Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

FORMER CATHOLIC: James interviews Patrick for American Radio

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
958 views
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Nov 7, 2007

Questions for Catholics are:
What was the first message preached by Peter that resulted in the conversion of 3000 orthodox Jews in Acts 2 and another 5000 in Acts 4?

If the Eucharest teaching was introduced in Acts why weren't the Apostles charged by the rulers for breaking an OT law and what were they charged with?

(Leviticus 7:27 Whatsoever soul it be that eateth any manner of blood, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.
Leviticus 17:10,11 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
Leviticus 17:14 For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.) What were the apostles arrested for?

Since many left Jesus in John 6:66 because of John 6:54, why wasn't there a similar occurrance in Acts 2 and Acts 4 and the rest of the book of Acts?

These were instructions given to the converted Gentiles. Why wasn't the Euchariest doctrine included in them?
Acts 15:20,29 But that we write unto them [converted Gentiles], that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

sacraments Catholic Relief Services Catholic Charities apostolic succession Eucharist Catholic Mass Nicene-Creed liturgy ecumenical councils Filioque Irenaeus Polycarp Catechism of the Catholic Church Sacred-Tradition Magisterium Baptism Confirmation Eucharist Penance Anointing-of-the-Sick Holy Orders Holy Matrimony Apostles' Creed papal infallibility filioque clause immaculate-conception priesthood seven deadly sins Baptism absolution seal of confession excommunication Penance Confirmation apostolic constitution Purgatory Liturgy of the Hours Mass of Paul VI Liturgy of the Word transubstantiation homily Indult Council of Trent Summorum-Pontificum motu-proprio Ecclesia-Dei Advent Lent Ordinary-Time canon-law breviary Stations of the Cross Mother of God College of Cardinals Vatican Vatican City Roman Curia hierarchy bishops priests deacons patriarchs primates archbishops College of Bishops metropolitans Communion and Liberation, Neocatechumenal Way, Regnum Christi, Focolare Movement Charismatic movement Traditionalists Opus Dei Life Teen divorce annulments monks nuns cloistered friars Rule of St Benedict Sisters of Charity Marist Brothers Carmelites Cistercians

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 2 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (23)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • kamikaze

  • serenitymike, do you know what the first message preached by Peter in Acts 2 that resulted in the conversion of 3000 orthodox Jews and another 5000 in Acts 4?

  • Therefore, the tradition spoken of in 2 Thessalonians would have been to reinforce Sola Scripture, not diminish it with unbiblical traditions. Also in chapter 3:6, Paul warns his reader against "false tradition." With such a serious alert as this, one would therefore expect the New Testament to be a timeless guide, to help steer people from falling into this dangerous error, otherwise how would one be able to know what was correct or not.

  • Yet in reality, all this verse is saying is that traditions were given orally to local assemblies before the New Testament was written. Also anyone who is well grounded in Holy Scripture, can see straight away that the Catholic Churches traditions are so diametrically opposed to the word of God, i.e., purgatory, Mary, the saints/statues, that Jewish Christians (early church) would have had no interest whatsoever in the way in which westernised Catholicism conducts its business.

  • 2 Thess. 2:15, not 1 Thess. 2:15 as you incorrectly stated, is very much a favourite for Catholics, for they believe it gives their system of tradition running parallel with the Bible, and in some cases even superseding the Scripture, some form of credibility.

  • You say not to follow traditions, but that is not what scripture says. "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter," 1 Thess 2:15. Scripture, teaches we are not only supposed to obey scripture, but also be instructed in traditions passed on down, orally, through the apostles so we can then properly interpret scripture. Scripture and Tradition are both needed.

  • When you say that "no one Church" can lay hold to Him. Are you saying that God, the Father, (Jn 17:21) founded more than "one Church," fathering more than one family? Basically, equating God to a polygamist. 1 Tim 3:15 says that "the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth." How can there be more than one Church, since there is only one truth, notice that 1 Tim 3:15 doesn't say that the Bible is the pillar and foundation of truth, either.

  • I think we need to remember that Christ is even about Christianity and as no one Church can lay hold to Him alone, we need to make sure therefore that we are actually following Him and obeying Him, and not some man-made set of rules, and may I say dubious ones at that, but to study the Scriptures for only these are inspired from God, never tradition or peoples feelings.

  • I meant it doesn't fit Rom 11:17-26, a better analogy for premillenialist would be to say that first tree (OT Israel) go dormant, second tree (NT Church) grow vibrantly, then get raptured to heaven before trib, then old tree (OT Israel) come back to life. Rom 11 doesn't use two trees, only one tree of faith exists with some branches being cut off (Jewish Israel) and new branch the church being grafted in to the original tree, Israel of God.

  • You keep bashing "liberal" Catholics for reaching out to other faiths, Muslims, with no effort to convert. I agree this is a problem in some circles among Catholics, but it is no less a problem in Protestant circles. I personally in my lay evangelizing Muslims and Jews will tell them sooner or later in my conversations the neccessity to come to a supernatural faith in Christ. It is the official teaching of the Church, even after Vat II, it's just not enough have the guts to preach it.

Loading...

0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more