How do I KNOW the Catholic Church is right?

[@hilaryfrank]

Absolutely fantastic. Thanks and God bless you abundantly. Just a few years ago, I was worried about the future of the Church, given the global trends of things. I feared for the Church's survival. I wondered what the next 10 to 20 centuries would be. Then I met a very elderly woman in Bristol, England, who reassured me. She said there was no need to worry because the Church will never die. Clearly, Christ is raising up people like you, fulfilling His promise that His Church will endure until the end of time. Today, I firmly believe, as surely as I know there will be a tomorrow, that the Church founded by Christ will never die.

[@catholicskeptic]

@hilaryfrank Thanks, and amen the gates of shall not prevail against His Church!!! All Glory to God!!!

[@notyourtypicalcomment2399]

@@catholicskepticthe Bible is not the word of God, but also oral tradition? Why not become a Talmudic believer then?

[@catholicskeptic]

@@notyourtypicalcomment2399 Okay, DON'T PUT WORDS in mouth !!!!! Of course the Bible is the Word of God, I never said it wasn't, and the Catholic Church gave you that Bible . And yes God also communicates His Word through oral Tradition. God identified Himself to Moses as The God of Abraham, The God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. How would Moses have recognized that? Where did Moses look it up? Apparently he and the children of Israel learned it by, hmm, oh yes, ORAL TRADITION.

[@DarkHorseCrusader]

“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to read the Bible so they can join the denomination that best agrees with their own understanding.”😅

[@ralf547]

I'd just stick with what Jesus taught there at the end of Matthew 28 (which by the way is in the bible). We should observe all that He taught. Where do I find all that He taught? His Word. Catholicism will add the sacred oral traditions. Where do I find them? Are they written down somewhere? If they complete the essential teachings for all Christians and for the making of new Christians/disciples, then they should be readily available, and complete. In this video, I think I heard Hugh say that the Catholic church hasn't taught any new dogmas such as the Marion dogmas because they have been taught since the beginning of the church. Just not included in the Bible. Then evidence should be available to prove that. When was it first said that Mary's body was assumed into heaven? Did John the Apostle, who was caring for Mary say that after her death her body as assumed into heaven? Is believing in her bodily assumption into heaven something all Catholics are required to believe? Is doubting that or not believing a sin? Is it a mortal sin?

[@spikenikz]

​@@ralf547 You can find your answers on what Jesus taught in the Church. You can start with the early church fathers. Try Ignatius of Antioch. There are so many reference right now in the internet.

[@Kitiwake]

Lol

[@ralf547]

@@Kitiwake :-)

[@DarkHorseCrusader]

@@ralf547Yes, John describes it in Revelation chapter 12.

[@CarpDiemBaby]

You have one of the best, most down to earth Catholic channels on KZbin. I love your witness of the gospel. Thank you!

[@GarthDomokos]

I owe a lot of thanks to William Lane Craig. In his chat with cosmic sceptic, they talked about whether the Canaanite slaughter was justified or not. I decided to investigate Joshua 10 and 11 an the Canaanite slaughter, beginning with the earlier books up until the end of Judges. What really struck me is how the structure of Israel was eerily run like the Roman Catholic church, with one nation under one visible headship. In fact at the end of Judges "in those days, there was no king, and everyone did what was right in their own eyes", is Protestantism in a nutshell. In saying this, based on "bible alone", the Canaanite slaughter should have never occurred. We know this because after the great flood story in Genesis chapter 8, God say's "since the desires of the human heart are evil from youth; nor will I ever strike down every living being as I have done". According to the "bible alone", Joshua, Moses successor would have been in biblical error in the complete slaughter of the Canaanites. This slaughter would have created an incredible divide among the Israelites. However, in order to conquer Canaan, we learn in the earlier books of why any agreement with the Canaanites would have spelled disaster for Israel. Without one visible leader to headship the Israelites, through which God has spoken through, the nations under this "ban" would have never been conquered, and history would have been drastically altered. In fact, every successful enterprise on earth follows this formula of one group, unity, and one final head. Period. Funny, just a few books into the bible, we see very quickly how an organization is suppose to be run. Not only is this blatantly obvious, to question it is to deny holy sacred scripture.

[@ralf547]

Is this an understanding that the Catholic church teaches concerning Joshua 10 & 11? Or is this your personal interpretation? If what you have discovered in your study isn't confirmed by the infallible interpreter, the Catholic church, then it is of no value to anyone. If what you found by studying those chapters of the Old Testament is true, then it is indeed possible for an individual to correctly interpret the Bible, and that would include Protestants.

[@isaacosahon4352]

​@ralf547 First, the Church never discourages private interpretation. The Church encourages private interpretations that accord with the unity of ALL SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION. Catholics are anti-sola scriptura, NOT anti-scripture.

[@John_Six]

Yeah, now go read Jude 11 and how he warns of Korah's rebellion. Protestants and Orthodox say Numbers 16: 3 to the authority that Christ left over His church.

[@GarthDomokos]

@@ralf547Infallible interpreter? good point. Using the bible as our reference what exactly swallowed Jonah in the story of Jonah and the whale? In 500 years of Protestantism, I have never heard of any good biblical answer that comes remotely close to the story. In fact, there are so many non biblical responses, it makes me admire the Catholic Church even more.

[@ralf547]

@@GarthDomokos what does it say in the Bible about Jonah? Thats all you need. Don't need to explain it further. I am pretty sure we would agree on the many errors of Evangelicalism and liberal Protestantism.

[@retrocalypse]

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, saying the sinner's prayer, telling them to buy a Bible, and turning them loose to whichever local church makes them feel comfortable". - Ray Comfort 3:16

[@catholicskeptic]

@retrocalypse Haha 😆. Yep, standard Evangelical ah, "principles " 🤪.

[@user-fi1pe4dg3u]

Or maybe is it better to say “therefore go and make disciples of all nations, saying the hail Mary , while Jesus thought His disciples to pray to God, telling them to by statues or the cross saying it will protect your homes ,and turning them loose to a false idolatrous doctrine religion to make them feel comfortable, and most of all making sure they stay away from the truth of the gospel.

[@physiocrat7143]

Speaking too fast

[@magomarko5991]

​​@@user-fi1pe4dg3uAren't there protestant channels where you can go? Or keep coming to catholic channels and one day you'll be one of us.

[@emmap1159]

​@@user-fi1pe4dg3u Mary, the angel whose words we repeat , the cross, and the eucharist are all in the gospel, which you choose to reject to your peril.

[@N1IA-4]

Keep doing what you're doing, Hugh. You're doing God's work. I am blessed to have been interview by Keith Little on "Cordial Catholic" a couple of weeks ago. It should be posted soon. There I discuss my conversion to Catholicism from 30 years of Protestantism (from Pentecostalism to Baptist to Reformed to Lutheran). It is great to be home :).

[@ralf547]

I will look for your interview on Cordial Catholic. It will interesting.

[@tony1685]

i am thinking that you never understood what the protest was/is all about, Sir.

[@N1IA-4]

@@tony1685 I know full well. I was a scholarly Protestant for 30 years. At the end of the day, Luther's act was one of schism. Period.

[@tony1685]

@@N1IA-4 do you believe that God's church upholds His Truth -- as 1 Tim 3:15 says, Sir?

[@tony1685]

and do you believe a Christian still shows love to Christ -- as Christ states in John 14:15 ?

[@39knights]

One of the interesting facts about the stigmata of Pare Pio; is that after his death the stigmata he had for 50 years healed itself and disappeared, after he died. The Catholic Faith has miracles in every decade of every century since its founding by Jesus.

[@ralf547]

What does this stigmata miracle teach us?

[@ralf547]

And is there physical evidence of the wounds disappearing? I've seen photos of him with his hands wrapped with the blood stains. I don't recall where exactly the wounds were, in the palms or in the wrists. But are there photos of his earthly remains without the wounds, or is it just what is said to have happened? Yes, I am a skeptic. So is Hugh.

[@essafats5728]

​@@ralf547no, u are not a skeptic but ur typical 1-dimension, shallow, ignorant, diluted "Christian" Protty

[@39knights]

@@ralf547 From the Catholic World Report news article I see "The accounts of those who stayed with Padre Pio until his final hours stated that the stigmata had completely disappeared without a scar. Only a red mark “as if drawn by a red pencil” remained on his side but, it too disappeared. ". So I was mistaken about it disappearing after his death, but i seems to have ocured just shortly before his death. Since the stigmata is such a rare event, and the customs of the times are not set as what to do with such a person when they are dying (ie. can you take sensational photos, etc.), should you be collecting evidence for future possible canonization, etc.; this fact may be left to evidence from eyewitness accounts. As to the placement, from medical reports I remember reading, the holes were in the palm of his hands, with a very thin tissue such that light could pass through it like passing a thin piece of plastic. The same in the soles of his feet and one on his side.

[@ralf547]

@@39knights that would not agree with the Shroud if Turin. Not criticizing, just noting.

[@Lovecatholicfaith]

glad more catholics exposed their opinions about catholic faith , because that's testimony I got so curious about and now I'm in the way to get baptized catholic ! I was raised LDS and was hard to deconstruct it from my brain.

[@kevinf.7586]

You are not alone i'm on a similar path. 😊

[@tony1685]

why not open the Bible and study It to become Christian?? catholicism isn't Christianity and hates our Creator.

[@geoffjs]

@@tony1685You obviously don’t know that Protestantism is heretical, proving the influence of Satan!

[@danvankouwenberg7234]

How can a body be invisible? God bless you, Hugh!

[@vinb2707]

The more I listen to ex pastors such as Hugh, the more I’m convinced of the Roman Catholic Church. The more I engage in debate with evangelicals that I know and listen to teachings and sermons being delivered by evangelical pastors, the more convinced I am of the Catholic Church I know so many people who go to a Baptist church one day then a non denominational church the next. And when they move on they go church shopping until they find a church that fits “their” beliefs. It’s as if the denomination doesn’t even matter. Ha, how does that work? They have boxed themselves in by standing on scripture alone and yet fail to acknowledge the purpose of them. They were meant for liturgical use. They live off of certain scripture verses at the expense of others. Discarding those that don’t fit their doctrinal view. I learned a long time ago that is not a logical position and doesn’t work.

[@ralf547]

God's Word says that we are saved by faith, graciously given by God, not by works [John 3:16, Eph 2:8-9, Luke 7:50, Gal 2:16, Rom 3:28 5:1 4:5, Phil 3:9]. Only those who are already saved, already Christians by virtue of possessing saving faith can please God [Hebrews 11] and therefore do a good work. The Council of Trent anathematizes anyone who believes these in salvation by faith alone. Recognizing the errors of Evangelicals doesn't say anything about Catholicism, good or bad.

[@Harbinger290]

My dear friend, I have expounded upon this notion time and time again, seeking to clarify the misconception that devotion to religion has any positive bearing on salvation. It is pertinent to consider the example of the Pharisees during the time of Christ, individuals who exhibited exceptional expertise in religious matters, comparable to the intellectual rigor of esteemed institutions like Ivy League universities. Nevertheless, despite their profound knowledge and dedication to religious laws, Jesus unequivocally declared that those marginalized by society - tax collectors and prostitutes - would find a place in the Kingdom of God ahead of the well-taught and highly religious Pharisees. This narrative underscores the crucial point that mere adherence to religious traditions does not guarantee heavenly reward; in fact, if history is any indication of future outcomes, one could argue that the highly religious are more likely to be damned. Religion has a way of replacing Christ, and the extremely adherent followers become deceived by their intense piety, missing the simplicity of Christ for salvation. One could simply say, they can’t see the forest for the trees! God Bless!

[@Kitiwake]

​@@Harbinger290 not all pious people, surely?

[@Harbinger290]

@@Kitiwake Friend, all would be both historically and biblically inaccurate. However, Jesus does seem to lend some insight into the issues with being religious as a means to salvation vs. seeking religion as a means of fellowship. Seeking Jesus for salvation and joining a group or fellowship that is seeking to grow in Him is the proper approach. It seems we have a lot of people who think they’ve found a religion that saves instead of finding the person who saves. Hope you get my point and my concern for others. God bless!

[@catholicskeptic]

@@ralf547 And yet you are yourself, in this very comment spreading errors. You are quoting the standard, select verses, to argue for the utterly Protestant notion of instantaneous salvation, obtained by "only believing ". James 2:24, Hebrews 5:9, Hebrews 12:14, Luke 9:23, Romans 2:4-7, Acts 2:38, 1Peter 3:21, Acts 22:16. All these verses tell us clearly that more is necessary than just the initial act of believing. The phrase, "those already saved", is a terminology unknown before the Protestant Reformation. For a historically savvy Lutheran, you sound here like good ole Dispensational Baptist.

[@Shevock]

Bishop Strickland is sadly been sharing neoprotestant literature. I pray for him to return into full communion. We just don't have the will to fight hyperindividualism without the Truth, Beauty and Grace of obedience. That individualism started the Protestant movement 500 years ago and the neoprotestant movement with Lefevre who refused to be obedient to a council, a papacy, a shepherding style they individually found challenging.

[@atrifle8364]

American Catholicism is soaking in Protestant culture, with the emphasis on protest, unfortunately.

[@ralf547]

Obedience to God, as He speaks to us thru His Word. Not a blind obedience to any church body.

[@sandra4065]

@@ralf547In other words, you missed the video. As it explained quite well, Jesus never founded a book; never commanded the Apostles to write anything down. What Jesus DID found was a Church. Just One. And all Christians received the Christian faith through the One Church for 382 years before the Bible was even compiled - by the Catholic Church.

[@ralf547]

@@sandra4065 I agree, Christ founded one true Church. All those whom He is saving through His perfect life, suffering, and death on our behalf. He said the Father gave Him all that He has and won't lose. He says His sheep know Him and follow His voice. Baptism bestows the Spirit, forgives sins, and saves (per Peter), and the Catholic church admits that baptism does all this even when performed in a non-Catholic church. So in some Protestant churches, Christians are being created outside of Catholicism. It's the faith that the Spirit gives that saves. Faith that unites through belief and total dependence upon Jesus who is the only way to the Father. His kingdom is not of this world. Catholicism is an institution in this world, along with every other church. But Christians aren't isolated in one worldly church institution, they are found in Christ, His mystical body. I am not saved by a book, I am saved by Christ. NOT by the Catholic church.

[@sandra4065]

@@ralf547 Actually, the Catholic Church bridges Earth and Heaven at every Mass, unlike Protestant churches.

[@jonatasmachado7217]

Excellent content!

[@catholicskeptic]

thanks, pray for me. God bless

[@tony1685]

@@catholicskeptic Sir, do you deny the fact that catholicism mandates sin?

[@geoffjs]

@@tony1685What nonsense, explain yourself!

[@tony1685]

@@geoffjs of course! sin = transgression of God's law -- 1 John 3:4 catholicism encourages bowing and praying to statues, idols and body parts -- breaking Exodus 20:8-11 catholicism is a day late. the Lord's day, the Holy day, the Lord's day was yesterday, the 7th day Sabbath -- Exodus 20:8-11 as such, catholicism proves it's not His church. it can't be.

[@EricN571]

Well explained!! Spot on . Thank you .

[@catholicskeptic]

@Eric571 Glad it communicated well, thanks. All Glory to God.

[@thedomesticmonk772]

Excellent presentation, I’m glad I found it. Thanks much!

[@catholicskeptic]

@thedomesticmonk772 Thanks , all Glory to God! Please pray for me, God Bless.

[@oldervermonter7396]

The Catholic Church, and only the Catholic Church, explains fully why things are as they are. This includes all the things wrong in the Church. The evidence shows this, but God deliberately doesn't make it overwhelming, because He wants you to choose Him out of love. Protestant denominations are defined by their differences from the Catholic Church - not the other way around.

[@catholicskeptic]

@oldervermonter7396 So true.

[@ralf547]

Protestant denominations are a mess, picking and choosing which portions of God's Word they want to believe, and ignoring or reasoning away others. This is true of the mainline liberal ones and most all of the Reformed and more conservative ones. What divides that Orthodox and Catholics right now? A question you should ponder. Some portion of the Catholic church is explaining how some things ought to be and how some things shouldn't be right now. But the differences between Catholicism and Protestantism aren't much in many ways. Achievement of salvation based to some degree on the sinner instead of solely on Christ. A departure from accepting the entirety of God's Word. Required beliefs and/or obedience of things not included in and sometimes even forbidden by God in His Word. Even in a way a Pope. Catholicism has one. Lot's of Protestant denominations have their version even as they scream in opposition to the Catholic Pontiff.

[@oldervermonter7396]

@@ralf547 Thank you for your response. A few thoughts in answer: 1 - Catholic and Protestant should have a lot in common. Protestantism came from Catholicism. Anything "True" in Protestantism comes from the source. 2 - Orthodox also split from the Catholic Church. In many ways they are very close, but the differences exist. Again, what is "true" in Orthodoxy is rooted in the Catholic Church. Remember that there are Eastern Catholic Rites that use the same rites as the Orthodox but are in union with the Pope and thus in the Catholic Church. Thank you for your thoughts.

[@ralf547]

@@oldervermonter7396 we know that even pre east/west split, the church wasn't perfect, cause they needed councils and saints to correct errors. As the Reformation approached, corrections were badly needed again. There was as a response the counter Reformation. I think the Reformation started by the church, motivating Luther, should have been what the church adopted. There woukdn't have been so much following turmoil.

[@tony1685]

actually Sir, the Bible proves clearly that what our Creator proves a church -- catholicism doesn't fit. they lack His criteria. a true -protestant- Christian church is defined by it's desire and striving to follow God at His Word of Truth -- John 17:17

[@ojhn]

Mr Comfort needs to meet up with someone like you on his walk abouts, and not the easy pickings uninformed Catholics he finds.

[@francissweeney7318]

Peter explained how we receive the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38.

[@tony1685]

and Acts 5:37 -- one must believe and repent -- which infants can't do. another teaching showing catholicism isn't Christianity.

[@geoffjs]

⁠@@tony1685Protestant bias & ignorance is astounding! If you are fair minded, His One True Church features throughout the bible including Mt 16 18-19, 1 Tim 3:15 & she codified your bible in 382 from which the heretic removed 7 books without approval Deut 4:2. His Church became known as Catholic or Universal in 107 The New Testament includes three passages that explicitly refer to “households” being baptized: “She was baptized, with her household” (Acts 16:15) “He was baptized at once, with all his family” (Acts 16:33; 18:8 also implicitly implies it) “I did baptize also the household of Stephanas.” (1 Corinthians 1:16) which could have included infants. Likewise with Acts 2 38-39 Why are Protestants inconsistent with their selection of texts? They correctly challenge Catholics but seem to be blind to texts if Catholics return the challenge.

[@francissweeney7318]

Agreed !

[@tony1685]

@@francissweeney7318 keep spreading Truth, friend! and for this evening, sundown -- *Happy Sabbath!!!* i pray church tomorrow morning is a blessing for you and yours.

[@DUZCO10]

Jeremiah 17:9 "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?"

[@sandra4065]

The reason Protestantism and all heresy exists 👍🏼

[@johnchung6777]

Excellent presentation very informative and helpful for Catholic’s and anyone else that finds understanding of what is said in this splendid video thank you very much Catholic brother AMEN 🙏 DEO GRATIS HOSANNA IN EXCELSIS DEO 🐑🕊️✨

[@genemyersmyers6710]

If protestants and orthodox would believe scripture, they would know the Catholic church is the true church.. the keys to the kingdom.

[@ednewcomer]

When Jesus walked the earth, many Jews questioned was He or wasn't He the long prophesied Messiah. My point is that discerning the truth takes effort. Ask the Holy Spirit to help you. God will lead you to His Church for He wants all people to be saved.

[@ralf547]

Everyone starts out dead in sin, unable to make a decision to become a Christian. Jesus said the Father brings people to Him, they don't of their own volition or reasoning believe and be saved. Growing in knowledge of God's truth is part of sanctification and requires the effort of the Christian cooperating with the Holy Spirit. That happens only after the individual is a Christian because faith is needed in order to do anything pleasing to God. And pursuing Him and His truth would certainly be something that pleases Him. (Heb 11)

[@ednewcomer]

@@ralf547 The journey begins with Baptism. Before baptism, we're all dead to sin. Baptism orients the soul not only to worship God and serve Him with their lives, but also to take part in His kingly, prophetic, and priestly offices. St. Paul describes baptism as the “first installment of our inheritance toward redemption as God’s possession, to the praise of His glory” (Ephesians 1:14). Baptism does five things: 1.) It forgives all sins that were committed before baptism including original, mortal, and venial sin. 2.) It makes the baptized a new creature. 3.) It turns the baptized into a newly adopted son or daughter of God and a member of the Church. 4.) It brings them to share in the royal priesthood of Christ. (1 Peter 2:9) 5.) It leaves a spiritual mark (or character) of belonging to Christ on the soul of the baptized. Baptism is the foundation of communion within the Church, and the initiation into Christ’s Body the Church. Finally, baptisms are a family affair, not just for the individual but for the Church as well. Thus, salvation is really a family affair. We're in this together.

[@jacoblaan3707]

I loved your presentation!

[@Twannyberg]

God bless you, welcome home!👍

[@panes840]

P.s. i think people worry about Chinese whispers in and outside of the written word in RCC or protestant. There is no guarantee, so how do we deal with that psychological issue? Thanks Hugh.

[@HAL9000-su1mz]

Medication or therapy.

[@panes840]

@@HAL9000-su1mz not a helpful reply and you know it.

[@atrifle8364]

We first acknowledge that we look loons because the group in question has a distinct physical appearance. Where are they, seriously? Even the discussion of such things brings to mind a very different group historically and we probably don't want to go there. Beyond there, the answer is that Jesus built a Church and that the gates shall not prevail against it. That implies not only defense, but offense. We'll be fine.

[@panes840]

@@atrifle8364 sorry I don't understand what you are trying to say

[@diedertspijkerboer]

The church is like any company: it takes a problem, or invents one and then presents its product as a solution to that problem. The best marketing strategy is to present its solution as the only possible solution, because it creates a kind of monopoly in the eyes of the customers. The problem that the church made up is sin and a soul that somehow is affected by that sin and might go to hell. The products that cure the problem are the sacraments and donating money to the Church. Once you realise that people are inherently flawed, that takes away most of the guilt about "sin" and puts the problem in the lap of the "entity" that invented people. Add to that modern psychology, psychatry, etc. and you realise that the products the church has to offer aren't that good or very useful. Add also that there's no scientific evidence for the existence of the soul or hell and the church becomes almost entirely irrelevant. So then the remaining question is: who founded the church and came up with the problem and the products: people who didn't know any better and made stuff up. Over the course of time, the ideas and products that appeared most convincing to the "customers" won out, or replaced other ideas and products, which is why there are 2 billion Christians today and hardly any who believe that the Roman gods are real. Realise all this and you will not be burdened by your "sins" any more than necessary and you'll take a more rational approach to curing your faults and shortcomings.

[@danielmeadows3712]

Hi, hope you are well. You say the Church created a problem in order to sell a solution, that being sin . Can you explain why they would do that and to what end?

[@ralf547]

There is no scientific evidence to explain gravity. Do you have any moral standard, personally? Don't call it sin if you don't want to. But is it right or wrong to physically torture a dog, or a child? If social norms change and make child sacrifice acceptable/desirable, will child sacrifice than be a good thing? Now that you have supposedly destroyed "sin" in your comment, explain right and wrong for me.

[@sandra4065]

No.

[@francissweeney7318]

Isaiah 55:8 " For My thoughts are not your thoughts , neither are your ways My ways, declares the Lord." Every church that starts explaining the Lord such was done by in 381 AD where man's explanation of a trinity ignores the Lords declaration. It is a prideful act, refuted by the Lord in straight forward language. Every denomination that I am aware of ignores Isaiah 55:8.

[@larrybedouin2921]

Jesus said "It is finished!" Not It is consummated. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: *Nor yet that he should offer himself often* as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; *For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world* but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: So *Christ was ONCE OFFERED to bear the sins of many* and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. {Hebrews 9:24-28}

[@MrJohnmartin2009]

Is the secular age a necessary conclusion after Europe dropped the sacraments and suffered a withdrawal of grace?

[@therese6447]

Work out your salvation in fear and trembling not I know in my heart Im good LOL

[@buschenterprises4788]

they say “i have the witness of the Spirit “ huh? how do you know that?

[@jeromepopiel388]

My friend, when God makes all things new, there's no mistaking that. It's not like when we decide we're going to do better. When God does His work, there's no mistake. There is a totally changed life. Luke 19:8-10 [8]And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold. [9]And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham. [10]For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost. When you meet Jesus, He turns it all around. And you can't stop thanking Him for talking your burden.

[@ralf547]

I've heard so many things proclaimed by public people and by friends that were supposedly from God, the Spirit. They were false, didn't happen, or somehow changed over time. If they turned out to be true, it was at about the same rate as by chance. If anyone claims to hear from God, there must be a standard for judging it's legitimacy. If it doesn't violate God's Word or cause confusion with regard to God's Word, no need to criticize it, but since it would agree with God's Word it's not really a problem. Otherwise it is a problem and could be harmful.

[@larrybedouin2921]

It was Peters confession of faith that Jesus would build his church on. Not on Peter himself. When Jesus came into the coasts of *Caesarea Philippi* he asked his disciples, saying, "Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?" And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, "But whom say ye that I am?" And Simon Peter answered and said, *Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God* And Jesus answered and said unto him, "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and *upon this rock I will build my church* and *the gates of hell* shall not prevail against it.” {Matthew 16:13-18} "upon *this rock* I will build my church" is a demonstrated pronoun. No different than, Jesus answered and said unto them, "Destroy *this temple* and in three days I will raise it up.” {John 2:19} "the gates of hell" Here Jesus was using satire, for the pagans believed that the gates of hades was at a cave in Caesarea Philippi. “And I will give unto thee *the keys of the kingdom of heaven* and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” {Matthew 16:19} The keys to the kingdom is not exclusive to Peter, for anyone can open the kingdom of heaven by their witness of the gospel to unbelievers. “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.” {Matthew 10:32} That *if thou shalt confess with thy mouth* the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and *with the mouth confession is made unto salvation* {Romans 10:9-10} And that *every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord* to the glory of God the Father. {Philippians 2:11} Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. {1 John 4:15} And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, *If thou believest with all thine heart thou mayest* And he answered and said, *I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God* {Acts 8:35-36}

[@twoody9760]

All your quotes are from a Catholic book. The Catholic Church gave the Bible to the world when it canonized the books of the Bible. The Catholic Church interprets the Bible correctly. The Church would not canonize a book contrary to Catholicism. "It was Peters confession of faith" is pure Protest-ant tradition. Your false interpretation was not proposed until the 16th century when Protestantism began.

[@larrybedouin2921]

@@twoody9760 Nonsense.

[@larrybedouin2921]

@@twoody9760 That old scarlet harlot kept the bible from the people and would still be doing it if it wasn't for the printing press.

[@twoody9760]

@@larrybedouin2921 In other words, you cannot refute anything I posted.

[@larrybedouin2921]

@@twoody9760 That old scarlet harlot kept the bible from the people. They would continue today if not for the printing press. My bible is the pastor's KJV bible which Rome had no part in.

[@larrybedouin2921]

-- "On the day of preperation, at the hour of dinner, there came out pursuers and horsemen" and Polycarp was killed "on the great day of the Sabbath, at the eighth hour" (The encyclical epistle of the church at Smyrna, the Martyrdom of Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. Verses 7.1 & 8.1 Charles H. Hoole's 1885 translation.) -- "Again as to the assertion that Sabbath has been abolished. We deny that He has abolished it plainly; for He was Himself Lord of the Sabbath." (Archelaus c. 3rd century.) -- "Gnostic 8th day Origins" "They affirm that man was formed on the eighth day, for sometimes they will have him been made on the sixth day, and sometimes on the eighth, unless perchance they mean that the earthly part was formed on the sixth day, but his fleshly part on the eighth, for these two things are distinguished by them." (Irenaeus of Lyons c. 2nd century.) -- The Gnostic "Eight Day" origins of Sunday rest. "But the works of the Nicolaitans in that time were false and troublesome men, who, as ministers under the name of Nicholas, had made for themselves a hersey, to the effect that what might be offered to Idols might be exorcised and eaten, and whoever should have committed fornication might receive peace on the eighth day." (Victorinious of Pettau c. 3rd century.) -- "For almost all the churches throughout the world celebrate the mysteries on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of *Alexandria and Rome* on account of some *ancient tradition* cease to do this." (Socrates Scholasticus c. 380 - 439 A.D.) -- "There are many here among us now, who fast on the same day as the Jews, [Rome made the Sabbath day a fast] and keep the Sabbaths in the same mannor." (John Chrysostom c. 339 - 407 A.D.) -- 'Primitive Christianity' Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria tells us that "They assemble on Saturday, not that they are infected with Judaism, but only to worship Christ the Lord of the Sabbath" (Pseudo Athanasius; William Cave c. 1676) -- "Thus Christ did not at all rescind the Sabbath, He kept the law thereof.....even in the case before us He fulfilled the law while interpreting its condition; moreover, He exhibits in a clear light the different kinds of work, while doing what the law excepts from the sacredness of the Sabbath and while imparting to the Sabbath itself, which from the beginning had been consecrated by the Benediction of the Father. An additional sanctity by His own Beneficent action. For He furnished to this day divine safeguards..... *a course which His adversary would have pursued for some other days, to avoid honouring the Creator's Sabbath* and restoring to the Sabbath the works which were proper for it." (3rd century Tertillian on the Sabbath.) *Council of Laodicea* canon 29 A.D. 363 "Christians must not Judaize by resting on the sabbath day, but must work on that day, rather honoring --the Lord's Day-- [Sun-day] and, if they can, resting as Christians. But if they they shall be found to be Judaizers, let them be an anathema from Christ." ^ Proof that true Christianity still remembered the sabbath day, to keep it Holy, even in the fourth century A.D.

[@ralf547]

7th Day Adventist?

[@larrybedouin2921]

@@ralf547 Gnostic 8th day?

[@thisis_chavez]

Our Lady of Christendom, pray for us

[@mitchellosmer1293]

quote---Our Lady of Christendom, pray for us..unquote ---Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten. Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun. ---Psalm 6:5 For in death there is no remembrance of you; in Sheol who will give you praise? ---Psalm 146:4 When his breath departs, he returns to the earth; on that very day his plans perish. ---Ecclesiastes 9:6 Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun. ---Genesis 3:19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.” ----James 2:26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. ---Job 14:10-12 But a man dies and is laid low; man breathes his last, and where is he? As waters fail from a lake and a river wastes away and dries up, so a man lies down and rises not again; till the heavens are no more he will not awake or be roused out of his sleep. --****John 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. ---Hebrews 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment. (Judgement on Judgement day) ---Acts 7:60 And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep (died). ---Revelation 20:4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. -----Job 14:12 So a man lies down and rises not again; till the heavens are no more he will not awake or be roused out of his sleep. According to Catholics, God and the Gospels are liars !!!! Where in those QUOTES FROM the BIBLE does any of those quotes even come close to purgatory being true???

[@geoffjs]

@@mitchellosmer1293 Purgatory The concept of Purgatory does exist in Scripture which is very clear when it says, “But nothing unclean shall enter [heaven]” (Rev. 21:27). Hab. 1:13 says, “You [God]… are of purer eyes than to behold evil and cannot look on wrong…” How many of us will be perfectly sanctified at the time of our deaths? I dare say most of us will be in need of further purification in order to enter the gates of heaven after we die, if, please God, we die in a state of grace. Purgatory can be supported by II Maccabees 12:39-46, we discover Judas Maccabeus and members of his Jewish military forces collecting the bodies of some fallen comrades who had been killed in battle. When they discovered these men were carrying “sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear” (vs. 40), Judas and his companions discerned they had died as a punishment for sin. Therefore, Judas and his men “turned to prayer beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out… He also took up a collection… and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably… Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.” This may be why Luther removed Macabees from his bible & was tempted to do the same with the book of James Luke 12 35-48 servants rewarded/punished in varying ways For some Protestants to say that all sin is sin and to not differentiate between mortal sin like adultery and venial sin like stealing a dollar is illogical & a poor understanding

[@anthonyfowler2623]

James 2:26

[@frederickanderson1860]

0:24 catholic church has been around longtime, like the monarchy. The problem is what do you replace it with??? Of course the revolutions in France America England Russia, proved you can't removed any long standing system over night. Not because they say we are the true successor's of the apostle's.

[@Lya3588]

👍

[@panes840]

Where is it written that she was a virgin before the conception? Im not a,skeptic im just asking because mr and mrs average on the street dont have access to all this other documentation to see what's written In fact, what documentation? The one thing i am akeptic on is why so, so much is kept under lock and key at the vatican. Some of it sure i can understand, but not all, and tgis is key to folks her are skeptic. It's all cloak and dagger. Can you point to stuff we can rwad outside of the bible. Thanks Hugh and God Bless you for this channel. Really helping me.

[@geoffjs]

Luke 1 28-37 is very clear & confirms her immaculate conception.

[@swim96ful]

Matthew 1:22-23, “All this took place to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophets: “Look, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son…”. It’s a reference to Isaiah 7:14. “The Vatican” doesn’t hold any doctrine behind locks doors ;)

[@catholicskeptic]

@panes840 Matthew 1:25,clearly states Joseph knew her not until she forth her first born. And I know that many Protestants love this verse because of the word "until". They assume, as I once did, that this means she no longer remained a virgin after Christ's birth. But the Bible speaks the same way about Rachel in the Old Testament, not having anymore children "until" her death. Does this mean she had children after her death? First born does not mean there is a second born and a third born, etc. I understand where you are coming from in your questions, so please don't be offended by my answers. But yes Mr. and Mrs. Average do indeed have access. They can read,the early Church Fathers, the History of the Church written by Eusebius, which was the first history of the Church written 3 centuries into the existence of the Church. They read , for outside of the Church references, such as the works of Josephus, 1st century historian. All these are readily available online, in libraries, bookstores, Amazon, etc. As far as"secret, locked away, hidden stuff", I discovered, in my own journey, much these ideas are myths created by outside of Church, anti-catholic sources. There is a ton of accurate historical information available. Sadly many Protestant and other non-Catholic people take it as fact, when they read these very biased sources against the Church. I , sadly, bought into them for years. So I encourage you to look into the early Church fathers, you'll be startlingly amazed at just how Catholic they were.

[@HAL9000-su1mz]

@@catholicskeptic The Knox Translation expresses the same verse more clearly and IN THE CONTEXT of Isaiah 7:14: "25 ...and he had not known her when she bore a son, her first-born, to whom he gave the name Jesus."

[@panes840]

@catholicskeptic Hugh, this is marvellous. The reason I say this is because ivhave been a lukewarm protestant for years. I am 52 now. I'm looking to to do start a bible study this September into converting to a Catholic . I can tell you that here in the UK, where I am NOBODY, has ever pointed this out. I wouldn't know I could read such early writing myself. Why? It's crammed down our throats to not ask questions. Just follow the bible. Seriously. Can I make x2 suggestions. 1. Do a video outlining what material is available and how it can help. Listvit in the description box. Maybe it's more than 1 video. I can guarantee you that you will be the first to do so. 2. I see you hosting online bible study groups in real time, reaching people far and wide. Listening to you is a breath of fresh air, and your conversational style is like sitting down to watch a wise good friend explain things. Apart from the Exorcist files on YT, this channel is where I am learning. Hugh, a big hug from across the pond. God Bless you and thank you.

[@mariecait]

The Catholic Church tells us to be skeptical and rational! ❤

[@tony1685]

no, the catholic 'church' tells you to stop using sense, Scripture and integrity. John 14:15 proves this clearly.

[@geoffjs]

@@tony1685Over recent years, I have been astounded how irrational & inconsistent most Protestants are, quite sad really, not properly using your God given reason, which reflects poor or non existent philosophy. In spite of your bible focus, you can’t justify sola Scriptura from the bible neither personal interpretation! Why use the bible codified by the CC if you’re anti Catholic? To prove my point, Protestants don’t feel comfortable with the BOTH/AND view of Catholicism instead of a restrictive EITHER/OR alternative eg - Jesus & Mary, - Body & Blood, - hierarchy & authority, - the cross & corpus, - Faith & Reason - Sacred Tradition & Sacred Scripture etc. In addition, they don’t regard baptism Jn 3:5 & His Real True Presence Jn 6 51 as necessary for salvation, in spite of these commands from Jesus, your way or the highway? The bible says nothing about baptism by immersion neither does it exclude infant baptism which was common in the early church, consistent with circumcision after birth. I know you’ll say what about belief? Young Catholic adults confirm their faith in Confirmation By the way, rebaptism is illogical & blasphemy as one can only ever be baptised once, any subsequent baptism calls into question the work of the Holy Spirit at the first baptism

[@downenout8705]

So from a "sceptical" perspective how do you "know" that the biblical resurrection claim is true?

[@catholicskeptic]

@downenout8705 First you have to abandon the idea that no miracles are possible. The view of the idiots of the 19th century who called themselves by the erroneous name "free thinkers"! 🤪 So called free thinkers took the dogmatic view that the supernatural cannot happen ever. Other people would say , "hey there might be a miracle or not, let's consider the evidence. But the pompous free thinkers made their own dogma. The original term agnostic meant one "cannot know". To which I ask, "how do you KNOW you cannot know"? If one is truly "skeptical " then one cannot subscribe to "thought rules". The message from Christianity from the beginning was "resurrection "! Not a philosophy,or some other notion or idea. The higher criticism school of interpretation is full of errors. There are more manuscripts of the New Testament documents than anything. They get denied because the higher criticism school, followed the "no supernatural, no miracles possible rule", ergo, obviously we can't go by the documents. The disciples of a crucified by Rome Rabbi of the 1st century, suddenly came out from hiding and boldly proclaimed His resurrection, they faced suffering and were martyred , and subsequently the next several generations did so with utter conviction. Now that in itself does not "prove" it happened, but it lends considerable weight to having happened. Jesus existence and healing and miracles reputation was noted definitely by Josephus, a non Christian source, who had no reason to report it. Jesus himself had such an impact on history that He split history in two halfs. The calendar the civilized world goes by divides it between AD and BC. Despite the stupid CE and BCE sometimes used by contemporary scholars. What was that common era , pray tell? 🤪Even Neal DeGrasse Tysson , an agnostic, says the use of CE and BCE is stupid, as the Calendar developed by the Christians was very accurate. Everything we have in our society, universities, hospitals, the notion of caring for the poor, etc. all came into standard practice from this Christianity and its resurrection beliefs. Even Richard Dawkins acknowledges himself a "cultural Christian ", in that he prefers the civilization that emerged from Christianity as the best we have. The reality of miracles, medically investigated ( with the intention to debunk) miracles have been highly documented, all in the name of the one supposedly risen from the dead. These examples are the building of a body of evidence, a case to argue Christ as being Who He claimed to be, and therefore, being risen from the dead. Now again these are not "beyond a shadow of a doubt", proofs. But they are potentially proofs that there is something real and genuine that happened 2000 years ago, regarding the crucified teacher from Nazareth. These things ( there are more, but i am responding to your question off the top of my head) give one a basis to at least consider that the event of the resurrection of Christ may have indeed happened as a real and historical event. But thanks for the suggestion, I may do a video going into more details on this question.

[@downenout8705]

@@catholicskeptic Wow you do take Psalm fourteen seriously don't you. Fyi demonising the out group doesn't defacto make the in group right. When you start by telling me to abandon a position that I don't hold, it's difficult to take the rest of your bloviated sophistry seriously. You say that the miraculous is well documented, but you don't cite a single peer reviewed and published scientific paper out of the millions available on a multitude of subjects, that reaches a supernatural conclusion. I am a simple person I just follow the scientific consensus and that consensus is that nothing supernatural has ever been discovered. You say that the disciples were martyred but you don't cite your sources of this information. From my research you only have Peter and some very late and highly dubious sources for the others. You mention Joesphus's Testimonium Flavianum, that nearly all modern scholar reject as being unauthentic, and even if authentic would only be a report on what Christians believed, not the truth of those beliefs. The rest of what you wrote is a non sequitur with regard to the question I asked so I am ignoring it. I don't consider the above to be remotely close enough for anyone to conclude that they "know" that the biblical resurrection claim is true.

[@geoffjs]

If there was no resurrection, where is He buried? Secondly, the apostles & subsequent believers have been prepared to die for the Truth, which is only possible because of their conviction

[@downenout8705]

​@@geoffjsHave you not heard of the term "missing in action". The body could have been taken down by the Romans and thrown into a common grave and the tomb narrative is simply made up. I have already responded to martyrdom nonsense. If you can't see my reply, try searching the comments under "New". If you still can't see it then the content creator has hidden my reply from you.

[@geoffjs]

@@downenout8705Why then Christianity spread around the world & became the dominant faith. Martyrs don’t die for a lie, they die because of their conviction of the Truth of His One True Church which has, in spite of sinful men, existed for 2000 yrs, proof of her divine origin. Science can’t explain the supernatural eg Eucharistic miracles around the world with the same AB blood type & living heart tissue. Likewise, the miracles at Marian apparition sites which you can reject but they are what they are! Messages from Jesus via His mother have prophesied 1) the rise of Freemasonry & Communism, passionate enemies of the CC, 2)the Second World War & 3)the possibility of WW3, not generally, but with specific points. Your rejection of God & the supernatural is your loss. Be open minded!

[@paulsmallwood1484]

Protestant response. Historic Protestantism knows nothing of “I just know it in my heart” or “the Holy Spirit showed me”. If you were pastoring a church and this is what you taught, you were not teaching historic Protestantism. Maybe you were a sub sect of Evangelicalism but you were not Protestant. You were not teaching anything biblical as far as that goes. I find it interesting that a large number of Roman Catholics are caught up in the Charismatic Movement which also promotes “inner feelings and promptings”, “I just know it in my heart”, visions, visitations from Mary, visitations from saints, prophesying, etc, etc. but apparently it’s ok when Roman Catholics do it.

[@catholicskeptic]

No Paul, I certainly did not teach that, I simply pointed out many my congregation believed it. And many, many commenters on here who identify as Protestant Christians believe it. It has been one of the most popular responses. I love how you comment by throwing in an accusation, very entertaining debate trick. 😂

[@paulsmallwood1484]

@@catholicskeptic I noticed how you did not mention my comment that many Roman Catholics do the same thing. It isn’t something uniquely Evangelical. I however will gladly point out that Roman Catholics who engage in these sort of things are not following official teaching anymore than historic Protestants. Evangelicals are a whole different category.

[@jperez7893]

The Catholic Church is one holy catholic and apostolic meaning it is singular and monarchical under the pope because the church is the kingdom of heaven on earth. It is holy because its king is God Himself, Jesus Christ is sitting on the throne of David at the right hand of God forever. It is catholic because it is universal, it is for everyone and message of the gospel is to be preached for everyone so that all who believe and be baptized may be saved by the blood of Christ the Lord. It is apostolic because it persists in the world through an unbroken line of succession and it is historical. The bible can withstand historical scrutiny and is witness to history. Its deposit of faith is unchanging. It is against abortion, divorce, it maintains an exclusively male priesthood, and it maintains the sacrificial nature of biblical Israel to the present under the new covenant inaugurated by Jesus Christ. The sacrifice of the Lamb of God, the offering of bread and wine, and the offering of incense to the God of Israel has never ceased. No other institution on earth have these qualities.

[@catholicskeptic]

@jperez7893 Excellent summation of The Doctrine of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Thanks for sharing it. God Bless.

[@ralf547]

Just as God's people/Israel was based on faith in God as Savior and not on genetics, the New Testament Church is based on faith in Christ as Savior. Jesus is the head of His Church. His Church is Apostolic in that Jesus told the Apostles that saving faith would be created using their teaching/preaching which was the result of the Holy Spirit He sent them, bringing to their minds all that He/Jesus had done and taught in their presence during His earthly ministry. The Apostles used by God to save is what makes the Church Apostolic. Yes, believe and be baptized. Only males can serve as pastors. Christ's sacrifice was totally sufficient and fulfilled and made all the Old Testament sacrifices obsolete, to think that any further sacrifice is needed for forgiveness or salvation is to deny Christ as is explained so very clearly in the Book of Hebrews. Our sacrifices now are those of thanksgiving and of self sacrifice for the sake of our neighbors. God needs nothing of us. He has everything. In the Lord's Supper, we offer nothing to God. Christ has already entered into the throne room offering His blood once and for all. In the Lord's Supper, God gives to us His body and blood for just what He said it is for. The forgiveness of our sins. Only God's Church offers all these qualities. But God's Church isn't isolated in the Catholic church. It is Christ's mystical body, all those the Father has drawn and for whom Christ is Savior through faith. To think the Catholic church is essential for salvation is to make the Catholic church savior instead of Christ who is Savior, the only way to the Father.

[@jperez7893]

@@ralf547 unfortunately, you are misinformed. “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.” “…but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.” “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church …”

[@530jazzercise]

Jesus said, 1) few will be saved and, 2) the damned will suffer physical & metaphysical agonies eternally..what’s god’s calculus? how many souls suffering perpetually equals one that achieves the beatific vision?

[@ralf547]

Who are you asking this of? Hugh, those watching Hugh's video, or God? Who might have the answer? You expecting one of us watching the video to have that answer?

[@530jazzercise]

anyone who has an answer

[@ralf547]

@@530jazzercise don't hold your breath. It's kinda like asking if God can make a boulder so big He can't move.

[@Harbinger290]

Friend, please read Acts 16:30-33 and follow the plan. God Bless!

[@530jazzercise]

classic prooftexter non sequitur..you don’t even have the prooftext to show that acts is scripture..so much for sola scrip

[@anthonyfowler2623]

Start with the holy shroud of Turin

[@nedlandry7424]

Since the truth of scripture is our only real source of truth from above we are to take every idea and weigh it against the Word of God , as Paul commended the Bereans for, rather than just taking his word for it

[@catholicskeptic]

@nedlandry7424 Well you are partially right, the Word of God is our source of truth, but the Word of God is more than the scripture. How do you know at all what books belong in the Bible? Is the Table of Contents Page inspired? Does the Bible anywhere state what writings belong in it? In the canon I mean? aThe Bible no where even teaches Sola Scriptura. Jesus established a Church; gave the keys to the Kingdom to Peter. The Church in the book of Acts is clearly hierarchical, with all continuing steadfastly in the Apostles' teachings. ( see Acts 2:42) The New Testament canon was not collected, codified and established ( the 27 books you and I accept as scripture) until 382 AD. Almost 400 years after the time of Christ. Now yes those books were written in the 1st century, but so were many others. How did Christians live, many die as martyrs, for almost 4 centuries with not clear New Testament to read. 90 % could not read, and no moveable type printing press would be invented until the 1400s. So a @go by the Bible alone" would never have worked. What they did have was a Living Church, which taught them through the Successors to the Apostles, and it was Pope Damasus and the Bishops who first chose and authorized those 27 books. So every time you go to the Bible, you are accepting the authority of the One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

[@sandra4065]

Yet when Paul wrote that, the only Scriptures were the Old Testament ones. How does that work again?

[@tony1685]

@@sandra4065 *False Dichotomy Logical Fallacy* -- God's Word is the same in both Testaments.

[@tony1685]

@@catholicskeptic nonsense Sir -- there is a difference between the Christian Bible and the catholic 'bible' which is missing verses and has added apocryphal books, which contradict God's Word. the Christian Bible is derived from the Byzantine Texts, aka Textus Receptus, originating from Antioch, where Christianity was born - Acts 11:26 the Bible exposes and totally destroys the catholic 'church' and the nonsense it teaches. this is why catholicism only has 2 methods of attack -- first they try to take full responsibility for God's Word -- then, when that's easily proven incorrect -- they minimize and downplay His Word.

[@geoffjs]

@@tony1685You’ve got things completely wrong! Don’t forget that Jesus left us a Church which codified your bible in 382AD which included the apocrypha which were in the Septuagint that Jesus & His apostles used. The heretic removed the apocrypha & added the word ALONE to Rom 3:28, the only time that Faith alone appears in the bible. The Church is the pillar & foundation of Truth 1 Tim 3:15 What are the missing parts of the Catholic bible?

[@frederickanderson1860]

5:09 this is just ur own personal opinion,u can't justify ur own opinions and make generalized examples.

[@geoffjs]

Mt 16 18-19

[@tony1685]

actually, that passage starts at verse :13 and ends with :20 -- the Subject of that passage being Jesus Christ is the Son of God. notice it's not _'Peter's Promotion'_ , but _'Peter's Confession'_ there are multiple other reasons to prove this as well -- let me know if you'd like some of them listed, Sir. thanks for reading.

[@francissweeney7318]

The will of the Father is " To believe on Him who He sent ." Jesus is The Word of God. To do the will of The Father is to believe on The Word of God. No additional doctrines of men are required.

[@catholicskeptic]

@francissweeney7318 Absolutely true. But it also means to believe Jesus, in what He said. It is not enough to believe in the Jesus of the Word, one has to believe in the words of Jesus. Jesus established a living Church, promised the gates of hell will not prevail against it. ( Matthew16:13-19) Jesus told us we eat His flesh and drink His blood we have not life in us .( John 6:48-58). Jesus gave His Apostle (and there their successors) the power to forgive or retain sins. ( John 20:21-23) The completed Bible was given to us by the Church Christ founded and is Head of, The Catholic Church. The first canon of the 27 books of the New Testament was selected, collected and established at the Council of Rome under Pope Damasus and the Bishops of the Catholic Church in 382 AD. The Catholic Church did not "add doctrines of men", but rather Protestant rebels started in the 16th century Subtracted Doctrine from His Church, centuries after the time of Christ.

[@francissweeney7318]

No where in scripture does Jesus give authority to the successors of His chosen Apostles. Jesus knew the hearts of men. He did not leave His church incomplete. The catholic church has deviated far from His teachings over time.

[@catholicskeptic]

@@francissweeney7318 And you get this from the Bible, that the Church you trash gave you, 🤔. And of course was not complete with the New Testament until 382 AD. I ask what I ask all of you who hold such opinions, is your Table of Contents page inspired by the Holy Ghost? Where in the New Testament is it written which books belong in there? Oops two questions, but I don't think you can adequately answer either one. Yet you think Jesus, Who yes knows the hearts of men, left it to thousands and thousands of individuals to privately figure out the Bible's clear truth: which gave you 35,000 + different churches, sects and denominations. 🤔. Also no where in the NT does Jesus ever say "everyone go by a book I get to in 3 centuries or so after My ascension. 😂🤣

[@francissweeney7318]

The church Jesus gave to His sheep was complete when Paul established it's ordinances. Galations 1:8 " If anyone preaches any other gospel than the one we preached unto you , let them be accursed."

[@catholicskeptic]

@@francissweeney7318 Aha!!! Another John Nelson Darby Dispensationalist! You guys always fascinate me. You believe a theological view started by one man in the 1800s, doctrines taught no where by anyone previously that we know of. The Doctrine of "only go by Paul", the doctrine that reduces the Bible as applicable to our lives to the size of a pamphlet. The Church was declared and established by Christ;( Matthew 16:13-19) It was commissioned and sent forth by Christ ( Matthew 28:18-20). Paul was called by God and came in later, and he joined himself to the already established and existing Church.( Galatians 2:9) I as strongly opposed you dispensationalists when I was a Protestant as I do now as a member of The Catholic Church, which is the True Church. Dispensationalism is the most illogical, irrational and unscriptural theological system in the Protestant world. It means you essentially reject anything taught by Christ Himself in the Gospels; you reject anything from Acts; you reject anything taught by Peter, James, Jude ; you see them all as for some other "dispensation ", and not for today. Jesus said heaven and earth shall pass away, but not His Words! (Matthew 24:35). You guys are theologically kind of like Samaritans , who accepted the Law but rejected the prophets, regarding the Old Testament.

[@Pax-Africana]

They are just irrational...!

[@geoffjs]

You mean Protestants?

[@larrybedouin2921]

Thy way, O God, is in thy sanctuary, who is so great a God as our God? {Psalm77:13} ...as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith God, that thou make all things according to *the pattern* shewed to thee in the mount. {Hebrews 8:5} The *sanctuary* [tabernacle] was a pattern of types and shadows of the heavenly temple, and Jesus Christ is the substance of those types and shadows. Jesus Christ is the door to the sanctuary; He is the door to the Kingdom of heaven. He is the inner court surrounded by white linen; which is symbolic of being covered Christ prefect righteousness. He is our passover sacrificed for us on burnt alter for sacrifice. He is the laver for washing; symbolic of the rebirth, being born again of the Spirit. He is the table of Showbread; the two stacks of loves of bread are symbolic of the word of God (the bread of life) in two testaments / witnesses, also the twelve tribes of Israel and the twelve Apostles. He is the Lampstand; the oil being symbolic of his Spirit; the Lampstand symbolic of his light unto the world. He is our Altar of incense; making intercession for his saints. He is our Mercy seat covering the Ark of the covenant; Jesus is both our advocate standing for his saints with the Father and He is our judge in judment. Jesus Christ caused the sacrifices and their oblations to cease, (Dan 9:27) by his one perfect sacrifice. In contrast to the time of the Gentiles, wherefore the sanctuary of God is trodden under foot for forty and two months. How so? This church who calls herself the mother church, claims to be *the door* to salvation. And the white linen surrounding the inner court is the righteousness of Mary and the saints of the Roman church. She claims that Christ sacrifice and Atonement for sin was not sufficient, for she instituted seven (works) sacraments. She through infant baptism makes a mockery of the rebirth of the new man. Her Catechism thinks to replace the inspired word of God. Her prayers to dead saints and to Mary, thinks to replace Christ work of intercession at the altar of incense. Hers is a false spirit which thinks to cover the light of truth. This beast and her king think to change times and laws of God. And goeth into perdition.

[@Spiritof76Catholic]

LOL! Jesus established the Catholic Church. Biblical and historical fact. Mat5:17-20, 17 “Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them. 18 For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. 19 Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus is the way the truth and the life. Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and their thousands of contradictory, manmade churches are not. John15:14-31, Jesus said, “f you love me you will keep my commandments” and “26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” L, Z, C and their successors were not promised these things.

[@larrybedouin2921]

@@Spiritof76Catholic Jesus established his church, but it wasn't in Rome. -- The Gnostic "Eight Day" origins of Sunday rest. "But the works of the Nicolaitans in that time were false and troublesome men, who, as ministers under the name of Nicholas, had made for themselves a hersey, to the effect that what might be offered to Idols might be exorcised and eaten, and whoever should have committed fornication might receive peace on the eighth day." (Victorinious of Pettau c. 3rd century.) -- "For almost all the churches throughout the world celebrate the mysteries on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of *Alexandria and Rome* on account of some *ancient tradition* cease to do this." (Socrates Scholasticus c. 380 - 439 A.D.) -- "There are many here among us now, who fast on the same day as the Jews, [Rome made the Sabbath day a fast] and keep the Sabbaths in the same mannor." (John Chrysostom c. 339 - 407 A.D.)

[@ralf547]

@@Spiritof76Catholic The early Evangelical Church that was led by Luther initially was the result of the Pope excommunicating Luther. Luther died. The church continued without Luther. There certainly are contradictions between the many Protestant churches of today. The Catholic church of today is just another denomination along with Eastern Orthodox, Coptics, Lutherans, Protestants, and others. They all have their distinctives. But what identifies members of Christ's one true Church? It says in Matthew 16:15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven." Every member of Christ's Church can say along with Peter "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Matthew 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Every member of Christ's one true Church has been baptized and is being taught (if still in the flesh) or was taught (if already in heaven) to observe all that Jesus commanded. Catholicism isn't the only place where Christians are. Catholicism does incorrect and illegitimately claims to be the one true Church with extra-Jesus created commands and obligations for salvation. The Catholic dogmas that came after the completion of Jesus' Earthly ministry are not required for salvation.

[@larrybedouin2921]

And the woman was *arrayed in purple and scarlet colour* and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having *a golden cup in her hand* full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication. {Revelation 17:4}

[@biblealone9201]

Fundamentalists do, inform me that the book of Revelation is actually Church history forecast in symbols. Such reasoning reminds me of a paradox. Fundamentalist exegetes can see invading Muslim hordes, Soviet helicopters, European economic communities, Bill Clinton and Mikhail Gorbachev in the book of Revelation. It’s all crystal-clear, and it was certainly obvious to John. 🤔🤔 Hate to break it to all my extra holy protestant brethren, but "The mother of harlots" (not the whore) of rev 17 is the city of Jerusalem. Her 2 daughters are Israel and Judah, who played the harlot in their fathers house, her sisters are Sodom, Babylon and Egypt. Try reading the bible. When the Whore falls we read, "'Rejoice over her, O heaven! Rejoice, saints and apostles and prophets! God has judged her for the way she treated you'. . . . In her was found the blood of prophets and of the saints, and of all who have been killed on the earth" (Rev 18:20 and 24). So, the Whore could not be the Catholic Church because 1) it did not exist to kill the old testament prophets and 2) No blood is on the Churches hand with respect to any Apostle. Prophets existed as a group only in the Old Testament and in the first century (Acts 11:27-28, 13:1, 15:32, 21:10). Since the Whore persecuted apostles and prophets, the Whore must have existed in the first century and BEFORE. WHO KILLED THE PROPHETS Indeed, Jesus himself could not be any clearer in Matthew 23:37: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! Rev 17:5 "Babylon the great, mother of whores and of earth’s abominations.” 6 And I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus...." Rev 17:18 The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.” Rev 18:10 "Alas, alas, the great city, Babylon, the mighty city! For in one hour your judgment has come.” Rev 18:20 "Rejoice over her, O heaven, you saints and apostles and prophets! For God has given judgment for you against her.' SO WHO IS BABYLON - THE GREAT CITY MOTHER OF WHORES ANSWER REV 1:8 The GREAT CITY "where also their lord was crucified - JERUSALEM NOT ROME Passages of Revelation pertaining to the whore or the harlot makes sense when it is referring to ancient PAGAN Rome but makes no sense when Fundamentalists try to associate it with modern Rome. The passage says that the Whore will have power over kings. Modern Rome has no power over modern "kings", in fact there are almost no kings left in the world. Nor does the Church (which rests on Vatican hill outside of the 7 hills of Rome) have power over political leaders, otherwise ABORTION, PORNOGRAPHY, and HOMOSEXUALITY with HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE would not be legal in the civilized world. Revelation says that the whore was the center of commerce. (Rev 18:17-19) No economist today will say that modern Rome or the church is a leader in commerce. The US, Japan, etc are. However, ancient Pagan Rome was a leader in commerce. The Vatican is on Vatican hill and outside the 7 hills of Rome that that city is built on. And it MUST be noted the bibles including the KJV translate it not as hill but as mountain. Revelation 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. Jerusalem is built on 7 mounts. One source, jesus-messiah.com/prophecy/rev-13.html, lists the seven, and explains a bit more of why some authors list different mountains, and includes a map: 1.) Mount Gared; 2.) Mount Goath; 3.) Mount Acra; 4.) Mount Bezetha; 5.) Mount Moriah; 6.) Mount Ophel; 7.) Mount Zion. The seven mountains upon which Jerusalem was built are (according to wikipedia): Scopus, Nob, Olivet, "Mount of Corruption" or "Mount of Offence", "Mount Zion", the "Ophel Mount" and the new "Mount Zion." Or perhaps interpretations are far more complex than the followers of Jack Chick might expect, Who knows? Perhaps the 7 mountains refer to the 7 continents. Perhaps the harlot is in fact apostate Christianity of a protestant variety. It may not hurt to look at all the possibility bu NO ONE should go about insisting that there interpretation against another faith is correct. It is too convoluted with too many possibilities. And no one should contradict scripture in their assertions.

[@larrybedouin2921]

The state of the dead, according to the word of God. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof *thou shalt surely die* {Genesis 2:17} Man dieth, and wasteth away: yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he? ... So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their *sleep* O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, *until thy wrath be past* that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me! If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, 👉till my change come. ... His sons come to honour, and he knoweth it not; and they are brought low, but he perceiveth it not of them. {Job 14:10, 12-14 & 21} And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in *my flesh* shall I see God. {Job 19:26} Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, *nor knowledge nor wisdom* in the grave, whither thou goest. {The Preacher 9:10} Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; *in that very day his thoughts perish* {Psalm 146:3-4} Then said his disciples, Lord, if he *sleep* he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, "Lazarus is dead." {John 11:12-14} ... Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection 👉at the last day. Jesus said unto her, "I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet *shall* he live:" {John 11:24-25} But go thou thy way till the end be: for *thou shalt rest* and stand in thy lot *at the end of the days* {Daniel 12:13} For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him *should not perish* but have everlasting life. {John 3:16} And *the serpent said* unto the woman, *Ye shall not surely die* {Genesis 3:4} Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down *in the midst of the stones of fire* {Ezekiel 28:14} ^ (satan always turns the tables on God, for he is the father of lies.) The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. *Who* among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings? *He that walketh righteously and speaketh uprightly he that despiseth the gain of oppressions that shaketh his hands from holding of bribes that stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood and shutteth his eyes from seeing evil* {Isaiah 33:14-15} If anyone errors in their understanding of this doctrine of the dead, then they will in no way be led to the understanding of the truth, for it will be a stumblingblock unto the decernment of spiritual things, including soilterology and eschatology.

[@sandra4065]

You basically proved the Catholic viewpoint 👍🏼

[@larrybedouin2921]

@@sandra4065 No! The the Roman church teaches the immortality of the soul. That is the exact opposite of the biblical state of the dead. As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness: I shall be satisfied, *when I awake, with thy likeness* {Psalm 17:15} So *David slept with his fathers* and was buried in the city of David. {1 Kings 2:10} And *Solomon slept with his fathers* and was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead. {1 Kings 11:43} And *Rehoboam slept with his fathers* and was buried with his fathers in the city of David. And his mother's name was Naamah an Ammonitess. And Abijam his son reigned in his stead. {1 Kings 14:31} And *Abijam slept with his fathers* and they buried him in the city of David: and Asa his son reigned in his stead. {1 Kings 15:8} And *Asa slept with his fathers* and was buried with his fathers in the city of David his father: and Jehoshaphat his son reigned in his stead. {1 Kings 15:24} And Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers, *and was buried with his fathers in the city of David his father* and Jehoram his son reigned in his stead. {1 Kings 22:50} Thy dead men *shall* live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, *ye that dwell in dust* for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, *until the indignation be overpast* {Isaiah 26:19-20} -- There will be two resurrections separated by a thousand years. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. {Daniel 12:2} “And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.” {John 5:29} But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward *they that are Christ's at his coming* {1 Corinthians 15:23} But *the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished* This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in *the first resurrection* on such *the second death* hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. {Revelation 20:5-6} “Let both grow together *until the harvest* and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together *first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them* but gather the wheat into my barn.” {Matthew 13:30} “And, behold, I come quickly; and *my reward is with me* to give *every man* according as his work shall be.” {Revelation 22:12} ... And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. {Revelation 22:17} -- The time of the wedding feast. To the end [objective] he may establish your hearts unblameable in holiness *before* God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ *with all his saints* {1 Thessalonians 3:13} Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb *is come* and his wife hath made herself ready. {Revelation19:7} "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you *in my Father's* kingdom." {Matthew 26:29}

[@sandra4065]

@@larrybedouin2921 Jesus also taught the immortality of the human soul. What did you think he meant by everlasting life???

[@larrybedouin2921]

@@sandra4065 Immortality is conditional. Shall *mortal man* be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker? {Job 14:7} Let not sin therefore reign in *your mortal body* that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. {Romans 6:12} For we which live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest *in our mortal flesh* {2 Corinthians 4:11} For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and *this mortal* must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and *this mortal* shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. {1 Corinthians 15:53-54} But *if* the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken *your mortal bodies* by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. {Romans 8:11} “And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again 👉at the last day.” “And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up 👉at the last day.” {John 6:39-40} “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up 👉at the last day.” {John 6:44} “Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up 👉at the last day.” {John 6:64} But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's *at his coming* {1 Corinthians 15:23}

[@davidstamburski9487]

My concern is this present Pope seems to accept all those Far Eastern religions like Islam and Hinduism, he seems to be wanting to add them all together and say everybody's okay. It seems the Catholic church has lost its distinctiveness over the decades

[@catholicskeptic]

@davidstamburski9487 Would I be any happier with the Borgia Popes? Various characters have held the office over the centuries: the good ( majority) , the bad and the ugly. The Church stands on the three legs of Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium. The third one is made of men, flawed, sinful, etc. The good news is that the Magisterium, has no power to actually change what has been established as infallible doctrine. They can tweek it, chip at it, cloth their remarks in ambiguous language, and sometimes get very wishywashy. But the Truth stands and the Church stands. The most serious, traditional, on fire for the Faith, committed Catholics are in their 20s and 30s. The current Pope is 87. Catholic parishes that still have theologically liberal, spirit of Vatican Ii types are priests and members in their 70s and 80s . Beyond all that, Christ promises us that the Gates of hell shall not prevail against his Church.

[@davidstamburski9487]

​@@catholicskepticI know protestantism makes no sense. To much division. I told my wife we didn't make this mess..

[@ralf547]

@@davidstamburski9487 Protestantism's divisions aren't what make it nonsensical. Most all of them share a lot of truth (i.e. the triune nature of God). Too much division withing Catholicism right now. Does that make it illegitimate and/or nonsensical?

[@geoffjs]

@@ralf547Neither, just a bad patch, which she has also survived in the past centuries!

[@ralf547]

@@geoffjs I'm thinking some of those moving onto other Christian traditions are the ones surving this "rough oatch".

[@anthonyfowler2623]

Not all those who say lord lord will be saved

[@catholicskeptic]

@anthonyfowler2623 Yep, absolutely true.

[@sandra4065]

Exactly! Yet Protestants always forget the next verses! ❤

[@PInk77W1]

St Francis de Sales said there’s 8 proofs I don’t know them off the top of my head

[@ralf547]

St. Francis de Sales is a doctor of the Catholic church. Does that mean he could teach infallibly? Was he a member of the Catholic magisterium?

[@geoffjs]

@@ralf547only the Pope has the charism of teaching infallibly & as a bishop, he was part of the magisterium

[@ralf547]

@@geoffjs surely others besides the pope are able to correctly understand parts, even large parts of Scripture?

[@atrifle8364]

​​@@ralf547- Yes there are, but Peter is the answer key. If an interpretation doesn't match the Church, the next action is retrace steps and figure out the mistake in thinking. Catholics get a pretty steady stream of courageous Protestants who correctly interpret Scripture.

[@ralf547]

@@geoffjs Councils can speak infallibly.

[@STAR-RADIANCE]

Test all things against scripture

[@Rosiedelaroux]

It’s not.

[@frederickanderson1860]

14:03 you going around in circles. And like anyone in ur beliefs,you find ur faith in a hierarchial church system. Jesus said " birds have nests, and foxes have holes, yet son of man has no place to lay his head. Thats the price true followers experience.

[@catholicskeptic]

@frederickabderson1860 Appreciate your comment as everyone helps grow the channel. Perhaps you could consider actually making an argument, rather than accusing me of this or that. It's very entertaining.

[@frederickanderson1860]

@@catholicskeptic well u accuse protestants is that all who are outside the mother church. So you believe outside the mother church no salvation.

[@geoffjs]

@@frederickanderson1860That’s correct, those who knowingly reject the His One True Church Mt 16 18-19, put their salvation at risk.

[@frederickanderson1860]

@@geoffjs wrong; salvation is of the Lord not of any church adherence. Read gospel of john chapter 15 v 16& chapter 17.

[@geoffjs]

@@frederickanderson1860 Salvation comes from the grace received via the sacraments, baptism Jn 3:5 & His Real True Presence Jn 6:51 both of which Jesus commanded, together with faith & good works James 2 20-24 & Mt 25 30-45

[@francissweeney7318]

How can you know that the catholic church is right ? You can not because they put their own doctrines ahead of The Word of God. Usually they contradict The Word.

[@aadschram5877]

Proof please?

[@francissweeney7318]

What did the catholic church think God would do when they removed His Commandment against graven images ? He wrote that Commandment with His own hand.. catholic church annulments serve the devil not Jesus. What part of "" Let no man separate."

[@francissweeney7318]

Compare the catholic church " 10 Commandments" to the 10 Commandments God gave to Moses in Exodus 20. That is the tip of the iceburg.

[@geoffjs]

@@francissweeney7318You know that that is a blatant lie! If you want credibility, get your facts correct! The Catholic first commandment includes your second commandment, it was never deleted which is pure bigotry. Our ninth & tenth commandments were incorporated into your tenth commandment.

[@francissweeney7318]

God wrote His 10 Commandments in stone and gave them to Moses who wrote them in Exodus 20. Any honest person can see that the catholic church version is changed both in word and in meaning. Don't believe me, find a Jewish rabbi and try and convince them.

[@emmap1159]

The Pope lost me with Pachimama. Im still very much a Catholic but that was a heresy.

[@leylinegoddess]

do you know how many representations there are of the mother of god??? this is just one that happens to be from south america. relax. remember guadalupe

[@emmap1159]

@@leylinegoddess Is that what the natives claim, that she is their Madonna, the mother of Jesus? Was their an apparition? Because I heard it was a fertility goddess, but I could be misinformed. Never mind I looked it up: According to Inca legend Pachimama is an independent deity who controls fertility, presides over planting and causes earthquake. So not the Holy Mother.

[@leylinegoddess]

@@emmap1159 in the middle ages in europe, the mother goddess or mother of fertility , because they could identify where babies came from of all species, was worshipped as the mother. in order to keep the pagans attention, the mother goddess became the mother of god and the mother of jesus as it would follow. thus many cultures have a mother goddess and transfer this belief to the incoming culture of christianity. the guadalupe tonantzin is a perfect example read sor juana inez de la cruz and her history of her mexican culture as she grew out of it and into the neo euorpean culture in mexico. the mother basically has always come first. . all country cultures new that new life came from the mother. transferrable. no no apparitions.

[@leylinegoddess]

all mothers are fertility goddesses, care takers and bringers of new life. she looks very different in many different cultures. . she was ignored in christianity until country folk would not let go of the pagan attachment to the fertility of the mother. thus the madonna became the intermediaty to jesus

[@emmap1159]

@@leylinegoddess No. Our Holy Mother is the ark of the new covenant and the bringer of the divine into the world. Fertility and motherhood are obviously connected but that is by no means Mary's role.

[@philoalethia]

So... I am 15 minutes into this. I thought it was going to be about "How do I KNOW the Catholic Church is right?" Still waiting for anything that even resembles such an explanation or demonstration. Perhaps you could do me a favor and maybe just write out the essence of it in two or three sentences here, as I can't detect anything sensible in the content. No doubt it is just my own lack of attention. .... 25 minutes in now. Still nothing that constitutes justification to claim to "know" anything here. .... Okay. Listened to the end. That was not easy. Anyway, I could not discern anything that represented or justified a claim to know anything. 1) Would you please summarize your argument, below? Just a few clear, concise premises and conclusion would be fine. You claim to know logic so this should not be hard. I will be examining that argument to attempt to discern whether it is valid and sound. 2) Can I have my time back please?

[@richardyates7280]

24 minutes in and several minutes after I find clear enough

[@philoalethia]

@@richardyates7280 writes: "24 minutes in and several minutes after I find clear enough" Okay, then write it. Go ahead. Three or four sentences is all it should take.

[@cunjoz]

thanks for saving me time. your sacrifice will be remembered

[@ralf547]

I sort of agree, the headline for the video gave the impression the content would give a clear and definitive reason for believing the Catholic church is the one true Church. I had heard Hugh's reasons given here spread out in various other videos and they weren't convincing for me then. It would be great if he gave a definitive and concentrated argument for believing as he does.

[@sueseelie]

Do you want it served up on a silver platter just for your consumption? Why don’t you read some books, early church fathers, books by saints like St. Francis de Sales, books about the saints? Why? Because you’re not truly curious, you’re stuck on your faith, the way you want to do it and have no interest whatsoever. Perhaps I’m wrong.

[@larrybedouin2921]

Who are the Israel of God? There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. {Galatians 3:28-29} For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, *which is one inwardly and circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit* and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. {Romans 2:28-29} Wherefore remember, that ye being IN TIME PAST Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the COMMONWEALTH of ISRAEL, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: BUT now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh *by the blood of Christ* For he is our peace, who hath made both [Jew and Gentile] one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments [not the ten commandments] contained in ordinances; for to make in himself *of twain* ONE NEW MAN, so making peace; And that he might reconcile BOTH unto God in ONE BODY by the cross, *having slain the enmity thereby* And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but *fellowcitizens* with the saints, and of the household of God; [The commnwealth of Israel ... Jeshurun] {Ephesians 2:11-19} Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But *in every nation* he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. {Acts 10:34-35} Again... But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God. {Romans 2:10-11} Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For *they are not all Israel* which are of Israel: *Neither because they are the seed of Abraham* are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but *the children of the promise* are counted for the seed. {Romans 9:6-8} Now we, [Galatians] brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. {Galatians 4:28-29} For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon *the Israel of God* {Galatians 6:15-16} And they [the Jew] also, *if they abide not still in unbelief* shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in *again* {Romans 11:23} For ye are all the children of God *by faith in Christ Jesus* For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. {Galatians 3:26-27}

[@Big_Steve11]

The Pope told me the Catholic Church is right ;)

[@atrifle8364]

Jesus told me to trust Peter. Nobody sane trusts just Peter's word on it.

[@srich7503]

@@atrifle8364 Jesus didnt tell you anything without using His church… History shows us that Jesus didn't leave us a bible, - the apostles didn't tell us which books belong in the bible, - the church fathers never agreed on the 27 books of the NT through the 4th century, - not only did they not agree but their individual lists of would-be NT canons were GROWING during this time, growing in numbers of hundreds of “inspired” NT writings. Therefore, if it wasn't the Catholic/Orthodox church that compiled the 27 books of the NT in the 5th century with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and preserved it by laboriously hand copying them over and over throughout the centuries before the invention of the printing press, the “rule of faith” for many, please tell us who did? And if this church no longer exists today, what good is the text which came forth from her if she couldn't sustain herself?

[@WilliamFlemming-gk3cn]

Your right about Protestants, but referring to the virgin as able to be equal to Christ is wrong.

[@sandra4065]

Which he literally didn’t do. Watch it again but put aside your bias. You heard what wasn’t there.

[@user-fi1pe4dg3u]

“And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them inthe name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭28‬:‭18‬-‭20‬ Did Jesus add and say go and join my idolatrous religion the catholic church.?

[@biblealone9201]

Did Jesus add and say go and join my idolatrous religion the circus clowns There are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads; this one will not admit Baptism; that one rejects the Sacrament of the altar; another places another world between the present one and the day of judgment; some teach that Jesus Christ is not God. There is not an individual, however clownish he may be, who does not claim to be inspired by the Holy Ghost, and who does not put forth as prophecies his ravings and dreams. they are purveyors of ‘self-centered worship.' You may get people to come to those churches, and you may have church growth. But you will not have church impact. The reason is that church becomes increasingly like the culture. People go in, see a skit, listen to some music, hear a soothing sermon, and think they have done their Christian duty. They are entering the exact precarious position the mainline found itself in the '60s and '70s." if salvation is by "faith only" it excludes even faith gained by reading the Bible.😃😃

[@atrifle8364]

Did Jesus say "Run away with my Scripture canonized for Mass readings. Don't worry about Peter, he will fail at some point."?

[@user-fi1pe4dg3u]

@@atrifle8364?

[@user-fi1pe4dg3u]

@@atrifle8364 no Jesus never said that.

[@sbblando8533]

@@user-fi1pe4dg3u Make it make sense

[@ralf547]

I wrote my typical looonnnnnggggggggg comment on this video, trying to explain everything in detail. As I reread it and reread it again. I realized there is just three things for me to say. 1] I've said many times that the visible church from it's inception up to the Reformation is my ancestral Church. So most all of your "proofs" are mine as well. 2] There was a Reformation because it was needed. The Catholic church by that time was going so far off course that reformation was needed. I found errors I could not live with, so I "reformed" and left Catholicism. 3] There is only one true Church of Christ, and it's His mystical body composed of all whom He has saved. No visible church can pluck a Christian from Jesus' hand. Not the Catholic church demanding membership and adherence to it's peculiarities, or any other denomination's peculiar requirements. Jesus lived, suffered, died for His people/Church. He delivers forgiveness and salvation through Word and Sacrament ministry. I fear for anyone who relies upon anyone or anything other then Jesus for their salvation.

[@catholicskeptic]

@ralf547 The only aspect of what you wrote here is your own opinion, honestly your own total trust in your own perceptions. The church needed reform, so a man named Luther, made up a doctrine, "faith alone"; ( not in the Bible)broke his vows before God, and married a woman who broke her vows before God. He was given refuge by politicians, German Princes, and began the Protestant habit of exulting alliance and submission of church to the state. This was later followed up by Calvin, who stripped away the churches further, set up his fanatical consistery, and operated a "Christian " police state. Religious wars, madness, the break up of Christendom , and the rise of nation states, worship of the state.Denial of miracles and power of God. Yes the Church needed reform, for sure. And God raised up many holy Saints : St Ignatius of Loyola, St Francis De Sales, St John of the Cross, St Teresa of Avila, etc. Meanwhile back at the crazy Protestant ranch, you had: King Henry VIII , lusting after a woman, declaring himself Head of the Church, divorcing his faithful wife; followed by a heritage of Catholic blood and martyrs. Oh the puritans , who outlawed Christmas, put people in stocks in the town square , if they missed a church service. All you write is the personal views you have, a distorted notion of Christ's holy Church. You actually believe your "heritage ", as you trash the very Church that gave you the New Testament you base your faith on ( minus the 7 Old Testament books your crazy Luther declared not to be scripture). The man who called James the "epistle of straw". The fact that you accept and proclaim doctrines no one before the 16th century ever taught,well hope you turn out to be among the "elect" that God secretly chose to save, as you have no free will , (?Luther taught it too: "Bondage of the Will) and the true church is a secret , invisible thing? How do you know this? Why because some ex-Catholic rebels 1500 years after the time of Christ told you so. Sorry Ralf, you rant against Christ's Holy Church,because a) what you do understand, you don't like, b) what you don't understand, you refuse to learn about. I look for Truth, period, and the truth is not lost for centuries and re-discovered by a few arrogant rebels 500 years later, and dispersed into so many ridiculous variations . Luther was a heretic, as was Calvin, Swingli, Knox, etc. You are sadly a victim of the poor, watered down teaching of the post Vatican II church. And choose to follow a bunch of thoroughly corrupt ideas introduced by the 16th century, bitter Catholic rebels ( the first reformers). I am so deeply thankful God opened my eyes and delivered me from all the self-rooted madness you still embrace. That God brought me home to His Church, His SEVEN Sacraments , and I pray fervently that God will open your eyes. Feel free to comment and argue your support for your rebels and heresy. I'm sure my Catholic brothers and sisters on here will keep chopping up your points. But I end my dialogue with you here, will keep you in my prayers, and keep hoping you'll someday see the Light.

[@ralf547]

@@catholicskeptic I'll respond. And you say I use too many words.

[@catholicskeptic]

@@ralf547 Your responses are becoming Protestant jibber-jabber. I spent 30 years of my life in Protestant nonsense. It's embarrassing I bought into such a self- centered, man- centered , illogical concept. The very idea that one could base their Christianity on me and ideas made up 1500 years later is chaos and absurdity.

[@ralf547]

@@catholicskeptic There is another comment of yours that I intend to respond to. You provided a number of Scripture references to make your point. I'll get around to a reply sometime here soon. You complained at least once about the length of my comments and responses. I go down your responses and try to address everything you bring up. It takes a lot of words. I don't press you for responses at all, let alone an answer to everything I ask or contend. You have on more than one occasion admitted that I bring up some good questions and issues that need to be more exactingly and thoroughly responded to. I seldom if ever see those responses from you. But I still don't insist on you doing so. You have a job and limited time. But don't criticize my lengthy responses when all I'm doing is trying to be thorough. Your critical of my "personal views." Strange how I share those views with so many. They are the personal views of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod as well as the WELS, AALC, and others. We have shared confessions and beliefs. Are mine so personal if they are shared with so many and taught by Pastors and in Seminaries? I left that Calvinism, and what does Calvin, Henry the 8th, and the Puritans have to do with our conversation. BTW, Luther was helped by the prince because the Catholic church was going to kill/murder him. Why did the prince protect him? Because of the abuse of his people by the Catholic church. Selling indulgences. I don't know the details of how St Ignatius of Loyola, St Francis De Sales, St John of the Cross, St Teresa of Avila, etc. brought corrections or what exactly those corrections were. Do you? But I'd say the 16th Century Reformation definitely brought corrections. It rescued a lot of people from the errors of Catholicism of that day. Too bad the Pope and entire church didn't correct. You again accuse me of "attacking/trashing" the Catholic church, even after admitting in a recent response that you were too harsh in calling it an attack. I am just constructively criticizing. No different than your criticisms of the dispensationalists. Are you attacking/trashing them and their theology or just giving constructive criticism? I certainly haven't read the entire Catholic catechism. How many are there anyway. I hear Catholics say Pope St. John Paul II had one written, and that it wasn't very good and needed revisions. I hear about the Baltimore catechism. Is Baltimore the catechism that is on the USCCB's website, or is there another one. Which one is part of sacred tradition? Are any of them? If not, then they may not be entirely correct. If that is the case, do I need to read the entire thing(s)? Your love of hating "crazy" Luther is odd. Luther questioned the book of James. None of us Lutherans do now. He's been dead 500 years, and his place in our history is about as embarrassing as your Pope's who broke their vows by fathering children, and so much for vows of poverty. Let it go Hugh. I'll do the same. What I criticize (perhaps rant about at times, and shouldn't have) are indeed things I don't like. I don't not like them because of how they affect me. I know my place in God's kingdom. I don't like them because of what they are doing to others. The convoluted way a non-Catholic could possibly be saved, and the certainty of damnation for the hoards of Christians who left the Catholic church and aren't invincibly ignorant, absolution and a valid Lord's Supper only by a Catholic priest, are just extra Biblical human inventions that must be believed and adhered to out of fear of mortal sin that damns if not absolved before death. Being Baptized and having saving faith in Christ as savior isn't sufficient according to Catholicism. It is sufficient according to the risen Christ. You criticize me for using God's Word to critique such things, while the Catholic church has God's Word as one of it's 3 supporting legs and claims it as it's own and considers it infallible and inerrant. I think it is a very authoritative source for use in critiquing Catholic doctrine and practice. Luther, Knox, Calvin all believed in the virgin birth, bodily resurrection, triune nature of God, trusted in Jesus to be their Lord and Savior who obtained for them forgiveness of sins. What exactly made them heretics? Was criticizing and separating from the Catholic church sufficient all by itself to make them heretics? If so, they are damned despite their faith. Of course they aren't damned for separating from Catholicism, but that teaching by the church places the church in the position of savior. Instead of Christ as the only way to the Father, Catholicism has made itself the only way. Idolatry. It is my greatest concern for Catholics, that the church is worshiped as the savior instead of Christ. That concern alone keeps me commenting. The TRUTH was never lost. Christ's Church is preserved by Christ. But the Catholic church was losing essential truths and those "heretics" simply pointed that out. And can you really judge if they were arrogant? Perhaps deeply convicted and motivated out of concern for others. You so easily attribute bad motives. Knox was willing to burn rather than betray what he believed true. That doesn't sound like arrogance, at all. I am sincerely glad you have left the self rooted madness of Evangelicalism. It's a dangerous place. I attended some Evangelical churches in the past, but never for very long, and am glad I left them too. Was the church you pastored in a denomination? Hopefully you weren't word faith or something like that. Were you ever Presbyterian, Methodist, E-Free, or another denomination? As far as your Catholic brothers and sisters chopping up my points, I am finding a lot of my points aren't getting follow ups. What's with that? We continue to pray for each other. Our prayers likely sound the same, but the result we hope for is quite different. God honors every prayer and answers in accordance with His will. On that I believe we agree.

[@ralf547]

@@catholicskeptic I think your version of Protestantism and my Lutheranism are extremely different. I don't think you know enough about Lutheranism to come to your conclusion.

[@Justas399]

How catholic church be right when it has so many false doctrines starting with the claims of the papacy?

[@srich7503]

By viewing the Bible with the proper lens… History shows us that Jesus didn't leave us a bible, - the apostles didn't tell us which books belong in the bible, - the church fathers never agreed on the 27 books of the NT through the 4th century, - not only did they not agree but their individual lists of would-be NT canons were GROWING during this time, growing in numbers of hundreds of “inspired” NT writings. Therefore, if it wasn't the Catholic/Orthodox church that compiled the 27 books of the NT in the 5th century with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and preserved it by laboriously hand copying them over and over throughout the centuries before the invention of the printing press, the “rule of faith” for many, please tell us who did? And if this church no longer exists today, what good is the text which came forth from her if she couldn't sustain herself?

[@Justas399]

@@srich7503 what does this have to do with the papacy?

[@srich7503]

@@Justas399 you tell me. What does the Bible have to do with your rule of faith…

[@Justas399]

@@srich7503 define "rule of faith"

[@Justas399]

@@srich7503 what is a rule of faith?

[@si-vis-pacem]

You can't be serious...😅

[@peterzinya1]

Any church that can burn and torture a million people to death and get away with it has to be the church of Christ. Jesus has 7 churches. (Rev 1-3) and none of them are in Rome.

[@essafats5728]

Is Rome in Asia?

[@peterzinya1]

@@essafats5728 not even close

[@isaacosahon4352]

Correction: In Revelation, letters were sent to seven churches in Asia Minor according to geography or diocese, just as churches in Africa, Asia, Europe, etc. Didn't Paul write a letter to the Romans? Or Christians were not in Rome when he wrote the letter? Jesus stated that He built HIS CHURCH, NOT CHURCHES (Matthew 16:18).

[@John_Six]

Cite your source. What year did this happen and what historian told you "a million?"

[@essafats5728]

oh geez, Lord have mercy on your faith tradition that reads without right comprehension, and incomplete interpretations, of the Bible. Is your faith tradition not that knowledgeable?