... no more comments
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Still not a WORD directed toward my inquiries, only emotional and sensationalistic rhetoric.
Open letter: isn't there ONE Roman Catholic who has the fortitude to answer my honest objections? Look at it this way: what if I'm a POTENTIAL Catholic? Doesn't that make you want to at least ATTEMPT to reason with me? Or is reason itself one of the things the RCC requires that you leave at the door? (Isaiah 1:18)
cheagan 5 months ago
@cheagan
Potential catholic, you will become one when you understand that your understanding is different from God's. Your ways r different from his. if you want to be so you should have your heart towards Holy spirit scripture, towards tradition, towards early churh fathers, saints and their writing, towards history of the church in all centuries (both good and bad), not just closin urself to the literal interpretation of scripture and trying to redifine XP and salvation thru inks&books
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
MILLIONS of RCs who NEVER " CC has always given communion to faithful at least during Sundays. Are you day dreaming about the church which you are going to build up ? i think you need to learn more about CC before starting to critise it. By greedy Jews i meant during Jesus' time.
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez
Cheagan -OUT.
cheagan 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez
Cheagan - OUT.
cheagan 5 months ago
@cheagan
Still not a WORD directed toward my inquiries, only emotional and sensationalistic rhetoric.
None of your post were inquiries, but were all judgements you passed on Catholic church. Also you did not express yourself to believe in the writings of the early church fathers or converts "Scott hahn or Tim staples. Nor hav u taken an effort to the documents i refered "John of damascus"
But you simple cry out sinner sinner sinner.... like the Jews who condemned Jesus
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
Chanced by another post and its comments. There you are Cheagan. You call others idiot and fool. Hah that reminds me of another verse in the bible....
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
@cheagan
Chanced by another post and its comments. There you are Cheagan. You call others idiot and fool. Very very unchristian. Hah that reminds me of another verse in the bible....Mt 5:22
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Was Jesus being unchristian when He called the Pharisees a "brood of vipers"? You are not worthy of my time in debate; you have been utterly unable to give me ANY answers or viable comments.
Your father is the devil, and your mother is a whore.
cheagan 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cheagan By the fruits shall you know the tree. By your own words you will be judged.
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
You have all the frustration and anger exhibited by those silly people when they loose a debate. They call names and become personal. I have answered all your comments but you did not receive it in you, like seeds sown in between cactus or on rocks..
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
Comment removed
cheagan 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Great. You win. Feel Better?
cheagan 5 months ago
@cheagan
Very very unchristian again. Yu are not Jesus but a simple human. So how can you call others names and still persist in the same sin you are committing without repenting. You need to learn the example of Michael the archangel. Jude 1:9. Feeling sorry for your soul.
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
Your father ...., and your mother ......
Very very unchristian again. Understand u are not Jesus but a simple human. You need to be meek and humble. So how can you call others names and still persist in the same sin you are committing without repenting. You need to learn the example of Michael the archangel. Jude 1:9. Feeling sorry for your soul.
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Michael was speaking to a being who was created above him in the angelic hierarchy; I am speaking to someone who is beneath me.
cheagan 5 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
who is beneath me..... Didnt i tell you about your ego a couple of times.... Be meek and humble like Jesus
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
Amen
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
Jeus can call Pharisees a "brood of vipers" ? Why because he does not have sin in him. Are you without sin ? Are you better than Michael the Archangel.
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
Won not me, repent or Satan will your soul
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cheagan
they were prevented from taking the eucharist...
This comment is baseless. On all sundays, according to the norm and tradition of the chruch the laity were allowed Eucharist.
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cheagan
they were prevented from taking the eucharist...
This comment is baseless. On all sundays, according to the norm and tradition of the chruch the laity were allowed Eucharist.
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
Comment removed
cheagan 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Refute THAT!
cheagan 6 months ago
@cheagan
Vicar of Christ.
jn 10:11 He is the shepherd
John 21:15-17 Simon is being assigned new shepherd by Jesus, therefore Peter is the first Vicar of Christ.
Who ever succeeds Peter becomes Vicar of Peter, who is the Vicar of Christ. Therfore, vicar of Christ.
u still not understnd Mt16:19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
keys stands4authority Rev1:18.
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
Comment removed
cheagan 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lionel3fernandez But let's not take our eye off the ball, shall we? Are you ready for your logic lesson of the day? It's easy to follow, based on the Law of Non-contradiction, wherein we find:
A=C,
B=C,
therefore A=B.
Anti-christ = INSTEAD OF Christ
Vicar of Christ = INSTEAD OF Christ,
therefore, Antichrist = Vicar of Christ, QED.
See the resemblance?
cheagan 5 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
Making my last post a little more clear. If you have not sold your property (which i bet not) and shared, i call you a Hypocrite and i dont want to talk to you again. If yes lets talk.
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Jesus said that to the rich young ruler to illustrate that he had not, in fact, kept all the commandments from his youth, as he claimed; he was holding his possessions in a higher place than his love of God - and this illustrates what we ALL as humans have in common. The man was no better than the rest of us, and just as much in need of Christ's salvation. However, I wouldn't place myself as an example, as he did that day, thus inviting the public rebuke of the Master.
cheagan 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Jesus said that to the rich young ruler to illustrate that he had not, in fact, kept all the commandments from his youth, as he claimed; he was holding his possessions in a higher place than his love of God - and this illustrates what we ALL as humans have in common. The man was no better than the rest of us, and just as much in need of Christ's salvation. However, I would not place myself as an example, as he did that day, thus inviting the public rebuke of the Master.
cheagan 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez It is just this sort of confusion that RCs and most evangelicals share - when it comes to Bible exegesis, you literalize where you should spiritualize, and you spiritualize where you should literalize. But what about the content of my posts? Don't they deserve to be addressed?
Only the Holy Ghost can open the Scriptures for you, my friend. I pray this for you now in the Name of Jesus. Amen.
cheagan 5 months ago
@cheagan
Regarding possession: You sound like the greedy Jews. So you agree that you are camel trying to pass through a needle hole. Similar to Annania and Saphira. It is the verse of the apostles to the early church, so if u really believe in the bible you have to be like the early church. If you are not like Act 4:32-34. then how can you claim that you are following what bible teaches
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez That is a DESCRIPTION of the NT church, not an IMPERATIVE for me to follow.
Good thing you're not my pastor.
cheagan 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cheagan
DESCRIPTION of the NT church, not an IMPERATIVE for me to follow.
I was waiting for this answer.... You are a typical greedy protestant who twist the bible according to your lifestyle. Ok so according to you all which you do not follow are for NT church and the other which you do follow are for the entire mankind till the end of time. No wonder we have 30000+ protestant denominations...i get that ..... no more comments
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@cheagan
Only the Holy Ghost can open the Scriptures for you".... For me it is logical to believ Holy spirit is leading a Church 2000 years old than 3000+ number of churchs with 3000+ different doctrines of faith each claimimg to be inspired by the same spirit and the same bible and most of them not even 200 years. Also learning abt life of reformers they did not exhibit any christian virtues in lives, so why should i imitiate them. Instead CC had a number of good saints with Xian virtues
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez I have never claimed to have anything in common with any "protestant" or "evangelical" denomination; if you really want to play it safe, though, you might consider becoming a Jew yourself (really - GREEDY Jews? a bit antisemitic, doncha think?). Do this: hold the book of the Law up to the mirror, and see if you fall short. My guess is: yes. Or do RCs think it counts if they "try their best"?
cheagan 5 months ago
@cheagan
Refute THAT!. I can sense anger/frustration in your post .remember telling before was my last post, but 2more answers,giving u the benefit of doubt that u r searching4truth. Two protestant converts u can refer to Scott Hahn and Tim Staples.questions for yu. You said u believe 'Sola Scriptura'. if so hav u sold everythin u hav n shared it among believers in yur chruch like apostles did n asked the early church2do? i bet not. if not i call u a hypocrit n my last post. else lets discus
lionel3fernandez 5 months ago
@lionel3fernandez Jesus said that to the rich young ruler to illustrate that he had not, in fact, kept all the commandments from his youth, as he claimed; he was holding his possessions in a higher place than his love of God - and this illustrates what we ALL as humans have in common. The man was no better than the rest of us, and just as much in need of Christ's salvation. However, I wouldn't place myself as an example, as he did that day, thus inviting the public rebuke of the Master.
cheagan 5 months ago
Comment removed
lionel3fernandez 6 months ago