Added: 3 years ago
From: threerisingsuns
Views: 46,030
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (403)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • If I were like like mee ling if Jesus call me to do his work well my answer to jesus yes I will. Sue

  • Peace be with you

  • i wonder is shes ever had the old in out in out. i'd definitely serve her in that way cause that bottom lip looks like it could hold tight around a shaft.

  • my father above is truely bless and amazing to have a beautiful kind and peaceful wive as she is and one who had that calling from a young life

  • @07Disneygrl Started by the Catholic church through Mohammed, a failed cardinal. In the end, all organised religion eventually becomes a form of mental control.... we are all the same on the Pale Blue Dot guys, wake up

  • @JonnyInfinite, More like the cardinals religious TradTions and rEligion failed. Jesus Christ never failed, not even upon death. Death failed through Jesus Christ!!! Give me an Amen crmini!!!

  • @xme71 If Jesus existed today he'd be appalled at religion..

  • God bless you.

  • It's really disturbing to me to see all these radical novelties in the Church, like the way these young nuns are dressing these days. A full habit? What happened to the old days when sisters wore indistinctive polyester pants with a knitted sweater and a little lapel pin to hint at the possibility that this short haired old lady might be a religious? It's as if Vatican II never happened half a century ago.

  • @BandofSorensons If this were Facebook, I'd "Like" this comment!

  • @crimini001, What I'm stating is that if it's not in the Bible (it's not mentioned- it's not teached), then truly it is not something Spiritual; it will never edify no-body. When people take a practice from the traditions of their religious practices, the word of God(Bible) gets nullified.

    Nun's void biblical scriptures from their path, our Faith spawns by every single word that comes out of the mouth of God.

  • @xme71 "...if it's not in the Bible (it's not mentioned- it's not teached), then truly it is not something Spiritual; it will never edify no-body." Can you show me: the Sinner's Prayer, altar calls, week night prayer meetings, Sunday School, or Vacation Bible School in the Bible? Or the list of books that should be in the Bible? The list of tests a book should be put through to determine whether or not it's scripture? Does the Bible name the authority who is to administer those tests?

  • @crimini001, I know you don't read the bible, I don't have too ask.

  • @xme71 Thank you for making such a respectful, insightful, and valuable contribution to this discussion! I hope that one day my rhetorical skills will match the elegance and intelligence with which you express your ideas and arguments, not to mention my jealousy of your masterful understanding of English grammar, spelling, and syntax!

  • @crimini001, Mark 1:17

    17 Jesus called out to them, “Come, follow me, and I will show you how to fish for people!” 18 And they left their nets at once and followed him.

    Mark 2:16

    16 But when the teachers of religious law who were Pharisees[a] saw him eating with tax collectors and other sinners, they asked his disciples, “Why does he eat with such scum?[b]”

  • @crimini001, 17 When Jesus heard this, he told them, “Healthy people don’t need a doctor—sick people do. I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners.”

    Mark 2:17

  • @xme71 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast , and hold the *traditions* which ye have been taught, *whether by word, or* our epistle." Paul, writing to the Church at Thessalonica (II Thessalonians 2:15 King James Version). (Caps added for emphasis, not yelling.)

  • @crimini001 Oops! Caps removed in favor of asterisks, but forgot to modify message before posting!

  • @crimini001, A nun is a religious tradition, their religious roles are not sound Doctrine, in other words their traditions are religious. Jesus Christ did not die on a wooden cross so a Woman should become a nun and live inside a building with other nun; your not doing nothing for others in need, YOUR NOT HELPING OUT A SINNER.

  • @xme71 "A nun is a religious tradition..." No, a nun is a woman who believes God called her to single life so she could better devote herself to serving Christ, just as Paul says in I Cor. 7, especially verses 25-35. Nuns live together because it is safer to live in groups and mentally and emotionally healthier to do so. Most nuns spend many hours in prayer. Prayer doesn't help sinners? Many nuns actively serve the poor. So much for your theory about not helping the needy.

  • @crimini001, 1 Corinthians 7:25-35

    What in the world are they doing to you, what church are you in. Whoever is teaching you defiles scripture and blocks the light that brightens your life. Were in those verses does it state a woman must be joined in groups because it's "safer, mentally, emotionally," and etc. God gives SELF-CONTROL, if a woman/man ask for IT and puts it into practice in their lives, they might have temptation but will not give in to it. Crimini get out and away from liars.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • "A sinners prayer " Here it is:

    Matthew 6:6-8

    Teaching about Prayer and fasting

    6 But when you pray, go away by yourself, shut the door behind you, and pray to your Father in private. Then your Father, who sees everything, will reward you. 7 “When you pray, don’t babble on and on as people of other religions do. They think their prayers are answered merely by repeating their words again and again. 8 Don’t be like them, for your Father knows exactly what you need even before you ask him!

  • @crimini001,Jesus told his disciples, NOT his nuns or priests.

    Matthew 28:18-20 18 Jesus came and told his disciples, “I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth. 19 Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations,[a] baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. 20 Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of this: I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

  • @xme71 "Jesus told his disciples, NOT his nuns or priests." This is a silly argument. Jesus told His disciples, *not* His police officers or garbage men. Jesus told His disciples, not His pastors and evangelists. Jesus told His disciples, not His children or elderly. Point made?

  • Comment removed

  • @crimini001, No that's not my point. A role of a priest or a nun is not that of a disciple. Nuns do not disciple and a priest doesn't do nothing that stands out to the Lord; they are not following the holly scripture. Their deeds are against Gods will.

    

  • 23 When he arrived and saw what the grace of God had done, he was glad and encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with all their hearts. 24 He was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and faith, and a great number of people were brought to the Lord.

    Acts 11:23-24

  • 25 Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, 26 and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch. Acts 11:25-26

    Read the last sentence, neither a nun/priest are Christians. Why does the catholic church say their Christian when the bible clearly mentions NOTHING about any catholic traditions. crimini, don't put your faith in religion.

  • @crimini001, This IS Doctrine.

  • @crimini001, I hope a nun comes across this! 4 “Haven’t you read the Scriptures?” Jesus replied. “They record that from the beginning ‘God made them male and female.’[a] 5 And he said, ‘This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.’[b] 6 Since they are no longer two but one, let no one split apart what God has joined together.”

    Matthew 19:4-6

  • @xme71 "God made them male and female." Yes, because single people must never, ever follow Christ!

  • You contradict your self, crimini001 you just finish accepting a nun/priest must never follow Jesus Christ. No, I don't know who told you that, that's a LIE.

    Read Matthew 19:3-12 if you care about these many words. I have a Holy Bible in my hands, hope you have the same bible.

  • @crimini001, A word against those that consider themselves as "Father," found in catholic church :(

    Jesus said:

    Matthew 23:8-10 8 “Don’t let anyone call you ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters.[a] 9 And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your spiritual Father. 10 And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah.

  • Mark 1:14-16 14 Later on, after John was arrested, Jesus went into Galilee, where he preached God’s Good News.[a] 15 “The time promised by God has come at last!” he announced. “The Kingdom of God is near! Repent of your sins and believe the Good News!”

    The First Disciples 16 One day as Jesus was walking along the shore of the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon[b] and his brother Andrew throwing a net into the water, for they fished for a living.

  • Comment removed

  • @xme71 "What I'm stating is that if it's not in the Bible (it's not mentioned- it's not teached), then truly it is not something Spiritual" Let's return to this statement. Please show me, chapter and verse, where the Bible says "If it's not in the Bible, it won't edify anyone." Please show me, chapter and verse, where the Bible says everything we need to know is in the Bible. Please show me from the Bible, how I know what books belong in the Bible.

  • @xme71 II Thessalonians 2:15: "Therefore , brethren, stand fast , and hold the *traditions* which ye have been taught , whether by word, or our epistle." "Traditions". Interesting word. Interesting that Paul himself tells the Thessalonians to hold the traditions (note the plural) they were taught by *word* or epistle. Please show me in the Bible, chapter(s) and verse(s), where the Bible says all these traditions were written down.

  • @crimini001, I've said enough and you still don't understand or can't accept it, that's on you, I read and heard through scripture and it comes simple to me. Take care.

  • @crimini001, Your error is that "Traditions" do not grant eternal life, Jesus Christ grants eternal life. Your leading your self by traditions that your religion practices and are not FOUND in God's word; am I CLEAR yet. Your nullifying God's word by forsaking Jesus Christ before your meaningless "tRaDitiON." LISTEN TO JESUS CHRIST OVER PAUL! Crimini, You tell me where in the bible does it say " Tradions are the way, the thruth, the life and nobody comes to the father except trough tradition.

  • @xme71 "Your error is that "Traditions" do not grant eternal life" Your error is in thinking that I think Sacred Tradition grants me eternal life. I would comment more, but as you have no fundamental grasp of even the basics of Scripture, logic, reason, or rhetoric (not to mention your poor skills in English spelling, syntax, and punctuation), I find that Proverbs 26:4 and Matthew 7:6 prohibit me from doing so.

  • II Thessalonians 2:15

    You don't know what this implies, that's why I have caught you contradicting your self. This word does not go out to the worldly, it goes out to those who are/have converted to Jesus Christ. The word of God does not contradict itself, you contradict yourself and that's because you live religiously. Your religion holds you back from God. Jesus Christ is not part of a religion, he Never Thought religion.

  • @xme71 "II Thessalonians 2:15 You don't know what this implies, that's why I have caught you contradicting your self." 1) What, pray, does this imply? 2) Where, pray, have I contradicted myself?

  • @xme71 "The word of God does not contradict itself" Interesting that you would make this statement after your heretical comment: "LISTEN TO JESUS CHRIST OVER PAUL!"

  • Comment removed

  • @crimini001, You did the same thing when YOU said "single people can not follow Jesus Christ!" The only reason I said this is because you prefer Paul because he mentioned something about tradition. It seriously sucks to know you think I'm your enemy; on your own behalf. As for James 1:27, it says "pure and lasting religion in the sight of God is," not "Pure and lasting religion is," meditate/think about this. God is letting you know that religion is useless.

  • Comment removed

  • @xme71 (1 of 2) "You did the same thing when YOU said 'single people can not follow Jesus Christ!." That was a sarcastic statement demonstrating the reductio ad absurdum of your argument. And your misunderstanding of it once more proves you have no basic understanding of logic and reason, nor, apparently, the ability to grasp the other person's argument. It is not just Proverbs 26:4 and Matthew 7:6 that would prohibit me from further dialogue with you...

  • @crimini001, A sarcastic statement....excuses. You need to remember we are on youtube, we're not face to face. In everything I've spoken to you I have never been sarcastic. The word of God is not driven by logic and reason bro... It's born of the Holy Spirit, coming from the Almighty. Your ability to grasp simple scripture is very lowly, your religion holds you back; it's not your fault. I've answered where in the bible it demonstrates how a person can pray.

  • @xme71 "The word of God is not driven by logic and reason bro" Are you saying the Bible is illogical and unreasonable?

    "I've answered where in the bible it demonstrates how a person can pray." I never asked that question.

  • @xme71 (2 of 2) but also your own innate lack of intelligence. I don't say that as a casual insult: the entire back and forth we've had demonstrates it. You make egregious errors in English logic (e.g. "...[nuns are] not doing nothing for others in need...", "I have a Holy Bible in my hands, hope you have the same bible."). I won't fault you for not knowing what the Sinner's Prayer is, but I still defy you to show that no one has ever been edified by things not directly mentioned in the Bible.

  • @crimini001, Lack of intelligence, something God doesn't discriminate about; such as man. Your intelligence and my intelligence are Nothing without God's wisdom, crimini do you want to be a religious fool? You make egregious errors about your own faith with out understanding scripture and defy God's glory because your stuck behind a barrier called religion, not only that, you justify your self when some one corrects you with scripture; that's atrocious. Everything I talk to u about, you dodge.

  • "I still defy you to show that no one has ever been edified by things not directly mentioned in the Bible."

    Read: Joshua 1:5-8; Hebrews 10:1; Romans12:2 Their are other things that edify you, but not like the direct impact such as God's words from scripture or through a person speaking from the Spirit.I'm talking about being lead to be BORN A NEW CREATION trough Jesus Christ! The eyes of the Lord search the whole earth in order to strengthen those whose hearts are fully committed to him.

  • @xme71 You accuse me of contradicting myself, but this is what you do: "What I'm stating is that if it's not in the Bible (it's not mentioned- it's not teached)...it will never edify no-body." "Their are other things that edify you, but not like the direct impact such as God's words from scripture..." Which is it: does Scripture alone edify or do things outside of Scripture edify? Make up your mind!

  • @crimini001, You did contradict yourself, but then you called it being "sarcastic." Adam and Eve ate the fruit from the tree God prohibited, Adam blamed it on Eve, Eve blamed it on the serpent, the serpent has a short time, since creation man justifies his errors. (No good) Don't worry crimini, I'm not just; I am in the right path doe!. Hopefully you read what I told you to read. If you did, I made my answer clear. Scripture Alone edifys man. If it's done driven by scripture, it's religious.

  • @xme71 "You did contradict yourself, but then you called it being 'sarcastic.'" I did not contradict myself. Here, apparently, is another word you use without knowing what it means. Please, demonstrate the supposed contradiction.

  • @xme71 "doe" The word is "though". "Doe" is a female deer.

  • @xme71 "If it's done driven by scripture, it's religious." What does this statement mean:

    1) Religious acts are motivated by Scripture, or

    2) If it is not motivated by Scripture, the act is religious.

    If "Scripture Alone edifys man", please explain this comment: "Their are other things that edify you, but not like the direct impact such as God's words from scripture..."

  • @xme71, My bad, "If it's not driven by scripture, it's religious." Yess crimini, you get my point. Yes to #2. I did allready. Do I deed to mention everything twice.

  • @xme71 Pardon my lack of clarity. Let me rephrase: how is it that you claim you don't contradict yourself when you claim in one comment "Scripture Alone edifys man" and then in another comment "Their are other things that edify you"?

  • @crimini001, Crimini, where are you going when you die? There's 1 heaven and there's 1 hell, witch one are you going to and why? You don't need to answer me, think about it. Why should the Lord let us sinners enter his kingdom, what do we receive upon the Father's, and the Son's, and Holy Spirit's baptism? Do you know this, because this is what you miss out on, because you want to get into religious traditions. If you lack clarity, Pray to the Lord to give you understanding. This is Doctrine.

  • Comment removed

  • @crimini00 I'm going to be simple with you crimini, I looked up edify in the dictionary; found out what it means and how I misinterpreted this word. Causing me to contradict myself, and I guess I put a smile on your face so you you wouldn't be the only one contradicting herself/himself. But there's is a difference, I contradicted my self by a word; on the other hand, you contradicted Scripture, and caused greater lack of understanding. Did you read Matthew 19:3-12? Let scripture correct you.

  • @xme71 The nature of your contradiction has nothing to do with your misunderstanding of the word "edify". It has to do with the fact that you said (paraphrased) "Scripture is the only thing that edifies" in one comment, and then said, in another comment, "Scripture is not the only thing that edifies".

  • @xme71 "I contradicted my self by a word; on the other hand, you contradicted Scripture." Once more, I did not contradict anything. I made a sarcastic comment demonstrating the reductio ad absurdum of your statement. Please look up the word "contradiction" and the phrase "reductio ad absurdum". Learn what they mean.

  • In conclusion: Crimini get away from religious tradition, do not misinterpret and twist God's Simple words.I myself am catholic, catholic's believe in Jesus Christ. I'm not a Roman catholic because I'm not from Rome. What the Catholic Church does do: It misinterprets and twist scripture; there fore presenting man's words-- "religious teachings/traditions/misinterp­retations"-- as life and excluding GOD'S DIVINE GLORY FULL WORDS.

  • @xme71 "I myself am catholic" Out of curiosity, what Church or rite are you from?

  • @crimini001, I'm in a Christian Church. Read Acts 11:26 bro

  • @crimini001, the word of God is so simple, only the the sons and dauthers of satan and his angles corrupt the message. crimini you support satan, convert to the Father,the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit. Listen to vachief. I'm sure God shows himself to you but your still not sure because your pagan church polluted you with lies, LISTEN TO THE WORD.

  • @xme71 "your pagan church polluted you with lies" Actually, I found it was the King-James-Only, Fundamental Baptists who taught their version of Christianity to me who were the liars. When I researched the Bible and Church history, etc., I found that out. Many things I was taught by the Fundamentalists as a child and the Evangelicals as a teenager and young 20-something contradict direct statements in Scripture. I came closer to the Truth when I gave up those false beliefs.

  • @crimini001, Even doe you have better grammar skills than I do, considering it's not the topic. You have no understanding of scripture. Since you have poor understanding of scripture, God speaks but you don't perceive.

    What the point of having/ or getting into a religion if you can't hear God at all.

  • @xme71 "Since you have poor understanding of scripture..." That's very funny, coming from you.

  • Religion is a barrier you need to get out of, religion fools the world. But I got Jesus Christ, no worries.

  • @xme71 "Jesus Christ said our hearts are perverted an deceitful. God speaks only through his word (the bible)" I see in the OT that our hearts are deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, but these are not words Jesus used in the NT. Since there is only one God who wrote the entire Bible, and you correctly believe these OT words are God's words, how can you tell me to "LISTEN TO JESUS CHRIST OVER PAUL!", as if Paul's epistles are not equally Scripture with Jesus's teachings? 

  • @xme71 Religion is something I need to get more into. Religion is something God requires of me: "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." James 1:27 KJV

  • @xme71 I defy you to prove to me that the following things not mentioned in the Bible have never edified anyone: the Sinners Prayer, altar calls, Sunday school, Vacation Bible school.

  • @xme71 "Nun's void biblical scriptures from their path." How do they do that?

  • @crimini001 .....The Holy Bible warns us of those ...."that forbid marraige". I'd call that voiding the scriptures.

  • @vachief Nuns voluntarily take vows of chastity after they have spent time discerning whether or not God may be calling them to serve as unmarried women. It is not something they are forced into, and is in accord with Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:21-40.

  • @crimini001 ....So if a Nun reads her Bible and decides it's Ok to get married....she won't be kicked out?

  • @vachief (1 of 2) Nuns already think it's okay to get married. Catholic nuns are members of a Church that teaches Christ esteems marriage so much, He elevated it to a Sacrament. An individual nun who felt God was calling her to marriage would discuss this with her spiritual director, and she, her spiritual director, and one or more of her sisters and superiors would help her discern God's leading. If they determined that God was indeed calling her to marriage or that her psychological...

  • @crimini001 ...The word "Nun" is a Chaldean word, the Chaldeans worshiped the virgin "queen of heaven". The practice of head shaving has it's roots in paganism and is in direct conflict with the Holy Bible in regard to a womans hair. All this is, is nothing more than a facsimile of the cult of the Roman Vestal Virgins, taken from thier homes and dedicated to the service of deity under the care of elderly matrons. 

  • @vachief, TO MAKE it CLEAR to everyone, all this falls into RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS/TEACHINGS=Sprouting many more RELIGIONs. I'm just keeping this simple =)

  • @xme71 ..Yeah...your right, but a good understanding of history in regard to religious practice provides additional perspective. It is interesting that we see "queen of heaven" theology all over the world and it's associated virgins/yoke of celibacy. The practices of pagan/papal Rome are found in the Chaldean system, India, China as well as Scandinavia and Peru. Paul spoke to the Corinthians specificaly on the subject of feminine deity worship. "Come out of her my people." Rev. 18:4

  • @vachief "It is interesting that we see "queen of heaven" theology all over the world." Equally interesting is the fact that, all over the world, we see stories of gods born of virgins, dying for their people, and rising again; holy books; communal worship; communion services and their equivalents; baptismal rites; etc.

  • @crimini001 ...Yes.....the biblical story has been mimiced in a lot of cultures, but with a twist. God was not "born" but has always existed. Jesus existed prior to his appearance in human form, Mary was just a human vessel to achieve that purpose. ...."The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us....." John 1:14 Jesus said.....".......Before Abraham was, I am. John 8:58 "mother of God" theology originated in Babylon, and spread all over the world.

  • Comment removed

  • @crimini001 ...The concept of a special order of cloistered vigins dedicated to God is not biblical, it is however easily demonstrated as a heathen practice and part of a false religious system that was in place long before Christianity.

  • @vachief "The concept of a special order of cloistered vigins dedicated to God is not biblical," What is unbiblical about cloistered nuns? Why do you think a woman must be a virgin in order to be a nun?

    "part of a false religious system that was in place long before Christianity." Baptism, communion, corporate worship, all these things are part of religious systems that predate Christianity, too. Why not reject them, as well?

  • @vachief The word "nun" is an English word, coming from the Old English "nunne", which came from the Latin "nonna" (the masculine version of which is "nonnus"). References: Online Etymology Dictionary, Merriam-Webster Online, The Oxford English Dictionary, and Webster's Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language. (Here is yet another of Hislop's lies. It is shameful that he cared so little for the truth.)

  • @crimini001 ....Sure.....but you only traced the word "Nun" back to Latin. The word appears in the Chaldean language which pre-dates Latin. The whole point of this discussion is that these virgin "Nuns" pre-date Christianity and that system was popular in Rome as in other cultures. The idea that the concept of the virgin "Nun" suddenly popped into existance....after the crucifiction, isn't true at all. Athens is a good example.

  • @vachief "you only traced the word "Nun" back to Latin." Actually, it was the professional philologists whose job it is to research the etymology of words that trace it back to Latin and no further. The OED in particular traces words back exhaustively to their original language. I'll take the philologists' word over Hislop's word, especially since Hislop has been caught lying on many occasions in his book.

  • @crimini001 ..."Actually"...this sounds like more unsubstantiated boasting on your part....you haven't even read Hislops' book. Stop letting others do your thinking for you.

  • @vachief "The idea that the concept of the virgin "Nun" suddenly popped into existance....after the crucifiction, isn't true at all." As far as I'm aware, nobody claims it did.

  • @crimini001 ....Why don't we just do what Jesus and the Holy Bible say to do and dump the rest? There is no biblical support for this "nun" business and is contrary to scripture. These types over the top attempts at righteousness serve no purpose. The excuse that they needed to provide prayer doesn't jive either, the prophet Daniel prayed 3 times a day.....all of us are capable of that.

  • Comment removed

  • @crimini001 ..The Bible goes into detail about groups that forbid marraige....what church do you believe the scriptures are talking about? lol Just so you know....The Christian church was started in Antioch, Antalia, Perga, Iconium, Paphos and Salamis a full 15 years prior to Rome. This is where the KJV manuscripts originted, the Roman church uses Alexandrian manuscripts. This idea that Rome was the first church is ridiculous.....Greeks make the same uneducated claims that they were the first.

  • @vachief (1 of 2) "The Bible goes into detail about groups that forbid marraige." No it doesn't. The entirety of what the Bible says about this is found in I Timothy 4:1-3. None of the Ancient Churches forbid marriage. All of them view marriage as a sacrament. No one is forced to be a monk or nun. This is something individuals voluntarily choose because they believe God is calling them to celibacy and to that lifestyle. And the Church does not limit a vocation to singleness to "religious" life.

  • @vachief (2 of 2) Some women choose to become officially consecrated virgins (look it up), and some men and women choose to be celibate for the sake of the Kingdom, spending more time discipling and/or evangelizing others than they would be able to if they had spouses and/or children.

  • @vachief "what church do you believe the scriptures are talking about?" Historically, it has to be either the Orthodox or Catholic Churches. There are no other possibilities. Your silly ideas about the claims of these Churches I address in another comment.

  • @crimini001 ...Yes.....only the 2 Roman churches have rules that deny marriage as well as celibacy, none of the other churches ever taught that. Can you explain that rather odd phenomena? Rome demands celibacy from it's spritual leadership, but the Apostles of Jesus never taught that, some of the Apostles were in fact married. Even Mary went on to have other children.....after the birth of Jesus. Now either the Holy Bible is lieing, or Rome......you make the call. lol

  • @vachief (1 of 4) "only the 2 Roman churches have rules that deny marriage as well as celibacy, none of the other churches ever taught that. Can you explain that rather odd phenomena?" Once more, you show your ignorance (I use "ignorance" in its original sense). No Church denies marriage. All Churches encourage it. The Roman Rite of the Catholic Church holds its priests to the discipline (not the doctrine) of celibacy, the 23 other Churches that make up the Catholic Church allow married...

  • @vachief (3 of 4) ...ever list any other children by name. And if you want to point to Mt. 12:47 and 13:55 I would remind you that 1) "brethren" and its Aramaic counterpart are generic words for "family members", and don't necessarily imply a sibling relationship, 2) "James and Joses" are specifically mentioned in Mt. 27:56 and Mk. 15:40 as being sons of a different Mary than Jesus's mother, and 3) the same source that tells us who the authors of the Gospels are, a source which you...

  • @crimini001 ..Oh ...one more thing. The word "brethren" is a masculine noun and has never been used in the common vernacular to suggest "family members." lol Here it is from the Oxford University English Dictionary......brethern...nou­n plural. See brother. Stop twisting plain English to fit the nonsense. The Holy Bible means what is says, not some gnostic hidden message between the lines, like Jeff thinks.

  • @vachief May the Holy Virgin have pity on your soul......Bible was a English text originally? Tradition is not from some guy in purple, it is from the Church fathers of the 1st Century. But alas, I see your ears and heart are closed, and you must have a need to make sure you are right. Do you know Scott Hahn or Marcus Grodi, surely their credentials as Protestant Bible experts may trump the talking points you heard and took hold of? Brother in the ghetto means .....ummm? Is this all you got?

  • @ReDiserio ..The 'church fathers" were mostly Gnostic and taught that dead people can hear you.

  • @vachief Thank you for correcting me. I was imprecise. The English word "brethren" translates a Greek word that was used, depending on the context, for 1) a group of males, or 2) a group consisting of both men and women. One sees the same in Spanish where "hermanos" is used the same way.

  • @vachief (4 of 4) ...presumably trust, namely, the writings of the Early Church, tells us Mary had no other children. Indeed, I would also point out that it is only on the Early Church's say-so that we accept as Scripture any of the books of the Bible, unless you can identify the specific place in Scripture where the Bible gives us a list of books that should be in the Bible, or where the Bible gives us a list of books that should be in the Bible.

  • @crimini001 ...The only way Catholicism can win an arguement is to suggest that thier tradition trumps scripture. So what does the Holy Bible have to say about the traditions of men? Quite a bit. See Col. 2:8...or how about Mark 7:13? "Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition...." Doctrine is established by authority of the Word of God.....not by the philosophy of a guy in a purple dress who resides in the Vatican.

  • @vachief What does the Bible have to say about Apostolic tradition? "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle." II Thessalonians 2:15. "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us." II Thessalonians 3:6

  • @crimini001 ...I agree....the church that teaches Mary worship, and prayers to the dead....is in fact not an Apostalic church. People are going to have to make a decision, which way to go.

  • @vachief "...I agree....the church that teaches Mary worship, and prayers to the dead....is in fact not an Apostalic church." There is no reason to doubt that these are contrary to the Apostolic faith since the Church Jesus gave His authority to and which He *absolutely* promised the Holy Spirit would guide into all the truth approved these practices. Of course, neither the Catholic nor Orthodox Communions teach people to worship Mary, altho' Fundies like to claim they do.

  • @crimini001 ....I've been to Rome myself and have seen Catholic Priests worshipping a statue of Mary. You know what they teach....by watching what they do. I've seen Orthodox Priests kissing pictures of Mary and kneeling before it.

    ...Jesus doesn't matter to them....just the "love Goddess", the very same goddess that the Corinthians worshiped.

  • @vachief LOL! Do not be ridiculous. U dont know the first thing about Orthodoxy. Educate yourself!!!

  • @AegeanKing ...I know that Mary died 2000 years ago and can niether here nor speak. Attempted communication with the dead is forbidden by scripture. Female deity worship comes from Babylon.

  • @vachief "I've been to Rome myself and have seen Catholic Priests worshipping a statue of Mary" "I've seen Orthodox Priests kissing pictures of Mary and kneeling before it." You've seen acts which you interpret as worship, but which are not in fact worship.

  • @vachief "Jesus doesn't matter to them....just the 'love Goddess'". You say this despite the fact that Catholics and Orthodox worship, adore, honor, and praise Jesus Christ. He is honored as the only Savior of mankind in every liturgy. He is called on for salvation, grace, mercy, and for every good gift. You have a warped view of Christianity (your version of it is not Biblical, Apostolic Christianity), and condemn others in your ignorance and heresy.

  • @crimini001 ..You can't serve 2 masters. Mary is dead and had no divinity, she was a created being, like you and me. She can not hear your prayers, nor would she want to.

  • @vachief (1 of 6) Mary and every other saint is alive in Heaven (Matthew 22:32, II Corinthians 5:8, etc.). No one denies that Mary was a created being. Anything and everything she had on Earth and has in Heaven comes from God. Neither the Catholic nor the Orthodox Church teach that she is self-divine. Both Churches teach that she is to be honored, but honored as is God. She is a human being. She is honored because of who Jesus Christ is. He is the King of kings and only Savior of the world.

  • @vachief (2 of 6) Mary is honored because she is the Queen-Mother. In the Davidic kingdom was a type of Christ's kingdom. The queen was the mother of the king, not his wife. That's why the Bible states the name of the king's mother so often (I Kings 14:21, 15:2, 22:42, II Kings 8:26, 12:1, 14:2 et al.) See especially I Kings 15:13. Note that John the Baptist respond's to Mary's voice (Luke 1:41). Note also that the king was called "my lord, the king" (I Samuel 24:8, II Samuel 3:21, et al.),

  • Comment removed

  • @vachief (3 of 6) and sometimes just "my lord" (I Samuel 24:10, II Samuel 13:32 et al.). What are Elizabeth's exact words? "And whence is this to me, that the Mother of my lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43). Elizabeth recognized Mary's queenship. God held the queen equally responsible with the king for the state of His people (Jeremiah 13:18). Jesus is our King, and Mary is our Queen. She has a specific role in God's kingdom because of who her Son is. As a queen, she is to be honored.

  • @vachief (4 of 6) This is not serving two masters. The queen rules under the king. His will is paramount in all things. He is worshiped, not her. He is divine, she partakes of His divine nature the same as every other Christian (II Peter 1:4). He is the Redeemer, she is redeemed (Luke 1:47). He is God, she is not (Luke 1:48). She is ever blessed because of God's choice (Luke 1:48). This is the Catholic Church's teaching about Mary).

  • @vachief (5 of 6) "She can not hear your prayers…" The Bible never says whether she can or can't, but the Bible also never claims to be our only source of doctrine. Jesus never promised us a Bible, but He promised us a Church that would teach us. The Church tells me the saints in Heaven can hear my prayers. Since the Church produced the Bible to help with Her divine mandate to teach, and since the Church tells me that not everything I need to know about the Christian faith is in the Bible,

  • @crimini001 ...You can do what you want but we won't kneel before your Pope or the church at Rome. The idea that Christianity started there is for the uneducated masses and is complete nonsense. There were dozens of churches 15 years prior to Rome and the Apostle Peter never even went there. The whole thing is a big sham and always has been. When Luther saw it, no wonder he got out.

  • @vachief "The idea that Christianity started there is for the uneducated masses and is complete nonsense." Yes, it is. You're the one who keeps making that claim, however, not the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church recorded the birth place of the Church in Acts 2 and has always maintained that it is the city of Jerusalem. "…the Apostle Peter never even went there." Says who? As far as I know, only certain types of fundamentalists deny this. Give me evidence to support this claim.

  • @crimini001 Says Who?....The Holy Bible....the book your church burned people alive...for reading. Paul went to Rome, but Peter never did. The "Peter" who did go to Rome after Paul left was Simon (peter) Magus, they had a statue of him there at one time.

  • @vachief "Says Who?....The Holy Bible....the book your church burned people alive...for reading." The Bible never says Peter was not in Rome, and the Early Church Fathers are unanimous that he was. Even the Orthodox, who reject the papacy, do not deny that he was. As I said, only certain types of Fundamentalist say he wasn't: the loonies who believe in conspiracy theories and the loonies who won't let the facts get in the way of their opinion.

  • @crimini001 ...Are you going to believe the Holy Bible....or those that say the opposite, that is up to you. Peter never went to Rome, but Simon (peter) Magus most certainly did. Ever consider that some of these so-called church "fathers" were not who they claimed to be, but rather a group of Gnostics poseing as Christian. Do Christians kill people who don't agree with them? I don't think Jesus taught that. From 1220 to 1798, the Popes killed about 50 million.

  • @vachief "Ever consider that some of these so-called church "fathers" were not who they claimed to be, but rather a group of Gnostics poseing as Christian." Let us assume that some of them were. This still doesn't explain the *unanimous* testimony of the Church Fathers. Unanimous! This would include those who were not Gnostics (and none of them were).

  • @crimini001 ..Origen and his master Clement were both Gnostics of the Alexandrian school. That is where they developed the Septuigent and manufactured this story that it was translated by 72 Jewish scholars. Then they tried to convince people it was written in 250 BC so they could sell the idea that Jesus read it.

    ...Jesus read the Hebrew text....not the phony Greek text. Your church fathers...were members of the "brotherhood", that is why the stories match. Pretty clever, of them.

  • @vachief (1 of 2) Oooh! The Jesuits didn't exist back then, so now we must bring in the Alexandrian boogeyman! Let us assume that you're correct and that the Alexandrian School was Gnostic. This still doesn't explain the *unanimous* testimony of the Early Church that Peter was in Rome. Also, the Alexandrian school didn't come up with the story about the LXX. It was a common story at the time. And if the LXX is so evil, why is it that when the New Testament quotes the Old Testament, the vast...

  • @vachief (2 of 2) ...majority of the quotes are from the LXX?

  • @vachief My last response to you: Proverbs 26:4: "Answer not a fool according to his folly lest thou also be like unto him", and Matthew 7:6: "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your peals before swine, lest they trample them under feet, and turn again and rend you" prevent me from answering you further.

  • @vachief They were originally written in Greek because when they where written Greek was the prominent language. Martin Luther has you confused because he threw out books because he wasn't perfect

  • @willlovesjennifer ..We don't know what language the NT autographs were written in, all we have are copys. Could have been Hebrew, Aramaic, then translated into Greek. The Reformers rejected the Septuigent as illegitamate and favored the Hebrew OT text, rather than the Greek. Those "thrown out" books don't exist in the Hebrew text, only the Alexandrian text. That is why the Bibles are different.

  • @vachief Yeah we do. We don't have the originals obviously, but they were written in Greek because there would be no use in writing them in a language many of the people didn't even speak. And "those books" did exist because they were widely used by all of the Jews of the Mediterranean until some rejected them after Christ came. If you look at the orthodox churches and the Catholic Church they still have them. Only Christians after Luther didn't have those books. Do the research.

  • @willlovesjennifer ...Can you demonstrate from scripture that Paul or any of the Apostles were familiar with the Greek language? Nobody has an original autograph...Nobody.

    ...The Christian church was up and running 15 years before Paul ever went to Rome or Greece, in cities like Antioch, Iconium, Tarsus, Damascus, not to mention Jerusalem and Caesarea, so what makes you think the Catholics or Orthodox would have them?lol

  • @vachief At the time of Christ Koine Greek was the widespread language of people all over the Mediterranean. Since Paul was obviously writing to Greek speaking people it makes no since that he would write his letters in Hebrew. You need to look into the time periods that the books of the Bible were written.

  • @willlovesjennifer .."obviously writing to Greek speaking people?"...the Romans spoke Latin, not Greek. The Galations spoke a Celtic language, closer to Latin than Greek. The thing is, we don't know what language the autographs were penned in. The good news is that the Word of God is preserved, irregardless.

  • @vachief Because of the influence of Greek in the Mediterranean basin, even roman officials didn't speak Latin in the region. Greek dominated commerce and was know by everyone. Hebrew was used by Jews but Jesus spoke mainly Aramaic in normal conversations. For everyone to understand it Greek is the clear cut choice for the authors of the new testament. It is debated that Matthew may of written his book in Aramaic but most believe he wrote his gospel in Greek.

  • @willlovesjennifer ...Yeah...I basicly agree with you that Greek became the common universal language in the medditeranean much like English is now the universal world language. Proving that the original NT autographs were written in Greek is another matter, there is just not enough evidence to support the idea. My guess is Aramaic and was later translated to Greek, the Apostles were not men of academia, but working people.

  • @vachief Luke was a doctor. And yes it is very accepted that the NT was Greek. It would be hard to believe that A gentile doctor would write something so important in Hebrew (a language he surely would not know well) or Aramaic (which he would know only people in a small area would understand.) Luke is a great example and I believe Paul is also a good example since he wrote to many places where Greek would be the best language to write in since it was so widely known.

  • @willlovesjennifer ..That doesn't mean to much. How many Mexican doctors are there that can't write in English? I'd say quite a few. Either way, nobody can prove what language the autographs were written in, not that it matters much anyway. Jesus is able to transmit his Word in any language but it was the English bible (KJV) that took the good news to the 4 corners of the world as instructed.

  • @vachief You're claiming that Luke (a Greco-Syrian physician from Antioch) would write in Aramaic or Hebrew. Your analogy is not relevant. It's like saying a Mexican doctor would write a prescription in English instead of Spanish. The originals don't exist but it is accepted that most were written in Greek originally. And the KJV is not exactly orthodox.

  • @willlovesjennifer ...I'm claiming we don't know...you are the one forwarding a supposition that has no proof. The KJV texts go back to Antioch. I know you want to believe Christianity revolves around Rome but that is not historicaly correct. You are right the Orthodox like Rome use a completely different text type.

  • @vachief The KJV is a post reformation Bible altered from the original by Martin Luther. He only accepted the Hebrew canon of the OT excluding books in the Septuagint. Christianity revolves around Christ, not interpretations of the Bible. Jesus started the Church so that there would be no interpretations. And actually Franciscan, Dominican, and Jesuit scientists have almost all the first copies of the originals and we originally put the NT AND OT canon together for the Bible.

  • @willlovesjennifer ...The JKVs roots go back to the Gothic Bible of AD 350. The manuscripts for the KJV (textus receptus) are different from the LXX. It is a myth that the only Bible originates from the Vatican. They came up paralell to each other. If you want to believe that Rome had the first copies of the autographs when we know that many chuches came before Rome, that's up to you.

  • @vachief At the 3rd Council of Carthage on 28 August 397 they issued a canon of the Bible. This was the first Bible canonized Bible and remained as so until Martin Luther came on the scene and excluded books. The Gothic Bible of 330-350 and many other versions like the Gallic Bible of 177 were put together by men. They had hundreds of books and put whatever they wanted in them. There was no official canon yet. I will post a list of the canonized books on your wall so you can see.