Luther wanted to exclude Revelation from the Bible.When he translated the Bible he put it at the end of the NT along with James Hebrews Jude...other books he questioned. (Much as he did with the apocrophal books in the OT).Since he couldnt exclude Revelations from the Bible he decided to use it against his rivals..the Catholics. So the book which he questioned as being part of the Bible was used as an infallible proof that the Pope was the antichrist. Ironic. Church history is interesting.
@Baptistnomore I don't follower Luther. but some of Luther friends were burned at the stake. what about the dogma "you shall not kill". for goodness sake, at the time of luther the catholic church was collecting money trough some terrible indulgences practices, even some catholic writers are ashamed of it. hence the doctrine of faith alone. that even if protestants don't explain it right,
compare that with people paying money for their beloved dead.
@medusa210562 There were terrible abuses of indulgences in the Catholic church. But they were being dealt with. Luther was part of that process....in fact when he nailed his 95 theses on the door at Gutenberg...he was a faithful follower of the Pope and remained so for over a year after. There were political forces in play here too...
@Baptistnomore I believe the pope is the historical Antichrist. The papacy is followed by more people in the world than anyone else form people who don't know what their church belies.
@medusa210562 Luther wanted to remove Revelations from the bible...but he couldnt so he decided to use it in a way and interpret in a way that would damage his enemies. So he promoted the view of the Pope as the anitchrist.....
@prairiemark The fact that the papacy is the historical Antichrist is incredibly evident to me. There is no other power with such power. Such kind of power and so much. But I am not being emotional here. If is a biblical prophecy with hundreds of that correlate to prove it.
@prairiemark For example The Antichrist would change law and times. I follow the 10 commandments as in exodus 20. (please don't come back to me with a numbering sermon. I am not catholic, Jews or protestant in this regard, I just follow exodus 20). Yet the vicar of God. The papacy took the second commandment away split the 10th in 2 and changed the forth. One of the most followed man in the world did that. But millions follow him,millions who don't know the Lord.
@medusa210562 The Bible says the early Christians worshiped on the first day of the week...resurrection Sunday. If you deny this you deny 2000 years of tradition by Gods Church. Christ repeated all of the ten commandments except one. .....
Paul said to let no man judge you about keeping New Moons, holidays or Sabbaths. So if I let someone judge me on this issue I am not following the Biblical pattern.
@medusa210562 I find many Catholics dont understand Catholic teaching and they are the ones most vulnerable to proseletizing to Protestant sects or to other cults. Many revert back to the Catholic Church after becoming discouraged with the constant fighting in protestantism that results from private interpretation of Gods word.
@prairiemark Look I like to fight for what I believe. But I guaranty you or any catholic I will always respect your conscience. Freedom of conscience if the first doctrine. That is why I am not a catholic. Why did the papacy ask kings to have law as to what people believed. There was one theocracy, that was in the desert with Moses. And the law of moses was perfect. We should never stop learning from it. But we are not a theocracy any more. "Give to ceasar what is ceasar's"
@medusa210562 If you follow Catholic theology at all you know the Pope and the Catholic church allow freedom of conscience....even to people that reject its teaching.
@medusa210562 I dont have time to jump from video to video and respond to each post....but if you want to interact by private message in a respectful and friendly way I am willing. Thanks for you time and your effort to communicate.
The pope is the anti christ and the beast of rev 13 and 17. The pope changed the sabbath day gave orders to kill 50 million christians in the dark ages he even called himself the equal of Christ. daniel 7 and rev 13 said these are the things the anti christ would do and so far only the pope has done them. rev 17 also said the anti christ would sit in power with a harlot counterfit christian church which would be located in rome. The pope and the satanic illuminati groups rule the world 4 now.
I didn't ask whether there was any opposition before 1534. I asked why this poor man didn't talk about it. The Church has always been under attack. There was a time when the vast majority of bishops were Arian and believed that Christ was not divine. If it wasn't for the Church's defense of truth through the centuries ther would be no Christianity for John Macarthur to defend. His ignorance of history is breathtaking and heartbreaking. To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.
@maximiliankolbe1 Looking at church history objectively was a major factor in my journey from sectarian evangelicalism to Catholicism. If we look at the beliefs of the early church fathers like Ignatius and as ourselves....are they more like the Catholics or more like the Baptists, the answer is clear....they were Catholic. Infant baptism, real presence at communion, the role of bishops, liturgical services. Studying church history leads to Catholicism....but few will study church history.
MacArthur refers to the reformers as the authorities that dissprove Catholicism. Yet if we honestly look to Luther and Calvin we find them much closer to Catholicism than to MacArthurs antabaptist sect. They both believed that our Christian life starts at baptism as an infant, that at communion the real presence of Christ occurs , that the church interprets the Bible for the church. Both Calvin and Luther believed in the immaculate conception of Mary and a well developed maryology.
The pope is the beast of Rev13 and the vatican is the harlot church of Rev17. The pope changed the sabbath day to sunday a pagan satanic day,he gave orders to torture and kill the true christians in the dark ages 50 million in total,he called himself JESUS SUBSTITUE vicarus filii dei which is what the prophet daniel said the anti christ would dare to claim about himself. Rev17 says the harlot church sits with the anti christ on the city which lays on seven hills ROME. Put it together JESUSLOVESU
@cuvinteleluitati What twist of hermeneutics allows you to make flat statements about this? Christian scholars have struggled with Revelation and what it means for 2000 years. Luther, like other reformers wondered if Revelation should even be in the Bible as he did many other books.. But since he couldnt remove it he decided to use it to his own advantage and score points against his political and religious enemies.....so then we had the Pope as the AntiChrist and so forth. Hardly honest.
Following up on my second point I just want to add, you can be a Christian scholar all your life, writing Christian books, and focusing on publishing them, if all your doing is educating people on Christian philosophy and not helping people enough to save their souls through repentance, you are just as useful in God's eyes as a priest in the days of Jesus who condemns people with no accountability.
Secondly, MacArthur conveys the word of God through a logically interpretation whereas the Catholic Church conveys the word of God through the fear of condemnation and the need for salvation. Just by looking at the two interpretations, I would say the Catholic Church is more in touch with Christ message about humility, penance, and love. Christ never taught in a logical perspective because the technique leaves out the the emotion of having the burden of sin which is inherent in all human being
I see a clear problem with Macarthur's arguments. First, Catholics look to the Pope for spiritual guidance, we don't worship him. This is same for all Evangelists who look to MacArthur for guidance similarly, MacArthur looks to the authority you wrote the Bible for guidance. Why do we need guidance, because we are all sinners incapable of finding spiritual faith for ourselves.
@prairiemark Oh, he asked Christ to forgive him of his sins when he was a infant? And what sins did he commit? Rape, stealing, lying, homosexuallity, taking the Lord's name in vain, adultry, murder? I don't know of any "infants" that are guilty of those sins. To be Baptized is to "willing be submersed in water, for the cleansing away of your sins: to represent the death of Christ, then to be raise into a new life WITH Christ". Sprinkling of an infant only gets the baby wet......Paganism
@JesusHoldMyHand1 The vast majority of Christians today and since Christs death believe in infant baptism. The Bible teaches it parallels old testament circumcision. Infant baptism was practiced by the early church. All of the early Church Fathers practiced infant baptism except Tertulian...and he was a heretic.
@prairiemark You pick & choose what Scriptures you want to believe & follow, rejecting EVERYTHING else? Well, I'll tell you what, EVERY WORD OF THE BIBLE IS GOD-BREATHED. Since you REJECT most of His Word, you are no more following Christ than any other Muslim, Hindu or Athiest. But, I will continue praying for you to ditch your Pagan beliefs, doctrines & rituals. HE THAT HAS EARS, LET HIM HEAR. Jesus is telling you that & ONLY He hears prayers & ONLY He is GOD!!!
@JesusHoldMyHand1 Some day your knee will bow and your arrogance will end. I studied the Bible for several years at a Bible College and at a Christian liberal arts college. I am three credits short of a major in Biblical Studies. I read the Bible several times a week and am trying to improve on that. What is the standard your religion requires as far as Biblical Knowlege?
@JesusHoldMyHand1 Why did MacArthur quote Luther, Calvin and Cotton Mather as his "authorities" on why the Catholic church is wrong...yet they all believe in infant baptism as Catholics do...and actually their beliefs are closer to catholic than to what MacArthurs recently invented sect is. He doesnt mention that.
@prairiemark Why don't you ask him? He also said they didn't believe in infant baptism in the long version of this Sermon. Infants don't need to be baptized because they haven't sinned, haven't asked Christ to forgive them, nor have they REPENTED of those sins. You have to be old enough to understand that you're a sinner, accept Christ, then live for Him. NO BABY IS RESPONSIBLE enough for any of the requirements. Therefore, they are NOT Baptized in the Lord.
@JesusHoldMyHand1 The question of course was rhetorical. MacArthur is misrepresenting the beliefs of the reformers to be more like his own....which differ from both historic Catholicism and historic Protestantism. MacArthur has no historic Christianity to appeal to that is like his own sect. The apostles didnt believe like him, the early chruch fathers didnt, the reformers were not like him....so he tried to make it look like he agrees with the reformers.
@JesusHoldMyHand1 I believe the Bible too.The problem is..how do we interpret it? Can each of us have our own interpretation? What if our favorite interpretation seems to contradict other parts of the Bible. Example Look at MacARthurs tricks in interpretting tongues.I Cor 14:2 says that the person that prays in tongues prays to God. MacArthur doesnt believe that so what does he do? He adds a key word into the scriptures with no justification. He that prays to tongues prays to a (false) God.
@JesusHoldMyHand1 If he said Luther and Calvin didnt believe in infant baptism he was wrong...read them yourself. Infants need to be baptized because baptism is the NT parallel to circumsision as stated in Pauls espistles. Infants need to be baptized because they have original sin and baptism brings washing and regeneration by the Holy Spirit. Infants need to be baptized because that was the example of the early church starting in NT times.....
@JesusHoldMyHand1 You define baptism as "to be willing be submersed in the waer for the cleansing away of your sins to represent the death of Christ then to be raised into a new life with Christ" This definition is an example of a man made tradition that you use to interpret the Bible with. The dicache...written likely around 60 AD and before 100AD tells of using sprinkling and pouring as legitimate ways of baptism practiced by christians...even before the death of the apostles.
@JesusHoldMyHand1 Did you ever consider what the historic doctrine of Christianity called ORIGINAL Sin is? We dont have to sin to be guilty and sinful, we are born sinful. We are not sinful because we sin.....we sin because we are sinful. MacArthur says he believes in original sin,but he builds his theology as if he does not.
@maximiliankolbe1 The Nestorian Christians opposed the pope ...and were dealt with...Partly at the Council of Ephesus. There were others...the Montanists, Ariansists, Manicheanists, some with Gnostic tendancies....There never was a time when people didnt oppose the Church that Ghrist established. After the reformation the number of sects balooned...because each person started to think they could have a private interpretation of the Sacred Word.
@prairiemark You talk like the reformation happened because more people wanted to be protestant. Not the reformation happened because slowly slowly there was more freedom.
@medusa210562 j The desire to be free of Gods authority is often a motivation to form a new religion, or new branch of an old one. Some freedom is good, some is bad. I wonder if having many thousands of sects and subsects is good?
@prairiemark Well there have always been to situations. The terrible dark ages, and now. but Catholics speak like there have been "two situations" The beautiful dark ages and now. Man has always been sinful, but the catholic church only started to be civilized when it lost power. I have friends whom relatives were in jail during fascism in Mussolini's time for not agreeing with the catholic church. For example one of the presidents of the Italian Seventh day Adventist church was.
@medusa210562 Who provided a lot of the medical care during the dark ages? Where were the centers of learning? Which people painsakingly copied manuscripts of the scriptures? The Catholics is the answer to each.
@prairiemark About who provided a lot of the medical care during the dark ages? Very simplistic comment. Millions or Catholics of the dark ages were good christian saints and charitable Christians. THIS GOOD CATHOLICS WERE THE ONES THAT WERE BURNED AT THE STAKE, MILLIONS WERE DECLARED WITCHES, SOME WERE SAINTISTS THAT DISAGREED WITH THE VATICAN,(GOOD CATHOLIC SAINTISTS) SOME OF THIS MARTYRS HAD BEEN SOME OF THE MOST HUMBLE CHERITABLE HARD WORKING CATHOLIC PRIESTS
@medusa210562 The comments were not simplistic but salient. Medicine, educaton, transmission of the scriptures all were important roles the Catholic chuch has played...and were an expression of Christian truth impacting culture during terrible times.
@prairiemark CATHOLIC PRIESTS, CATHOLIC PRIESTS WHO HAD HELPED PORE PEOPLE ALL THEIR LIVES BUT AT THE END WERE BURNED AT THE STAKE BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T BELIEVE IN ONE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE AND WOULD NOT RECOUNT.
@prairiemark Your answer about motivation freedom etc etc sounds philosophical to me. Man cannot love God by being forced. I was catholic and guess what my grandmother used to self flagellate. Now I understand that true faith has works. BUT SELF FLAGELLATING OR SHOULD THESE BE WORKS OF LOVE.
@prairiemark By the way if I compare any of my catholic friend to me, I am the least to be free of God's authority. My wife and I are Seventh day Adventist. We pray together every morning and night. We are very involved at church. All my catholic friends who are all my relatives and friends literally only go to church for weddings and funerals. Why doesn't the catholic church excommunicate them. If they read the bible they would become protestants.
@medusa210562 The Bible says to compare ourselves to each other is not wise,especially if we want to look good.We should compare our beliefs with the scriptures and with the sacred traditions of historic Christianity.Are our beliefs in line with the ancient creeds of Christendom like the apostles creed or the nicean creed? Do we believe what the early church fathers like Polycarp and Ignatius learned from the apostles?Do we follow 2000 years of Church teaching and worship on resurrection day?
@prairiemark I have been testing my believes with the bible for about 37 years. There is not one catholic doctrine I believe in. I am not an historian but simply just think of this. At about 200 ad the Christians were being killed in the Colosseum. About 1 hundred years later people were still being killed in the Colosseum. And half of Rome was now christian. Soon the Christian church was strong and powerful and people were still being killed in the collossium
@medusa210562 The Catholic Doctrines are stated in the creeds. I believe in God the Father, maker of heaven and earth and in Jesus Christ his Son, our Lord. I believe in the Holy Spirit, Christ was born of a virgin. Christ Suffered under Pontius Pilate, he was crucified, buried....on the third day he rose from the dead. He is coming again....
I am sorry you believe none of these doctrines. But how can you study the Bible for 37 years and not conclude that at least some are true.
@medusa210562 Think of Ireneaus of Lyons who was a bishop in Europe. There was controversy about a new kind of speaking in tongues that was causing division. Ireaneaus went to the Rome for several months to seek direction on how to deal with these problems. When he came back home....most of the other bishops were beheaded. He became a head bishop somewhat by default because the others were dead.
@prairiemark What is the lesson we learn form the story of Ireneaus?( I personally don't believe in speaking in toungues.) I am not sure what you are trying to tell me.
@medusa210562 No doubt the Roman persecution of Christians was terrible. If you read the testimonies of Christians who picked up the bones of their pastors and family members who were thrown to the beasts it breaks your heart.
The Bible is a book about real people, in real history and their encounters with God. The Bible cannot be understood without historical context. Otherwise the understanding of it become subjective and meaningless. Studying the Bible alone doesnt work.
@prairiemark I study the bible in historical context. But the bible was finished before the dark ages. Anyway I am not sure what you are trying to say precisely, again. To me.
I was a catholic. All I can say would you like to discuss one catholic doctrine with me? I just finished reading on the internet the history of Jan Hus
@medusa210562 Ok, lets discuss catholic doctrine. Lets start with the Apostles Creed. I believe in one God maker of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesuse Christ. I beleive Jesus died and was raised for our sins. I believe he is coming again. I believe in forgiveness of sins through Christ.....which of these catholic doctrines would you like to discuss first?
@prairiemark Ok lets discuss doctrine. I will just tell you how my beliefs differ to begin with. Please I am not trying to be antagonist to you I am just honest. Ok I believe in a seven day creation. the catholic church believes in theistic evolution. I believe people sleep until Jesus returns. they are not in heaven or hell, or purgatory. I don't believe in an immortal soul. I believe every human who ever lived needed to be forgiven. You believe Mary never even sinned.
@medusa210562 You generalize a bit much. Some Catholics do believe in thiestic evolution, but some are more literalists about Genesis. Catholics believe Mary had a special work in her life at her conception regarding sin....but Christ is still her Savior.Special circumstances were needed for the birth of a Sinless Savior. I believe Christ did not need to be forgiven yet he was man. I guess we differ there although I thought SDA believed that too.
@prairiemark Christ did not need to be forgiven Mary did. No special circumstances were needed for the birth of a sinless savior, other then what the bible is very clear about. The wonder that Christ was human as well as God should stop Catholics stipulating about how Mary was. She was a sinful human like you and me. A saved follower of our God yes etc etc. The conception was miraculous etc etc. she was blessed. but don't make ather doctrines of it.
@prairiemark I differ from your beliefs in about 35 majior points. This makes a complete different gospel. I believe in salvation by faith alone. Olthough I don't blame catholics for not understanding this, even protestants don't explain it well. O go to far with it. It is really salvation by grace alone. And fatih and works are an equal responce. BUT NEITHER FAITH OR WORKS HAVE MERITS FOR US. if Catholics understood this they wouldn't do useless works, but only works of love.
@medusa210562 The only place in the new testament where the phrase "faith alone" is used is in James....You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. (2:24)
Gods grace flows to us through the sacraments...John is clear about this "whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him." "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." Johns students and friend like Polycarp and Ignatius believed this too
@prairiemark As I said to you we are saved by Grace alone. not faith alone. faith and works are an equal response, But neither this faith or this works produce OUR merits. if Catholics understood this they would not flagellate, do long penance when they feel guilty. The list goes on and on. but they would just produce works of love. Now I am not saying that every catholic is the same. but many are misled by catholic doctrines that makes one feel he can contribute to his salvation.
for billy graham to say that catholics are christians is what is meant to happen for the New World Order and the Anti-Christ to occur. this is prophecy. catholics unfortunately are not christians. i find that many people that i meet that are catholics only proclaim to be because of tradition and because their family is catholic but they dont really believe in it truly in their heart. get out of that religion and find the truth!
@StAugustine79 Yea and if infant baptism excuses you from the Christian faith , then all Eastern Rite believers, Anglicans, Lutherans, and so on are not Christians either. What he preaches is not only sectarian but "Cultic" as Clark Pinnock and Chuck Colson have pointed out.
@StAugustine79 Good point. However when you talk to followers of MacArthur, most of them dont know much about the those that sat under the teaching of the apostles or the other church fathers....and most of them have been taught to be very suspicious of anything written that is not part of the Bible.....historical context is something that they dont understand. The Bible is understood however MacArthur explains it to them, not according to the historical context in which it was written.
@patriciacarrasco I believe in God the Father maker of heaven and earth and in Jesus Christ his Son our Lord who was concieved by the Holy Spirit, Born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate....he was crucified, buried, and rose again. I believe in the Holy Spirit, ......who are you to tell me I am not a Christian...you are in dangerous territory.
I belive that the antichrist are most satisfied when we Christians call each other antichrist. He likes our devisions into groups of disagreement. But if we as Cristians unite into one single body, then the world will belive. Your way of doing this is simply not fruitful.
The devil is infiltrating into all relgions as to where the people are going to get fed up with such jibberish against each other's religion they will tune out and become atheists. Prophecy states that before the end of the world the church will leave the earth thus leaving evil to it.
Matthew cph 16 is saying that Jesus is the Rock, the gates of hell cannot defeat Jesus, but satan is not afraid of humans, he is afraid of Jesus. Jesus conquered sin, satan, and death. Jesus is the Rock, and Peter built his faith on Jesus.
I pray for this man may God show him the truth that the Catholic church is doing the same as him in praising God. Unfortunately, he has to put odwn another christian church to evangelize others to his thoughts
@MagicMartin5 If you ask any Catholic if they are Christian, 9 out of 10 will respond "No I am A Catholic"
Listen to the charges John MacArthur & all the other historical Christians make against the Pope and then READ the bible & History to see if it is true. DON'T just BLINDLY follow the Popes who are but men.
Can you find me WHERE in the bible we are commanded to create a monolithic, man-centered institution that exalts men & sets a man of all beings as the head of the church?
@Dorakuwel I believe you are looking for Matthew 16 "And you shall be called Peter and upon this rock I will build my church" I believe that this shows Christ making Peter the Pope who was to create a church (notice how Jesus never said 'and through these men a book will be made' he was more interested in teaching and in the creation fo the church) The Pope along with the church is supposed to be the representative of christ on Earth, the salt of the Earth, a light to those who walk in darkness
@MagicMartin5 I am NOT seeing anything in that passage that commands us to build this monolithic man-centered institution of political power that is the Roman Catholic 'church'. You would think the LORD would be a bit more explicit if He was going to make Peter the seat of power for a human run political institution, given the absolute certainty of human institutions becoming corrupted sooner or later.
Where are the words from Jesus setting out the power structure & rules for this institution?
@Dorakuwel It is not man-centered it is Christ centered we are called the body of Christ because Christ is our head. And I believe he was specific when he said upon this rock I will build my church. He gave the apostles the authority and he created the power structure by telling only Peter (the 1st pope) that upon him I would build my church. I also dont believe that Christ would allow his church to be wrong for 1500 years before someone came along and "fixed" it.
Even if Jesus gave Peter all the authroity you claim, there is nothing in Scripture to say such power was to be given to any SUCCESSORS. In fact, no mention of successors is mentioned in Scripture. Even Matthew 16:18 says nothing about sucessors. If Peter was the first Pope, then he was the only one!
BTW the true church consist of those who are saved and secured according to Jesus' work on the cross. "For by grace are ye saved through faith, and not of yourselves, it is the gift of God" Eph 2:8
@AchillesShield Friend, you can find in the Bible a parable told by Christ which says that in the true church the wheat will be with the weeds, the saints will be with the sinners. They are to be together until the last judgement when they will be seperated. (Matthew 13:23-30) Churches aren't meant to be clubs for the elite, they are hospitals for sinners.
The word 'church' comes from the Greek word 'ekklesia', a 'called-out assembly'. It has two meaning in the Bible: one, a LOCAL church, and two, the whole community of believers, those 'called out' to salvation through faith in Christ's work on the cross. There in NOTHING in the Bible that commands a hierarchy where one assembly lords it over another. There have always been 'local' assemblies that gather to worship Christ, and there have always been saved people. Christ did not "fail his church".
@Dorakuwel while some people (since people are sinners) have abused this power that shouldnt put down my beliefs. Judge my beliefs not humans (which my beliefs show are sinners and can make mistakes)
John Hagee doesn't realise the irony of all this? "A man who deludes other people by degrees comes to delude himself". I don't suppose John Hagee considers himself to be infallable with what he is advocating?
Baptist Confession on the church 26.4, "...the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming."
@oldsoulify --The Baptist konfession sounds a lot like the accusation toward Moses from the people of Korah: "Why do you exalt hourself above the people? We are holy enough".
@Ni1234ck You are a smart man. You would have been killed had you been born in Europe (including England) 500 years ago. So would this speaker. He would have been burned to the stake or put on the rack. This is the reason the Pilgrims came to America and look what they built out of nothing. That is God's work and now America has to find itself again because these Islamist Vatican assassins want to destroy it along with Israel. God Bless - fight the vicar of Christ.
@Ni1234ck All men have done abominable things... this does not mean that God cannot accomplish his will through them...i.e. King David, King Solomon, and many many more... So even though luther was foolish in his antisemitism, God still used him to break the normalcy of the perversion that was the church....if we had to be perfect for God to use us, then none of us would be used right?
YES SIR, THERE IS SOME THRUTH IN YOUR WORDS. YET I SOMETIME FEEL THAT THE WAY THEY TREAT LUTHER IS LIKE A SECOND MOSES-AND THIS IS NOT HIS POSITION TO MY UNDERSTANDING.
I wish he would read the reformers on Mary.....Calvin, Zwingly, even Wesley 200 years later believed in the ever virgin Mary.
Perhaps he should read Luther on baptism regeneration and Calvin on Infant Baptism or Cotton Mather on all the blessings he received at his infant baptism. He uses selective passages and honors these leaders when they agree with him....yet they were far closer to being Catholics than MacArthur admits.
with the power of ‘loosing and binding in heaven and on earth’ [Matt. 16:19]?" (Demurrer Against the Heretics 22 [A.D. 200])"[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’. . . What kind of man are you, subverting and changing what was the manifest intent of the Lord when he conferred this personally
@petrusprimus Problem is the binding and loosing in Matt 16 and 18 is the same power. Reread your own quote and other church fathers. We find missing vatican I's interpretation of it. All apostles had and shared equal authority. You can't get around Eph 2:20 and neither can Vatican I in it's novel claims in 1870ad.
@NY1054Cool Hi, you are ignoring what I am saying and want me to play your silly games of responding to your cowcrapping remarks that aren't worth the tp they were spun from. Catholicism was around from the beginning & founded by Christ, PERIOD.The defiant Pharisee who refuses to investigate this will be DAMNED. As far as the old hash that Peter isn't the rock in Matt 16, HIS NAME WAS CHANGED 2 "CEPHAS", MEANING "ROCK". How many times do u need to read it before u understand? Please get a life
@petrusprimus Last time I read Acts I saw the local church of Jersualem being founded and not the Church of Rome. We dont see or know of the church of Rome from Acts 2 to 15 at all. In fact we see Christianity starting in what is known as the Eastern Church rather than the Western Church. What you have is really RCC historical revisionism. Peter's name being changed does not equal being made head of the entire visible church on the earth. Bad logical fallacy and question begging that is.
@petrusprimus You are told what to believe and never studied the church fathers themselves while I have. I own their writings along with a large number of theological works from all perspectives. Roman Catholicism doctrinally is really post 1054ad. By the way, no episcopacy in the Church of Rome until after 140ad. Thats something present day rcc so called apologist ignore.
@davidkgriffith Hi David. Good question. The Pharisees were rebuked for their UNOFFICIAL teachings WHICH HAD NO AUTHORITY. You can find teachings of Popes that were not to the universal Church or were not on faith and morals that some call questionable. That being said, just as those who spoke WITH AUTHORITY from THE SEAT OF MOSES needed to be heeded (as Christ COMMANDED), so too those who spoke from THE SEAT OF PETER who was given THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN needed to be heeded. The
@petrusprimus We dont find the " chair of Peter " mentioned in any of Peter's Epistles. I guess he was unaware of it. :) All the apostles were told they would have the power of blinding and loosing " in Matthew 18:18 and evident all were the founders and never Peter alone in Eph 2:20. Peter an apostle by gift and an elder by office is what Peter himself says. :) No one in the Chair of Moses was infallible either. Guess Rome overlooked that. :)
@NY1054Cool@davidkgriffith. Hi.Neither do you have the formula on how to get married. That didn't stop me from getting married (a sacrament from God, as St Paul himself says) and KNOWING that I was being married CORRECTLY. Why? Because I know the PREACHING of the apostles was just as AUTHORITATIVE as their WRITING. Of course ALL of the apostles had authority to bind and loose (as the first bishops). IN FACT, my wife's ancestors in INDIA WERE BAPTIZED by ST THOMAS THE APOSTLE HIMSELF. I have
@petrusprimus Never knew there was a formula. :) lol Too bad nothing of it being a sacarement either.:) Peter was not in charge of Acts 15 council. James was chair person there. The early church fathers did not hold to the Vatican I interpretation of Matt 16:18. Big problem there. They held in general that it was the Person of Peter's faith . Sure enough Eastern Orthodox rejects the claims RCC makes of Peter too.
@NY1054Cool Hi. I really don't see why I should proceed with a conversation with an ignorant infidel: 1. Marriage was given BY GOD to man, and consent of the will, among other things, must be present for the marriage TO BE VALID. 2. Eph 5:32 (Marriage) is a great mystery (IE. SACRAMENTUM, from the Latin) in reference to Christ and to His Church. Your gratuitious accusations about what the Bible and Church fathers say ARE ANNOYING. Tertullian:"Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter,
@petrusprimus Marriage is Biblical but it is not a sacarement. Nothing in Eph 5:32 for that concept. Tertullian rejected the RCC view of Matt 16:18 as well. He sure did not believe the Bishop of Rome was head of the visible church on the earth.
been TO THE VERY PLACE where ST THOMAS was buried, and where he placed a pole THAT MIRACULOUSLY PREVENTED the CATHOLIC CHURCH in CHENNAI FROM BEING DESTROYED BY THE TSUNAMI. Your claim that Peter alone was never a founder is A MANIFEST LIE, as Christ Himself used THE SINGULAR in Matt 16:16-20, calling Peter THE ROCK on which the Church would be built and then giving *HIM ALONE* THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. This is why Peter has the final authority in the Council of Jerusalem in Acts.
The disobedience of Protestants is manifest with your speaking of how speaking with authority does not mean you are infallible. THE POINT IS, that you MUST OBEY the one WHOM HAS BEEN PUT in a position of power BY GOD. It truly amazes me how in a place like INDIA no one even questions that ROMAN CATHOLICS have the faith of Christ and the Apostles. ALL of the churches founded by St Thomas were and ARE Catholic, with statues, paintings, veneration of the Saints, and the Holy Sacrifice of
@petrusprimus Sorry I am not an offical member of any Protestant sect . Try again. It is the Roman See that is in sin. Catholic Church does not equate Roman Catholicism. That is not how it was used either historically. I guess more revisionism of Rome on that. I owe the Pope nothing he is not my authority. He is not head of the entire visible church on earth. :) RCC does not teach the doctrines of the apostles. :)
@petrusprimus The distinctions between dulia, hyperdulia and latria are mere human inventions and shows the extent of covering up what is essentially idol worship which Scripture condemns. It's no better than the incident with the golden calf. :(
@NY1054Cool the Mass. The HERETICAL, PERVERTED, LIFELESS fabrication of Luther was invented 1500 years later STICKS OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB when compared to the RICH TREASURY of life and MIRACLE giving religion that GOD ALMIGHTY gave from the beginning when the apostles were sent throughout the world TO PREACH THE TRUE GOSPEL AND SPREAD THE TRUE FAITH. It is SO SAD to me how a Protestant would forsake salvation because he does not trust that God can help him obey His Holy Commandments.
@petrusprimus Last time I checked Protestants were called separated brethern.Oh well. I guess RCC rather have those of Islam as worship and adoring God with them rathe than with Protestants. :) Trent denied the Gospel of Scripture.
@petrusprimus Doctrine of transsubstantiation in it's full completed formulation is post 900ad. Works before and after justification are not meriterious at all even if done by God's grace. Man does not cooperate with God's grace to merit eternal life as the RCC teaches. Gen 15:6 and Romans 3 to 5 is basic enough for a proper understanding. :) RCC claims apostolic tradition yet it has none. :)
upon Peter? Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys" (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).What kind of man are you, subverting and changing what was the manifest intent of the Lord when he conferred this personally upon Peter? Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys" (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).The Letter of Clement to James"Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith,
and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter" (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]). As far as your accusations against the Holy See, NO, antichrist/antipope Benedict 16 is neither Pope nor a Catholic. so DON'T accuse Catholicism of false worship if the WHORE OF BABYLON has assumed its name. Please take your UNBELIEF somewhere else. You make miracles A WASTE.
@petrusprimus Letter of Clement to James does not refer to the RCC. Try again. I did not call the Pope an antichrist. He is a mere false teacher. As far as Rev 17 is concerned I hold it is all the false elements within professing Christinity that is the false church there. Catholic Church refers to all Christians in the world and not the mere Roman See alone. Do you agree with point 841 of the CCC book ? And you call me an infidel ? :) lol Rome denies the Gospel. Thats my core issue.
@petrusprimus Lesson 1 of the church fathers. Most held that the Rock of Matt 16:18 is Peter's confession of faith another view held that the Rock is Christ himself. Both held by over 40 church fathers in rejection to Vatican I in 1870ad. Anachronism is preventing you from seeing the truth of what I am saying.
MENTAL BLOCK for the Protestant, unfortunately, is that OBEDIENCE IS NECESSARY AT ALL. I suppose they think that they can somehow borrow St Peter's keys, bring them to LOWE's and MAKE A COPY SO THEY CAN GET INTO HEAVEN FOR THEMSELVES. NO SUCH THING HAPPENS IN CATHOLICISM. One must OBEY Christ and Peter, along with the APOSTLES. AS CHRIST SAID, "HE WHO **HEARS** YOU (APOSTLES), HEARS ME. HE WHO REJECTS **YOU (APOSTLES) REJECTS **ME**. Good luck rejecting the teachings of the Apostles and
@petrusprimus i agree that those who love god will be obedient. but not out of an necessity to be made righteous but rather a response to being made righteous because of what jesus has already done. isn't the issue really righteousness? if my righteousness is dependent upon my works, would that not contradict paul's words in romans 2:29, 3:19-25, 3:27-28? i am all for rebuking people who call themselves believers yet live a different way (paul does the same thing), but to say that one's
@Dystopiologist ITS HAVING THE FAITHFUL CALL PRIESTS "FATHER", DO U CALL JESUS CHRIST A LAWBREAKER, AS MARTIN LUTHER CALLED HIM AN ADULTERER? DID CHRIST call ABRAHAM "FATHER" in Luke 16? WAS IT NOT ENOUGHT THAT PAUL CALLED HIMSELF "FATHER" 1 Cor. 4:14–15. Or that John called FATHERS 1 John 2:13–14? What do you call your OWN FATHER, "MALE PARENT FIGURE"? I will not respond 2 your idiot claim that Catholics "worship" Mary. God will be the avenger 4 you lying about what His Church teaches
@davidkgriffith Yes. Read Matthew 23:2 Just as Moses (and even the Pharisees) had authority to speak for God and to bind the people's conscience, a TRUE Pope has authority to FAITHFULLY INTERPRET the deposit of Faith and bind people's consciences to the PROPER interpretation and DISCIPLINES in keeping with the teachings of Christ. Christ was not, however, speaking of some magical "chair". The "seat" represented a teaching that was being given AUTHORITATIVELY 4 the whole Church on faith & morals
I hereby formally challenge HERETIC John Macarthur to a debate on whether his Church of damnation (the Protestant, rebellious church) or the Church of Salvation, the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church is the True Church that preaches the True gospel. Anyone who rejects the plain words of Jesus Christ that he must eat the real Body of Christ to have salvation and be baptized by real water to be cleansed of his sins will burn in the fire made for unbelievers. Macarthurs, Cameron, or Comfort
@petrusprimus The practices of the Catholic church cannot stand up against the Gospels; the Gospels were given to us to measure all things by. The Catholic church worships and prays to saints and mary who are no more than mere men. Only God is worthy of worship. The Catholic church was set up and maintained for no other reason than for the Nobility to hold the population to ransom so they could hold control. Where in the bilbe does it say that one needs a pope to talk to god for u? U see the
@ginjaninja1988 ITS HAVING THE FAITHFUL CALL PRIESTS "FATHER", DO U CALL JESUS CHRIST A LAWBREAKER, AS MARTIN LUTHER CALLED HIM AN ADULTERER? DID CHRIST call ABRAHAM "FATHER" in Luke 16? WAS IT NOT ENOUGHT THAT PAUL CALLED HIMSELF "FATHER" 1 Cor. 4:14–15. Or that John called FATHERS 1 John 2:13–14? What do you call your OWN FATHER, "MALE PARENT FIGURE"? I will not respond 2 your idiot claim that Catholics "worship" Mary. God will be the avenger 4 you lying about what His Church teaches
@ginjaninja1988 Ginja, you are COMPLETELY not following me. I've already shown you that you have 2 CHOICES. 1. You can BELIEVE JESUS CHRIST FOR HIS WORD when he said over TEN TIMES that WE NEEDED TO EAT HIS TRUE FLESH AND DRINK HIS TRUE BLOOD. Christ achieved this through TRANSUBSTANTIATION, which you see at the account in the last supper: THIS IS MY BODY. TAKE AND EAT. THIS IS MY BLOOD. TAKE AND DRINK. NOWHERE DOES IT SAY "REPRESENTS" OR "SYMBOLIZES". If you are so obstinate to want to believe
@petrusprimus Catholic church is exactly what the pre Jesus Jewish religion was; the same type of religious ceremony and structure that Jesus challenged and stood against. All you need is relationship with christ, to study the Gospels for yourself, to know the power and loving touch of his holy spirit. The Protestants are not the rebellious church; rather the Catholic church is the rebellious church set up for power, greed and control, what did the catholic church bring? murder, oppression
@ginjaninja1988 Ginja, dude, what in the heck are you talking about? Are you a dualist who says that the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament are DIFFERENT GODS??? Dude, I don't believe in a schizo religion. The same God who COMMANDED the rituals in the Old Testament is the VERY SAME GOD who COMMANDS rituals in the New Testament. As far as INDIVIDUALS who go by the name of Catholic lusting after power, greed and control, YOU ARE CORRECT. Do you indite CHRIST since he
@ginjaninja1988 PERSONALLY CHOSE Judas (who lusted after power, money and murdered?). Christ chose sinful men to build His Church, but at the WORD INCARNATE said in Matt 16:18-20, THE GATES OF HELL would not prevail against His Church. I really AM NOT interested in a MAN-ORIENTED religion, where I sit and listen to a HERETIC preach at me for 45 minutes, or bow my head to his TRADITIONS OF MEN. I will believe in the WORD OF GOD, and THE CHURCH, who faithful transmits the COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.
@ginjaninja1988 FAITH IT IS *IMPOSSIBLE* TO PLEASE GOD. I SUGGEST YOU BEG GOD FOR THE GIFT OF FAITH. Let the life of Martin Luther be a warning to you of the wickedness of Protestantism. It's friend, Freemasonry, now runs the USA and is swiftly bringing it to the Antichrist New World Order, an order of nonsense where FORCE is the only logic.
@petrusprimus Read John 14:15 onwards. It is clear that the Father sent us the Holy Spirit to be our teacher and to guide us in our walk with God; to teach us the scripture. Here also says that he is inside us and we are in him! And for Mary worship..... I think that statues, prayers, adoration, even the devotion of the lest Pope to Mary = Clearly WORSHIP... Catholicism is the same as all other heresey like the free masons, prosperity and social gospels and the new age movements. Simply they
@ginjaninja1988 WHERE DOES IT SAY that God sent the Holy Ghost to be GINJANINJA's teacher and guide??? That passage is written for BELIEVERS in the words of Jesus Christ and MEMBERS of His Church. I've already PROVEN you DON'T follow the scriptures, so claiming the Holy Ghost MAKES YOU follow the (proper interpretation of the) scriptures is NONSENSE. Devotion and worship are two different things, silly. IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW, FREEMASONRY is the FRIEND of Protestantism, only it's FLIP SIDE.
@petrusprimus ACCUSATION that we must WORK for our salvation, READ YOUR BIBLE. What part of WORK OUT YOUR SALVATION WITH FEAR AND TREMBLING *DON'T* YOU UNDERSTAND??? Philippians 2v12-13 Please list the parts of the Bible you reject or the parts you would like to turn into HERESIES. THEN we can have a more intelligent conversation. And YES, I believe Christ's sacrificed SAVED ME, but not in the heretical way that you understand.
@petrusprimus refuse that Jesus's sacrifice on the cross saved us from our sins and rather that we must work for salvation..... Thats the first fact that Satan always attacks... and I tell u that the Catholic chruch is deeply involved in the new world order. Maybe u shuld listen to this sermon by John Macarthur.
@ginjaninja1988 They BOTH HAVE IN COMMON a rejection that the Revelation of Jesus Christ is UNIMPORTANT. Masons SAY this, PROTESTANTS *ACT* like this. This is why you are still arguing with me about being a Christian when you have already REJECTED the plain words of Jesus Christ about His Body BEING TRUE FLESH and his Blood BEING TRUE DRINK. You reject His Precept to partake of His Body and Blood because you pick and choose which teachings to follow. SORRY, that's NOT Christian. As far as your
@ginjaninja1988 and FINALLY, just because some FREEMASON like ANTIPOPE Benedict 16 SAYS he's a Catholic, THAT DOESN'T MEAN HE IS-- anymore than A FREEMASON like BARRACK OBAMA saying he is a "Christian" makes him a Christian.
@ginjaninja1988 FINALLY, BUD- I HAVE READ the (REAL) Holy Bible multiple times and I know how PROTESTANTS MOCK the holy words of Christ by EATING CRACKERS AND DRINKING GRAPE JUICE than consuming the very BODY AND BLOOD of Christ, as CHRIST COMMANDED. Christ told the APOSTLES. WHOEVER HEARS YOU HEARS ME, WHOEVER REJECTS YOU, REJECTS ME.
If you know ANYTHING about the KEYS OF THE KINGDOM, you know you MUST obey Peter and his Successors (who have the keys)WHO BIND ON EARTH WHAT IS BOUND IN HEAVEN
@petrusprimus Communion is not in what exactly you eat but rather it is a rememberance of what Christ did for us. If you want to be really authentic sit down and have a meal to remember Christ. Why do you think that communion turns to the blood and flesh? There is no biblical truth behind this. Infact that would be canabilism. As in many things the catholic church does not stand up to the Gospel and is instead based upon the dictate of man. Jesus is the way and the truth, not the pope
@ginjaninja1988 Where the HECK did Christ say it was ONLY a REMEMBRANCE. Read JOHN 6. What part of UNLESS YOU EAT MY BODY AND DRINK MY BLOOD YOU WILL NOT HAVE LIFE WITHIN YOU do you NOT understand? Christ says MY BODY IS FOOD INDEED BY BLOOD IS DRINK INDEED. Are you calling CHRIST A LIAR (HE WHO SAID, "THIS *IS* MY BODY"??? If you are, you are A BLASPHEMER, JUST LIKE MARTIN LUTHER WHO CALLED CHRIST AN ADULTERER!!! I HONOR MARY, AS CHRIST DID, WHILE YOU DISHONOR HIM WITH YOUR BLASPHEMIES!
@petrusprimus The message of John 6 is not "eat my flesh and drink my blood" rather Jesus was illustrating to the people he was teaching that to live a person must eat to satisfy physical hunger and sustain physical life and just like this a person must invite Jesus into their lives everyday to satisfy their spiritual hunger and spiritual life. A spiritual hunger that can only be satisfied by personal relationship with Christ, as for communion being the consumption of the body and blood
@ginjaninja1988 and PLEASE stop making SILLY accusations like "Catholics WORSHIP MARY. That is a STUPID heresy. We HONOR her and ASK HER INTERCESSION, as is COMMANDED in Holy Scripture by the 4th commandment and by St Paul. If you are SINCERELY seeking answers to these questions and want to be OBEDIENT than believe what is CONVENIENT, feel free to correspond with me. THANK YOU.
@petrusprimus Ah it pains me to hear you say such things. You don not need an intermediatry between you and Christ; not in Mary the Clergy or the Pope! We as CHRISTIANS have the authority to read and decide upon scripture, when you think Jesus was giving authority to Peter he was giving authority to all believers. I have seen many many miricles with my own eyes done by the Holy Spirit in the name of Jesus himself! Infact this very morning my mother prayed for my knee which i damaged training
@ginjaninja1988 The shame about Protestantism is that Protestants think they know the WHOLE Bible because the "Holy Spirit" teaches them. No, it isn't the Holy Spirit who causes a Protestant to "change his mind" about his interpretation concerning the "Word of God". Nor is it the "Holy Spirit" who has been the author of over 30,000 Godless sects of Protestantism, all teaching different things. St. James says, "Pray for one another, that you may be healed." That is called INTERCESSION. The
Luther wanted to exclude Revelation from the Bible.When he translated the Bible he put it at the end of the NT along with James Hebrews Jude...other books he questioned. (Much as he did with the apocrophal books in the OT).Since he couldnt exclude Revelations from the Bible he decided to use it against his rivals..the Catholics. So the book which he questioned as being part of the Bible was used as an infallible proof that the Pope was the antichrist. Ironic. Church history is interesting.
Baptistnomore 4 days ago
@Baptistnomore I don't follower Luther. but some of Luther friends were burned at the stake. what about the dogma "you shall not kill". for goodness sake, at the time of luther the catholic church was collecting money trough some terrible indulgences practices, even some catholic writers are ashamed of it. hence the doctrine of faith alone. that even if protestants don't explain it right,
compare that with people paying money for their beloved dead.
medusa210562 4 days ago
@medusa210562 There were terrible abuses of indulgences in the Catholic church. But they were being dealt with. Luther was part of that process....in fact when he nailed his 95 theses on the door at Gutenberg...he was a faithful follower of the Pope and remained so for over a year after. There were political forces in play here too...
prairiemark 4 days ago
@Baptistnomore I believe the pope is the historical Antichrist. The papacy is followed by more people in the world than anyone else form people who don't know what their church belies.
medusa210562 4 days ago
@medusa210562 Luther wanted to remove Revelations from the bible...but he couldnt so he decided to use it in a way and interpret in a way that would damage his enemies. So he promoted the view of the Pope as the anitchrist.....
prairiemark 4 days ago
@prairiemark The fact that the papacy is the historical Antichrist is incredibly evident to me. There is no other power with such power. Such kind of power and so much. But I am not being emotional here. If is a biblical prophecy with hundreds of that correlate to prove it.
medusa210562 3 days ago
@medusa210562 There is no Biblical "proof" for a wild belief like that. It is a convenient view if you hate the Catholic Church.
prairiemark 3 days ago
@prairiemark For example The Antichrist would change law and times. I follow the 10 commandments as in exodus 20. (please don't come back to me with a numbering sermon. I am not catholic, Jews or protestant in this regard, I just follow exodus 20). Yet the vicar of God. The papacy took the second commandment away split the 10th in 2 and changed the forth. One of the most followed man in the world did that. But millions follow him,millions who don't know the Lord.
medusa210562 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 The Bible says the early Christians worshiped on the first day of the week...resurrection Sunday. If you deny this you deny 2000 years of tradition by Gods Church. Christ repeated all of the ten commandments except one. .....
Paul said to let no man judge you about keeping New Moons, holidays or Sabbaths. So if I let someone judge me on this issue I am not following the Biblical pattern.
prairiemark 3 days ago
@medusa210562 I find many Catholics dont understand Catholic teaching and they are the ones most vulnerable to proseletizing to Protestant sects or to other cults. Many revert back to the Catholic Church after becoming discouraged with the constant fighting in protestantism that results from private interpretation of Gods word.
prairiemark 4 days ago
@prairiemark Look I like to fight for what I believe. But I guaranty you or any catholic I will always respect your conscience. Freedom of conscience if the first doctrine. That is why I am not a catholic. Why did the papacy ask kings to have law as to what people believed. There was one theocracy, that was in the desert with Moses. And the law of moses was perfect. We should never stop learning from it. But we are not a theocracy any more. "Give to ceasar what is ceasar's"
medusa210562 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 If you follow Catholic theology at all you know the Pope and the Catholic church allow freedom of conscience....even to people that reject its teaching.
prairiemark 3 days ago
@medusa210562 I dont have time to jump from video to video and respond to each post....but if you want to interact by private message in a respectful and friendly way I am willing. Thanks for you time and your effort to communicate.
prairiemark 4 days ago
@prairiemark ok we can talk privatelly, subscribe to me. You can see me playing the clarinet and the saxophone. Maybe you will enjoy that. God bless
medusa210562 3 days ago
The pope is the anti christ and the beast of rev 13 and 17. The pope changed the sabbath day gave orders to kill 50 million christians in the dark ages he even called himself the equal of Christ. daniel 7 and rev 13 said these are the things the anti christ would do and so far only the pope has done them. rev 17 also said the anti christ would sit in power with a harlot counterfit christian church which would be located in rome. The pope and the satanic illuminati groups rule the world 4 now.
cuvinteleluitati 4 days ago
I didn't ask whether there was any opposition before 1534. I asked why this poor man didn't talk about it. The Church has always been under attack. There was a time when the vast majority of bishops were Arian and believed that Christ was not divine. If it wasn't for the Church's defense of truth through the centuries ther would be no Christianity for John Macarthur to defend. His ignorance of history is breathtaking and heartbreaking. To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.
maximiliankolbe1 1 week ago
@maximiliankolbe1 Looking at church history objectively was a major factor in my journey from sectarian evangelicalism to Catholicism. If we look at the beliefs of the early church fathers like Ignatius and as ourselves....are they more like the Catholics or more like the Baptists, the answer is clear....they were Catholic. Infant baptism, real presence at communion, the role of bishops, liturgical services. Studying church history leads to Catholicism....but few will study church history.
prairiemark 5 days ago
MacArthur refers to the reformers as the authorities that dissprove Catholicism. Yet if we honestly look to Luther and Calvin we find them much closer to Catholicism than to MacArthurs antabaptist sect. They both believed that our Christian life starts at baptism as an infant, that at communion the real presence of Christ occurs , that the church interprets the Bible for the church. Both Calvin and Luther believed in the immaculate conception of Mary and a well developed maryology.
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The pope is the beast of Rev13 and the vatican is the harlot church of Rev17. The pope changed the sabbath day to sunday a pagan satanic day,he gave orders to torture and kill the true christians in the dark ages 50 million in total,he called himself JESUS SUBSTITUE vicarus filii dei which is what the prophet daniel said the anti christ would dare to claim about himself. Rev17 says the harlot church sits with the anti christ on the city which lays on seven hills ROME. Put it together JESUSLOVESU
cuvinteleluitati 2 weeks ago
@cuvinteleluitati What twist of hermeneutics allows you to make flat statements about this? Christian scholars have struggled with Revelation and what it means for 2000 years. Luther, like other reformers wondered if Revelation should even be in the Bible as he did many other books.. But since he couldnt remove it he decided to use it to his own advantage and score points against his political and religious enemies.....so then we had the Pope as the AntiChrist and so forth. Hardly honest.
prairiemark 6 days ago
Following up on my second point I just want to add, you can be a Christian scholar all your life, writing Christian books, and focusing on publishing them, if all your doing is educating people on Christian philosophy and not helping people enough to save their souls through repentance, you are just as useful in God's eyes as a priest in the days of Jesus who condemns people with no accountability.
atime07 1 month ago
Secondly, MacArthur conveys the word of God through a logically interpretation whereas the Catholic Church conveys the word of God through the fear of condemnation and the need for salvation. Just by looking at the two interpretations, I would say the Catholic Church is more in touch with Christ message about humility, penance, and love. Christ never taught in a logical perspective because the technique leaves out the the emotion of having the burden of sin which is inherent in all human being
atime07 1 month ago
I see a clear problem with Macarthur's arguments. First, Catholics look to the Pope for spiritual guidance, we don't worship him. This is same for all Evangelists who look to MacArthur for guidance similarly, MacArthur looks to the authority you wrote the Bible for guidance. Why do we need guidance, because we are all sinners incapable of finding spiritual faith for ourselves.
atime07 1 month ago
Oh, Cotton Mather is quoted as an authority...but he spoke of all the blessings he recieved at baptsim as an infant!
prairiemark 3 months ago
@prairiemark Oh, he asked Christ to forgive him of his sins when he was a infant? And what sins did he commit? Rape, stealing, lying, homosexuallity, taking the Lord's name in vain, adultry, murder? I don't know of any "infants" that are guilty of those sins. To be Baptized is to "willing be submersed in water, for the cleansing away of your sins: to represent the death of Christ, then to be raise into a new life WITH Christ". Sprinkling of an infant only gets the baby wet......Paganism
JesusHoldMyHand1 3 months ago
@JesusHoldMyHand1 The vast majority of Christians today and since Christs death believe in infant baptism. The Bible teaches it parallels old testament circumcision. Infant baptism was practiced by the early church. All of the early Church Fathers practiced infant baptism except Tertulian...and he was a heretic.
prairiemark 3 months ago
@prairiemark You pick & choose what Scriptures you want to believe & follow, rejecting EVERYTHING else? Well, I'll tell you what, EVERY WORD OF THE BIBLE IS GOD-BREATHED. Since you REJECT most of His Word, you are no more following Christ than any other Muslim, Hindu or Athiest. But, I will continue praying for you to ditch your Pagan beliefs, doctrines & rituals. HE THAT HAS EARS, LET HIM HEAR. Jesus is telling you that & ONLY He hears prayers & ONLY He is GOD!!!
JesusHoldMyHand1 3 months ago
@JesusHoldMyHand1 Some day your knee will bow and your arrogance will end. I studied the Bible for several years at a Bible College and at a Christian liberal arts college. I am three credits short of a major in Biblical Studies. I read the Bible several times a week and am trying to improve on that. What is the standard your religion requires as far as Biblical Knowlege?
prairiemark 3 months ago
@JesusHoldMyHand1 I believe the Sacred Word is God Breathed.....
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
@JesusHoldMyHand1 Why did MacArthur quote Luther, Calvin and Cotton Mather as his "authorities" on why the Catholic church is wrong...yet they all believe in infant baptism as Catholics do...and actually their beliefs are closer to catholic than to what MacArthurs recently invented sect is. He doesnt mention that.
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
@prairiemark Why don't you ask him? He also said they didn't believe in infant baptism in the long version of this Sermon. Infants don't need to be baptized because they haven't sinned, haven't asked Christ to forgive them, nor have they REPENTED of those sins. You have to be old enough to understand that you're a sinner, accept Christ, then live for Him. NO BABY IS RESPONSIBLE enough for any of the requirements. Therefore, they are NOT Baptized in the Lord.
JesusHoldMyHand1 2 weeks ago
@JesusHoldMyHand1 The question of course was rhetorical. MacArthur is misrepresenting the beliefs of the reformers to be more like his own....which differ from both historic Catholicism and historic Protestantism. MacArthur has no historic Christianity to appeal to that is like his own sect. The apostles didnt believe like him, the early chruch fathers didnt, the reformers were not like him....so he tried to make it look like he agrees with the reformers.
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
@prairiemark John MacArthur Believes the Bible.
JesusHoldMyHand1 2 weeks ago
@JesusHoldMyHand1 I believe the Bible too.The problem is..how do we interpret it? Can each of us have our own interpretation? What if our favorite interpretation seems to contradict other parts of the Bible. Example Look at MacARthurs tricks in interpretting tongues.I Cor 14:2 says that the person that prays in tongues prays to God. MacArthur doesnt believe that so what does he do? He adds a key word into the scriptures with no justification. He that prays to tongues prays to a (false) God.
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
@JesusHoldMyHand1 If he said Luther and Calvin didnt believe in infant baptism he was wrong...read them yourself. Infants need to be baptized because baptism is the NT parallel to circumsision as stated in Pauls espistles. Infants need to be baptized because they have original sin and baptism brings washing and regeneration by the Holy Spirit. Infants need to be baptized because that was the example of the early church starting in NT times.....
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
prairiemark 1 week ago
@JesusHoldMyHand1 You define baptism as "to be willing be submersed in the waer for the cleansing away of your sins to represent the death of Christ then to be raised into a new life with Christ" This definition is an example of a man made tradition that you use to interpret the Bible with. The dicache...written likely around 60 AD and before 100AD tells of using sprinkling and pouring as legitimate ways of baptism practiced by christians...even before the death of the apostles.
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
@JesusHoldMyHand1 Did you ever consider what the historic doctrine of Christianity called ORIGINAL Sin is? We dont have to sin to be guilty and sinful, we are born sinful. We are not sinful because we sin.....we sin because we are sinful. MacArthur says he believes in original sin,but he builds his theology as if he does not.
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
why are there no examples of people opposing the pope before 1534?
maximiliankolbe1 3 months ago
@maximiliankolbe1 The Nestorian Christians opposed the pope ...and were dealt with...Partly at the Council of Ephesus. There were others...the Montanists, Ariansists, Manicheanists, some with Gnostic tendancies....There never was a time when people didnt oppose the Church that Ghrist established. After the reformation the number of sects balooned...because each person started to think they could have a private interpretation of the Sacred Word.
prairiemark 1 week ago
@prairiemark You talk like the reformation happened because more people wanted to be protestant. Not the reformation happened because slowly slowly there was more freedom.
medusa210562 6 days ago
@medusa210562 j The desire to be free of Gods authority is often a motivation to form a new religion, or new branch of an old one. Some freedom is good, some is bad. I wonder if having many thousands of sects and subsects is good?
prairiemark 6 days ago
@prairiemark Well there have always been to situations. The terrible dark ages, and now. but Catholics speak like there have been "two situations" The beautiful dark ages and now. Man has always been sinful, but the catholic church only started to be civilized when it lost power. I have friends whom relatives were in jail during fascism in Mussolini's time for not agreeing with the catholic church. For example one of the presidents of the Italian Seventh day Adventist church was.
medusa210562 6 days ago
@medusa210562 Who provided a lot of the medical care during the dark ages? Where were the centers of learning? Which people painsakingly copied manuscripts of the scriptures? The Catholics is the answer to each.
prairiemark 5 days ago
@prairiemark About who provided a lot of the medical care during the dark ages? Very simplistic comment. Millions or Catholics of the dark ages were good christian saints and charitable Christians. THIS GOOD CATHOLICS WERE THE ONES THAT WERE BURNED AT THE STAKE, MILLIONS WERE DECLARED WITCHES, SOME WERE SAINTISTS THAT DISAGREED WITH THE VATICAN,(GOOD CATHOLIC SAINTISTS) SOME OF THIS MARTYRS HAD BEEN SOME OF THE MOST HUMBLE CHERITABLE HARD WORKING CATHOLIC PRIESTS
medusa210562 5 days ago
@medusa210562 Helping the poor as been and is a large part of Catholic ministry.
prairiemark 5 days ago
@medusa210562 The comments were not simplistic but salient. Medicine, educaton, transmission of the scriptures all were important roles the Catholic chuch has played...and were an expression of Christian truth impacting culture during terrible times.
prairiemark 4 days ago
@prairiemark The comments were simplistic because every one then was catholic, good and bad.
medusa210562 4 days ago
@prairiemark CATHOLIC PRIESTS, CATHOLIC PRIESTS WHO HAD HELPED PORE PEOPLE ALL THEIR LIVES BUT AT THE END WERE BURNED AT THE STAKE BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T BELIEVE IN ONE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE AND WOULD NOT RECOUNT.
medusa210562 5 days ago
@prairiemark Your answer about motivation freedom etc etc sounds philosophical to me. Man cannot love God by being forced. I was catholic and guess what my grandmother used to self flagellate. Now I understand that true faith has works. BUT SELF FLAGELLATING OR SHOULD THESE BE WORKS OF LOVE.
medusa210562 6 days ago
@prairiemark By the way if I compare any of my catholic friend to me, I am the least to be free of God's authority. My wife and I are Seventh day Adventist. We pray together every morning and night. We are very involved at church. All my catholic friends who are all my relatives and friends literally only go to church for weddings and funerals. Why doesn't the catholic church excommunicate them. If they read the bible they would become protestants.
medusa210562 6 days ago
@medusa210562 The Bible says to compare ourselves to each other is not wise,especially if we want to look good.We should compare our beliefs with the scriptures and with the sacred traditions of historic Christianity.Are our beliefs in line with the ancient creeds of Christendom like the apostles creed or the nicean creed? Do we believe what the early church fathers like Polycarp and Ignatius learned from the apostles?Do we follow 2000 years of Church teaching and worship on resurrection day?
prairiemark 5 days ago
@prairiemark I have been testing my believes with the bible for about 37 years. There is not one catholic doctrine I believe in. I am not an historian but simply just think of this. At about 200 ad the Christians were being killed in the Colosseum. About 1 hundred years later people were still being killed in the Colosseum. And half of Rome was now christian. Soon the Christian church was strong and powerful and people were still being killed in the collossium
medusa210562 5 days ago
@medusa210562 The Catholic Doctrines are stated in the creeds. I believe in God the Father, maker of heaven and earth and in Jesus Christ his Son, our Lord. I believe in the Holy Spirit, Christ was born of a virgin. Christ Suffered under Pontius Pilate, he was crucified, buried....on the third day he rose from the dead. He is coming again....
I am sorry you believe none of these doctrines. But how can you study the Bible for 37 years and not conclude that at least some are true.
prairiemark 5 days ago
@medusa210562 Think of Ireneaus of Lyons who was a bishop in Europe. There was controversy about a new kind of speaking in tongues that was causing division. Ireaneaus went to the Rome for several months to seek direction on how to deal with these problems. When he came back home....most of the other bishops were beheaded. He became a head bishop somewhat by default because the others were dead.
prairiemark 5 days ago
@prairiemark What is the lesson we learn form the story of Ireneaus?( I personally don't believe in speaking in toungues.) I am not sure what you are trying to tell me.
medusa210562 5 days ago
@medusa210562 No doubt the Roman persecution of Christians was terrible. If you read the testimonies of Christians who picked up the bones of their pastors and family members who were thrown to the beasts it breaks your heart.
The Bible is a book about real people, in real history and their encounters with God. The Bible cannot be understood without historical context. Otherwise the understanding of it become subjective and meaningless. Studying the Bible alone doesnt work.
prairiemark 5 days ago
@prairiemark I study the bible in historical context. But the bible was finished before the dark ages. Anyway I am not sure what you are trying to say precisely, again. To me.
I was a catholic. All I can say would you like to discuss one catholic doctrine with me? I just finished reading on the internet the history of Jan Hus
medusa210562 5 days ago
@medusa210562 Ok, lets discuss catholic doctrine. Lets start with the Apostles Creed. I believe in one God maker of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesuse Christ. I beleive Jesus died and was raised for our sins. I believe he is coming again. I believe in forgiveness of sins through Christ.....which of these catholic doctrines would you like to discuss first?
prairiemark 5 days ago
@prairiemark Ok lets discuss doctrine. I will just tell you how my beliefs differ to begin with. Please I am not trying to be antagonist to you I am just honest. Ok I believe in a seven day creation. the catholic church believes in theistic evolution. I believe people sleep until Jesus returns. they are not in heaven or hell, or purgatory. I don't believe in an immortal soul. I believe every human who ever lived needed to be forgiven. You believe Mary never even sinned.
medusa210562 4 days ago
@medusa210562 You generalize a bit much. Some Catholics do believe in thiestic evolution, but some are more literalists about Genesis. Catholics believe Mary had a special work in her life at her conception regarding sin....but Christ is still her Savior.Special circumstances were needed for the birth of a Sinless Savior. I believe Christ did not need to be forgiven yet he was man. I guess we differ there although I thought SDA believed that too.
prairiemark 4 days ago
@prairiemark Christ did not need to be forgiven Mary did. No special circumstances were needed for the birth of a sinless savior, other then what the bible is very clear about. The wonder that Christ was human as well as God should stop Catholics stipulating about how Mary was. She was a sinful human like you and me. A saved follower of our God yes etc etc. The conception was miraculous etc etc. she was blessed. but don't make ather doctrines of it.
medusa210562 4 days ago
@prairiemark I differ from your beliefs in about 35 majior points. This makes a complete different gospel. I believe in salvation by faith alone. Olthough I don't blame catholics for not understanding this, even protestants don't explain it well. O go to far with it. It is really salvation by grace alone. And fatih and works are an equal responce. BUT NEITHER FAITH OR WORKS HAVE MERITS FOR US. if Catholics understood this they wouldn't do useless works, but only works of love.
medusa210562 4 days ago
@medusa210562 The only place in the new testament where the phrase "faith alone" is used is in James....You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. (2:24)
Gods grace flows to us through the sacraments...John is clear about this "whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him." "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." Johns students and friend like Polycarp and Ignatius believed this too
prairiemark 4 days ago
@prairiemark As I said to you we are saved by Grace alone. not faith alone. faith and works are an equal response, But neither this faith or this works produce OUR merits. if Catholics understood this they would not flagellate, do long penance when they feel guilty. The list goes on and on. but they would just produce works of love. Now I am not saying that every catholic is the same. but many are misled by catholic doctrines that makes one feel he can contribute to his salvation.
medusa210562 4 days ago
for billy graham to say that catholics are christians is what is meant to happen for the New World Order and the Anti-Christ to occur. this is prophecy. catholics unfortunately are not christians. i find that many people that i meet that are catholics only proclaim to be because of tradition and because their family is catholic but they dont really believe in it truly in their heart. get out of that religion and find the truth!
patriciacarrasco 5 months ago
@patriciacarrasco If Catholics are not christians, then the apostolic fathers were not christians.
StAugustine79 3 months ago
@StAugustine79 Yea and if infant baptism excuses you from the Christian faith , then all Eastern Rite believers, Anglicans, Lutherans, and so on are not Christians either. What he preaches is not only sectarian but "Cultic" as Clark Pinnock and Chuck Colson have pointed out.
prairiemark 3 months ago
@StAugustine79 Good point. However when you talk to followers of MacArthur, most of them dont know much about the those that sat under the teaching of the apostles or the other church fathers....and most of them have been taught to be very suspicious of anything written that is not part of the Bible.....historical context is something that they dont understand. The Bible is understood however MacArthur explains it to them, not according to the historical context in which it was written.
prairiemark 1 week ago
@patriciacarrasco I believe in God the Father maker of heaven and earth and in Jesus Christ his Son our Lord who was concieved by the Holy Spirit, Born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate....he was crucified, buried, and rose again. I believe in the Holy Spirit, ......who are you to tell me I am not a Christian...you are in dangerous territory.
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
AVENUEOFLIGHT DOT COM
Avenueoflight 6 months ago
crosstheborder. org/america
the seat of the anti-christ is alive and well
FirstAmendmentRadio 6 months ago
I belive that the antichrist are most satisfied when we Christians call each other antichrist. He likes our devisions into groups of disagreement. But if we as Cristians unite into one single body, then the world will belive. Your way of doing this is simply not fruitful.
maximjaruta 9 months ago
Comment removed
dcglascock 8 months ago
you have no idea how wrong you are. the scriptures lay it out as clear as day. the pope is an antichrist figure.
resourceas 7 months ago
@resourceas It is not the scripture that teaches that, but the tradition you use to interpret Gods word. The error lies in your traditions.
prairiemark 2 weeks ago
The devil is infiltrating into all relgions as to where the people are going to get fed up with such jibberish against each other's religion they will tune out and become atheists. Prophecy states that before the end of the world the church will leave the earth thus leaving evil to it.
g4martinez 10 months ago
This Man Is One Bold Brother! "Culturally Speaking" John MacArthur is my Nigga!
chacetony 10 months ago
Matthew cph 16 is saying that Jesus is the Rock, the gates of hell cannot defeat Jesus, but satan is not afraid of humans, he is afraid of Jesus. Jesus conquered sin, satan, and death. Jesus is the Rock, and Peter built his faith on Jesus.
bornagainsaint1 1 year ago
I pray for this man may God show him the truth that the Catholic church is doing the same as him in praising God. Unfortunately, he has to put odwn another christian church to evangelize others to his thoughts
MagicMartin5 1 year ago
@MagicMartin5 If you ask any Catholic if they are Christian, 9 out of 10 will respond "No I am A Catholic"
Listen to the charges John MacArthur & all the other historical Christians make against the Pope and then READ the bible & History to see if it is true. DON'T just BLINDLY follow the Popes who are but men.
Can you find me WHERE in the bible we are commanded to create a monolithic, man-centered institution that exalts men & sets a man of all beings as the head of the church?
Dorakuwel 1 year ago
@Dorakuwel I believe you are looking for Matthew 16 "And you shall be called Peter and upon this rock I will build my church" I believe that this shows Christ making Peter the Pope who was to create a church (notice how Jesus never said 'and through these men a book will be made' he was more interested in teaching and in the creation fo the church) The Pope along with the church is supposed to be the representative of christ on Earth, the salt of the Earth, a light to those who walk in darkness
MagicMartin5 1 year ago
@MagicMartin5 I am NOT seeing anything in that passage that commands us to build this monolithic man-centered institution of political power that is the Roman Catholic 'church'. You would think the LORD would be a bit more explicit if He was going to make Peter the seat of power for a human run political institution, given the absolute certainty of human institutions becoming corrupted sooner or later.
Where are the words from Jesus setting out the power structure & rules for this institution?
Dorakuwel 1 year ago
@Dorakuwel It is not man-centered it is Christ centered we are called the body of Christ because Christ is our head. And I believe he was specific when he said upon this rock I will build my church. He gave the apostles the authority and he created the power structure by telling only Peter (the 1st pope) that upon him I would build my church. I also dont believe that Christ would allow his church to be wrong for 1500 years before someone came along and "fixed" it.
MagicMartin5 1 year ago
Even if Jesus gave Peter all the authroity you claim, there is nothing in Scripture to say such power was to be given to any SUCCESSORS. In fact, no mention of successors is mentioned in Scripture. Even Matthew 16:18 says nothing about sucessors. If Peter was the first Pope, then he was the only one!
BTW the true church consist of those who are saved and secured according to Jesus' work on the cross. "For by grace are ye saved through faith, and not of yourselves, it is the gift of God" Eph 2:8
AchillesShield 4 months ago
@AchillesShield Friend, you can find in the Bible a parable told by Christ which says that in the true church the wheat will be with the weeds, the saints will be with the sinners. They are to be together until the last judgement when they will be seperated. (Matthew 13:23-30) Churches aren't meant to be clubs for the elite, they are hospitals for sinners.
MagicMartin5 4 months ago
The word 'church' comes from the Greek word 'ekklesia', a 'called-out assembly'. It has two meaning in the Bible: one, a LOCAL church, and two, the whole community of believers, those 'called out' to salvation through faith in Christ's work on the cross. There in NOTHING in the Bible that commands a hierarchy where one assembly lords it over another. There have always been 'local' assemblies that gather to worship Christ, and there have always been saved people. Christ did not "fail his church".
AchillesShield 4 months ago
@Dorakuwel while some people (since people are sinners) have abused this power that shouldnt put down my beliefs. Judge my beliefs not humans (which my beliefs show are sinners and can make mistakes)
MagicMartin5 1 year ago
John Hagee doesn't realise the irony of all this? "A man who deludes other people by degrees comes to delude himself". I don't suppose John Hagee considers himself to be infallable with what he is advocating?
mattnashisgay 1 year ago
Has not MacArthur read the statements of Vatican II on the secular power of the Pope and the primacy of conscience in Christian conversion?
pharmfarm59538 1 year ago
Baptist Confession on the church 26.4, "...the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming."
oldsoulify 1 year ago
@oldsoulify --The Baptist konfession sounds a lot like the accusation toward Moses from the people of Korah: "Why do you exalt hourself above the people? We are holy enough".
WayOfTheMaster454 1 year ago
@WayOfTheMaster454 And your comment was completely selfless? ;-) God is exalted in truth, that's all that matters.
oldsoulify 1 year ago
I NEITHER BELIEVE IN THE POPE NOR IN MARTIN LUTHER FOR BOTH DID ABOMINABLE THINGS.
I NEED NOT MENTION THE ABOMINABLE THINGS WHAT THE POPES DID-IT KNOWN EVEN TO THE CATHOLICS.
AND LUTHER WAS ANTISEMITE TOO.
I ONLY HAVE TO BELIEVE IN JESUS AND HIS FATHER.
Ni1234ck 1 year ago
@Ni1234ck You are a smart man. You would have been killed had you been born in Europe (including England) 500 years ago. So would this speaker. He would have been burned to the stake or put on the rack. This is the reason the Pilgrims came to America and look what they built out of nothing. That is God's work and now America has to find itself again because these Islamist Vatican assassins want to destroy it along with Israel. God Bless - fight the vicar of Christ.
clarkewi 1 year ago
@Ni1234ck All men have done abominable things... this does not mean that God cannot accomplish his will through them...i.e. King David, King Solomon, and many many more... So even though luther was foolish in his antisemitism, God still used him to break the normalcy of the perversion that was the church....if we had to be perfect for God to use us, then none of us would be used right?
armystrong3305 1 year ago
@armystrong3305
YES SIR, THERE IS SOME THRUTH IN YOUR WORDS. YET I SOMETIME FEEL THAT THE WAY THEY TREAT LUTHER IS LIKE A SECOND MOSES-AND THIS IS NOT HIS POSITION TO MY UNDERSTANDING.
Ni1234ck 1 year ago
Comment removed
Ni1234ck 1 year ago
I wish he would read the reformers on Mary.....Calvin, Zwingly, even Wesley 200 years later believed in the ever virgin Mary.
Perhaps he should read Luther on baptism regeneration and Calvin on Infant Baptism or Cotton Mather on all the blessings he received at his infant baptism. He uses selective passages and honors these leaders when they agree with him....yet they were far closer to being Catholics than MacArthur admits.
pharmfarm59538 1 year ago
@pharmfarm59538 Well they obviously got them bits wrong then didn't they =)
jondea0 1 year ago
@jondea0 No....they were just continuing to believe Historic Biblical Christianity.
pharmfarm59538 1 year ago
with the power of ‘loosing and binding in heaven and on earth’ [Matt. 16:19]?" (Demurrer Against the Heretics 22 [A.D. 200])"[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’. . . What kind of man are you, subverting and changing what was the manifest intent of the Lord when he conferred this personally
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Problem is the binding and loosing in Matt 16 and 18 is the same power. Reread your own quote and other church fathers. We find missing vatican I's interpretation of it. All apostles had and shared equal authority. You can't get around Eph 2:20 and neither can Vatican I in it's novel claims in 1870ad.
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
@NY1054Cool Hi, you are ignoring what I am saying and want me to play your silly games of responding to your cowcrapping remarks that aren't worth the tp they were spun from. Catholicism was around from the beginning & founded by Christ, PERIOD.The defiant Pharisee who refuses to investigate this will be DAMNED. As far as the old hash that Peter isn't the rock in Matt 16, HIS NAME WAS CHANGED 2 "CEPHAS", MEANING "ROCK". How many times do u need to read it before u understand? Please get a life
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Last time I read Acts I saw the local church of Jersualem being founded and not the Church of Rome. We dont see or know of the church of Rome from Acts 2 to 15 at all. In fact we see Christianity starting in what is known as the Eastern Church rather than the Western Church. What you have is really RCC historical revisionism. Peter's name being changed does not equal being made head of the entire visible church on the earth. Bad logical fallacy and question begging that is.
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
@petrusprimus You are told what to believe and never studied the church fathers themselves while I have. I own their writings along with a large number of theological works from all perspectives. Roman Catholicism doctrinally is really post 1054ad. By the way, no episcopacy in the Church of Rome until after 140ad. Thats something present day rcc so called apologist ignore.
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
Comment removed
davidkgriffith 1 year ago
@davidkgriffith Hi David. Good question. The Pharisees were rebuked for their UNOFFICIAL teachings WHICH HAD NO AUTHORITY. You can find teachings of Popes that were not to the universal Church or were not on faith and morals that some call questionable. That being said, just as those who spoke WITH AUTHORITY from THE SEAT OF MOSES needed to be heeded (as Christ COMMANDED), so too those who spoke from THE SEAT OF PETER who was given THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN needed to be heeded. The
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus We dont find the " chair of Peter " mentioned in any of Peter's Epistles. I guess he was unaware of it. :) All the apostles were told they would have the power of blinding and loosing " in Matthew 18:18 and evident all were the founders and never Peter alone in Eph 2:20. Peter an apostle by gift and an elder by office is what Peter himself says. :) No one in the Chair of Moses was infallible either. Guess Rome overlooked that. :)
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
@NY1054Cool @davidkgriffith. Hi.Neither do you have the formula on how to get married. That didn't stop me from getting married (a sacrament from God, as St Paul himself says) and KNOWING that I was being married CORRECTLY. Why? Because I know the PREACHING of the apostles was just as AUTHORITATIVE as their WRITING. Of course ALL of the apostles had authority to bind and loose (as the first bishops). IN FACT, my wife's ancestors in INDIA WERE BAPTIZED by ST THOMAS THE APOSTLE HIMSELF. I have
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Never knew there was a formula. :) lol Too bad nothing of it being a sacarement either.:) Peter was not in charge of Acts 15 council. James was chair person there. The early church fathers did not hold to the Vatican I interpretation of Matt 16:18. Big problem there. They held in general that it was the Person of Peter's faith . Sure enough Eastern Orthodox rejects the claims RCC makes of Peter too.
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
@NY1054Cool Hi. I really don't see why I should proceed with a conversation with an ignorant infidel: 1. Marriage was given BY GOD to man, and consent of the will, among other things, must be present for the marriage TO BE VALID. 2. Eph 5:32 (Marriage) is a great mystery (IE. SACRAMENTUM, from the Latin) in reference to Christ and to His Church. Your gratuitious accusations about what the Bible and Church fathers say ARE ANNOYING. Tertullian:"Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter,
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Marriage is Biblical but it is not a sacarement. Nothing in Eph 5:32 for that concept. Tertullian rejected the RCC view of Matt 16:18 as well. He sure did not believe the Bishop of Rome was head of the visible church on the earth.
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
been TO THE VERY PLACE where ST THOMAS was buried, and where he placed a pole THAT MIRACULOUSLY PREVENTED the CATHOLIC CHURCH in CHENNAI FROM BEING DESTROYED BY THE TSUNAMI. Your claim that Peter alone was never a founder is A MANIFEST LIE, as Christ Himself used THE SINGULAR in Matt 16:16-20, calling Peter THE ROCK on which the Church would be built and then giving *HIM ALONE* THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. This is why Peter has the final authority in the Council of Jerusalem in Acts.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
The disobedience of Protestants is manifest with your speaking of how speaking with authority does not mean you are infallible. THE POINT IS, that you MUST OBEY the one WHOM HAS BEEN PUT in a position of power BY GOD. It truly amazes me how in a place like INDIA no one even questions that ROMAN CATHOLICS have the faith of Christ and the Apostles. ALL of the churches founded by St Thomas were and ARE Catholic, with statues, paintings, veneration of the Saints, and the Holy Sacrifice of
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Sorry I am not an offical member of any Protestant sect . Try again. It is the Roman See that is in sin. Catholic Church does not equate Roman Catholicism. That is not how it was used either historically. I guess more revisionism of Rome on that. I owe the Pope nothing he is not my authority. He is not head of the entire visible church on earth. :) RCC does not teach the doctrines of the apostles. :)
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
@petrusprimus The distinctions between dulia, hyperdulia and latria are mere human inventions and shows the extent of covering up what is essentially idol worship which Scripture condemns. It's no better than the incident with the golden calf. :(
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
@NY1054Cool the Mass. The HERETICAL, PERVERTED, LIFELESS fabrication of Luther was invented 1500 years later STICKS OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB when compared to the RICH TREASURY of life and MIRACLE giving religion that GOD ALMIGHTY gave from the beginning when the apostles were sent throughout the world TO PREACH THE TRUE GOSPEL AND SPREAD THE TRUE FAITH. It is SO SAD to me how a Protestant would forsake salvation because he does not trust that God can help him obey His Holy Commandments.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Last time I checked Protestants were called separated brethern.Oh well. I guess RCC rather have those of Islam as worship and adoring God with them rathe than with Protestants. :) Trent denied the Gospel of Scripture.
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Doctrine of transsubstantiation in it's full completed formulation is post 900ad. Works before and after justification are not meriterious at all even if done by God's grace. Man does not cooperate with God's grace to merit eternal life as the RCC teaches. Gen 15:6 and Romans 3 to 5 is basic enough for a proper understanding. :) RCC claims apostolic tradition yet it has none. :)
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
upon Peter? Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys" (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).What kind of man are you, subverting and changing what was the manifest intent of the Lord when he conferred this personally upon Peter? Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys" (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).The Letter of Clement to James"Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith,
petrusprimus 1 year ago
and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter" (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]). As far as your accusations against the Holy See, NO, antichrist/antipope Benedict 16 is neither Pope nor a Catholic. so DON'T accuse Catholicism of false worship if the WHORE OF BABYLON has assumed its name. Please take your UNBELIEF somewhere else. You make miracles A WASTE.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Letter of Clement to James does not refer to the RCC. Try again. I did not call the Pope an antichrist. He is a mere false teacher. As far as Rev 17 is concerned I hold it is all the false elements within professing Christinity that is the false church there. Catholic Church refers to all Christians in the world and not the mere Roman See alone. Do you agree with point 841 of the CCC book ? And you call me an infidel ? :) lol Rome denies the Gospel. Thats my core issue.
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Lesson 1 of the church fathers. Most held that the Rock of Matt 16:18 is Peter's confession of faith another view held that the Rock is Christ himself. Both held by over 40 church fathers in rejection to Vatican I in 1870ad. Anachronism is preventing you from seeing the truth of what I am saying.
NY1054Cool 1 year ago
MENTAL BLOCK for the Protestant, unfortunately, is that OBEDIENCE IS NECESSARY AT ALL. I suppose they think that they can somehow borrow St Peter's keys, bring them to LOWE's and MAKE A COPY SO THEY CAN GET INTO HEAVEN FOR THEMSELVES. NO SUCH THING HAPPENS IN CATHOLICISM. One must OBEY Christ and Peter, along with the APOSTLES. AS CHRIST SAID, "HE WHO **HEARS** YOU (APOSTLES), HEARS ME. HE WHO REJECTS **YOU (APOSTLES) REJECTS **ME**. Good luck rejecting the teachings of the Apostles and
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@davidkgriffith getting into HEAVEN. I have a hard time understanding HOW YOU CAN REJECT CHRIST YET DWELL WITH HIM FOR ALL ETERNITY.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus i agree that those who love god will be obedient. but not out of an necessity to be made righteous but rather a response to being made righteous because of what jesus has already done. isn't the issue really righteousness? if my righteousness is dependent upon my works, would that not contradict paul's words in romans 2:29, 3:19-25, 3:27-28? i am all for rebuking people who call themselves believers yet live a different way (paul does the same thing), but to say that one's
davidkgriffith 1 year ago
@petrusprimus salvation is dependent upon works is contrary to salvation being dependent upon god's grace.
davidkgriffith 1 year ago
'Just quoting a bunch of heretics.
Dystopiologist 1 year ago
@Dystopiologist ITS HAVING THE FAITHFUL CALL PRIESTS "FATHER", DO U CALL JESUS CHRIST A LAWBREAKER, AS MARTIN LUTHER CALLED HIM AN ADULTERER? DID CHRIST call ABRAHAM "FATHER" in Luke 16? WAS IT NOT ENOUGHT THAT PAUL CALLED HIMSELF "FATHER" 1 Cor. 4:14–15. Or that John called FATHERS 1 John 2:13–14? What do you call your OWN FATHER, "MALE PARENT FIGURE"? I will not respond 2 your idiot claim that Catholics "worship" Mary. God will be the avenger 4 you lying about what His Church teaches
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus
.
When did I ever have a problem with calling priests "father"? When did I ever claim that Catholics "worship" Mary?
.
I never said these things. I think that you're confused, friend.
Dystopiologist 1 year ago
@davidkgriffith Yes. Read Matthew 23:2 Just as Moses (and even the Pharisees) had authority to speak for God and to bind the people's conscience, a TRUE Pope has authority to FAITHFULLY INTERPRET the deposit of Faith and bind people's consciences to the PROPER interpretation and DISCIPLINES in keeping with the teachings of Christ. Christ was not, however, speaking of some magical "chair". The "seat" represented a teaching that was being given AUTHORITATIVELY 4 the whole Church on faith & morals
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus didn't jesus rebuke the pharisees for their teaching?
davidkgriffith 1 year ago
I hereby formally challenge HERETIC John Macarthur to a debate on whether his Church of damnation (the Protestant, rebellious church) or the Church of Salvation, the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church is the True Church that preaches the True gospel. Anyone who rejects the plain words of Jesus Christ that he must eat the real Body of Christ to have salvation and be baptized by real water to be cleansed of his sins will burn in the fire made for unbelievers. Macarthurs, Cameron, or Comfort
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus The practices of the Catholic church cannot stand up against the Gospels; the Gospels were given to us to measure all things by. The Catholic church worships and prays to saints and mary who are no more than mere men. Only God is worthy of worship. The Catholic church was set up and maintained for no other reason than for the Nobility to hold the population to ransom so they could hold control. Where in the bilbe does it say that one needs a pope to talk to god for u? U see the
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 ITS HAVING THE FAITHFUL CALL PRIESTS "FATHER", DO U CALL JESUS CHRIST A LAWBREAKER, AS MARTIN LUTHER CALLED HIM AN ADULTERER? DID CHRIST call ABRAHAM "FATHER" in Luke 16? WAS IT NOT ENOUGHT THAT PAUL CALLED HIMSELF "FATHER" 1 Cor. 4:14–15. Or that John called FATHERS 1 John 2:13–14? What do you call your OWN FATHER, "MALE PARENT FIGURE"? I will not respond 2 your idiot claim that Catholics "worship" Mary. God will be the avenger 4 you lying about what His Church teaches
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 Ginja, you are COMPLETELY not following me. I've already shown you that you have 2 CHOICES. 1. You can BELIEVE JESUS CHRIST FOR HIS WORD when he said over TEN TIMES that WE NEEDED TO EAT HIS TRUE FLESH AND DRINK HIS TRUE BLOOD. Christ achieved this through TRANSUBSTANTIATION, which you see at the account in the last supper: THIS IS MY BODY. TAKE AND EAT. THIS IS MY BLOOD. TAKE AND DRINK. NOWHERE DOES IT SAY "REPRESENTS" OR "SYMBOLIZES". If you are so obstinate to want to believe
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Catholic church is exactly what the pre Jesus Jewish religion was; the same type of religious ceremony and structure that Jesus challenged and stood against. All you need is relationship with christ, to study the Gospels for yourself, to know the power and loving touch of his holy spirit. The Protestants are not the rebellious church; rather the Catholic church is the rebellious church set up for power, greed and control, what did the catholic church bring? murder, oppression
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 Ginja, dude, what in the heck are you talking about? Are you a dualist who says that the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament are DIFFERENT GODS??? Dude, I don't believe in a schizo religion. The same God who COMMANDED the rituals in the Old Testament is the VERY SAME GOD who COMMANDS rituals in the New Testament. As far as INDIVIDUALS who go by the name of Catholic lusting after power, greed and control, YOU ARE CORRECT. Do you indite CHRIST since he
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 PERSONALLY CHOSE Judas (who lusted after power, money and murdered?). Christ chose sinful men to build His Church, but at the WORD INCARNATE said in Matt 16:18-20, THE GATES OF HELL would not prevail against His Church. I really AM NOT interested in a MAN-ORIENTED religion, where I sit and listen to a HERETIC preach at me for 45 minutes, or bow my head to his TRADITIONS OF MEN. I will believe in the WORD OF GOD, and THE CHURCH, who faithful transmits the COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
Comment removed
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 FAITH IT IS *IMPOSSIBLE* TO PLEASE GOD. I SUGGEST YOU BEG GOD FOR THE GIFT OF FAITH. Let the life of Martin Luther be a warning to you of the wickedness of Protestantism. It's friend, Freemasonry, now runs the USA and is swiftly bringing it to the Antichrist New World Order, an order of nonsense where FORCE is the only logic.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Read John 14:15 onwards. It is clear that the Father sent us the Holy Spirit to be our teacher and to guide us in our walk with God; to teach us the scripture. Here also says that he is inside us and we are in him! And for Mary worship..... I think that statues, prayers, adoration, even the devotion of the lest Pope to Mary = Clearly WORSHIP... Catholicism is the same as all other heresey like the free masons, prosperity and social gospels and the new age movements. Simply they
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 WHERE DOES IT SAY that God sent the Holy Ghost to be GINJANINJA's teacher and guide??? That passage is written for BELIEVERS in the words of Jesus Christ and MEMBERS of His Church. I've already PROVEN you DON'T follow the scriptures, so claiming the Holy Ghost MAKES YOU follow the (proper interpretation of the) scriptures is NONSENSE. Devotion and worship are two different things, silly. IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW, FREEMASONRY is the FRIEND of Protestantism, only it's FLIP SIDE.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus ACCUSATION that we must WORK for our salvation, READ YOUR BIBLE. What part of WORK OUT YOUR SALVATION WITH FEAR AND TREMBLING *DON'T* YOU UNDERSTAND??? Philippians 2v12-13 Please list the parts of the Bible you reject or the parts you would like to turn into HERESIES. THEN we can have a more intelligent conversation. And YES, I believe Christ's sacrificed SAVED ME, but not in the heretical way that you understand.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus refuse that Jesus's sacrifice on the cross saved us from our sins and rather that we must work for salvation..... Thats the first fact that Satan always attacks... and I tell u that the Catholic chruch is deeply involved in the new world order. Maybe u shuld listen to this sermon by John Macarthur.
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 They BOTH HAVE IN COMMON a rejection that the Revelation of Jesus Christ is UNIMPORTANT. Masons SAY this, PROTESTANTS *ACT* like this. This is why you are still arguing with me about being a Christian when you have already REJECTED the plain words of Jesus Christ about His Body BEING TRUE FLESH and his Blood BEING TRUE DRINK. You reject His Precept to partake of His Body and Blood because you pick and choose which teachings to follow. SORRY, that's NOT Christian. As far as your
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 and FINALLY, just because some FREEMASON like ANTIPOPE Benedict 16 SAYS he's a Catholic, THAT DOESN'T MEAN HE IS-- anymore than A FREEMASON like BARRACK OBAMA saying he is a "Christian" makes him a Christian.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
Comment removed
davidkgriffith 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@petrusprimus so do you believe the pope is infallable (sp) when speaking from his seat?
davidkgriffith 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 FINALLY, BUD- I HAVE READ the (REAL) Holy Bible multiple times and I know how PROTESTANTS MOCK the holy words of Christ by EATING CRACKERS AND DRINKING GRAPE JUICE than consuming the very BODY AND BLOOD of Christ, as CHRIST COMMANDED. Christ told the APOSTLES. WHOEVER HEARS YOU HEARS ME, WHOEVER REJECTS YOU, REJECTS ME.
If you know ANYTHING about the KEYS OF THE KINGDOM, you know you MUST obey Peter and his Successors (who have the keys)WHO BIND ON EARTH WHAT IS BOUND IN HEAVEN
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Communion is not in what exactly you eat but rather it is a rememberance of what Christ did for us. If you want to be really authentic sit down and have a meal to remember Christ. Why do you think that communion turns to the blood and flesh? There is no biblical truth behind this. Infact that would be canabilism. As in many things the catholic church does not stand up to the Gospel and is instead based upon the dictate of man. Jesus is the way and the truth, not the pope
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 Where the HECK did Christ say it was ONLY a REMEMBRANCE. Read JOHN 6. What part of UNLESS YOU EAT MY BODY AND DRINK MY BLOOD YOU WILL NOT HAVE LIFE WITHIN YOU do you NOT understand? Christ says MY BODY IS FOOD INDEED BY BLOOD IS DRINK INDEED. Are you calling CHRIST A LIAR (HE WHO SAID, "THIS *IS* MY BODY"??? If you are, you are A BLASPHEMER, JUST LIKE MARTIN LUTHER WHO CALLED CHRIST AN ADULTERER!!! I HONOR MARY, AS CHRIST DID, WHILE YOU DISHONOR HIM WITH YOUR BLASPHEMIES!
petrusprimus 1 year ago
Comment removed
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
Comment removed
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
@petrusprimus The message of John 6 is not "eat my flesh and drink my blood" rather Jesus was illustrating to the people he was teaching that to live a person must eat to satisfy physical hunger and sustain physical life and just like this a person must invite Jesus into their lives everyday to satisfy their spiritual hunger and spiritual life. A spiritual hunger that can only be satisfied by personal relationship with Christ, as for communion being the consumption of the body and blood
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 and PLEASE stop making SILLY accusations like "Catholics WORSHIP MARY. That is a STUPID heresy. We HONOR her and ASK HER INTERCESSION, as is COMMANDED in Holy Scripture by the 4th commandment and by St Paul. If you are SINCERELY seeking answers to these questions and want to be OBEDIENT than believe what is CONVENIENT, feel free to correspond with me. THANK YOU.
petrusprimus 1 year ago
@petrusprimus Ah it pains me to hear you say such things. You don not need an intermediatry between you and Christ; not in Mary the Clergy or the Pope! We as CHRISTIANS have the authority to read and decide upon scripture, when you think Jesus was giving authority to Peter he was giving authority to all believers. I have seen many many miricles with my own eyes done by the Holy Spirit in the name of Jesus himself! Infact this very morning my mother prayed for my knee which i damaged training
ginjaninja1988 1 year ago
@ginjaninja1988 The shame about Protestantism is that Protestants think they know the WHOLE Bible because the "Holy Spirit" teaches them. No, it isn't the Holy Spirit who causes a Protestant to "change his mind" about his interpretation concerning the "Word of God". Nor is it the "Holy Spirit" who has been the author of over 30,000 Godless sects of Protestantism, all teaching different things. St. James says, "Pray for one another, that you may be healed." That is called INTERCESSION. The
petrusprimus 1 year ago