Відео

No any other church except Catholic Church can fit into the Church of saints that Jesus established under the stewardship of Peter therefore many strong and highly educated protestants who studied and knew the truth are leaving the satanic cult of sola scriptura a man made tradition invented by a devil possessed man to join with the fullness of faith that Jesus desires

Only a true Pope is the Head of the Church. A false pope is not.

Because, we (Catholic church) have the pillar and ground of truth.

Failure to be obedient to the one appointed by God, fails to do God's will. Disobedience is one of the traits of satan. Follow God, not yourself or other reformers. Biblically speaking, God build His church and appoint a shepherd to watchover His flock. Why other people refuse to accept that. They refuse to be under of someone that God appointed to. Instead they take it by themselves.

👍🙏

Well, seeing as the papacy has been fully embracing *terrorism and murder* as well as sodomy; no Catholic can ever be loyal to the papacy nor to God Himself, and they're overthrown due to their embrace of objective evil even once! Since the embracing of evil by the office of the vicar of Christ has happened even once; everybody knows that theology is a set of lies from the mouth of God; and thus God Himself is evil only for even being a spirit!

Yes; great video. Favorite topic

We do need more of such writings exposed to us to defend the Papacy. I earlier viewed a video in which St. Optatus against the Donatist points to the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome.

Trump is ushing in the new world order/ 4th industrial revolution. Elon brags about a.i. summoning the demons. Here they come, via your boy MAGA (5th degree satanic cult order.)

Saint Jerome was using hyperbole there. He would never have followed anyone who declared that there were three hypostases because that would have been a lie. No matter who declared it. Just like saying that all religions are equal paths to God is a lie. No matter who says it.

Another reading of what is supposed to be papal primacy, but is now instead reread to mean what Vatican 1 meant, which is absolutely supremacy, temporal authority, and infallibility. Another “doctrinal development”

"Where Peter is there is the Church, and where the Church is there is not death, but everlasting life." - Saint Ambrose of Milan ✝️📿🌹

Protestantism is false. Catholic Church is truth

The Pope is the Pope, as long as he is the True Pope. Case in point, Wikipedia lists Pope Alexander III as a true Pope, and his rival to the Chair of Peter, Pope Victor IV as an anti-Pope. In reality Pope Victor IV was actually the True Pope. Proof of this came from Almighty God in the form of miracles wrought at the gravesite of Pope Victor IV, True Pope. Amen. In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. Time will tell as to the idiosyncrasies of francis, the anti-Pope.

🙏🙏🙏🙏❤️❤️❤️🇵🇭🇵🇭🇵🇭⛪️⛪️⛪️🇵🇭🇵🇭🇵🇭❤️❤️❤️🙏🙏🙏🙏

Jerome on quoting Romans 1:8? apostle Paul was praising the Church of God,which is based in Rome and not the Catholic Church👎❌.if we read from Romans 1:7-8 "To all that be in Rome,beloved of God, Called to be Saints," Apostle paul meant the brethrens in the Church of God which was based in Rome ,which is in the 👉"house hold",which are mentioned in Romans 16 KJV. If we read 1 Cor.1:1-2, it was mentioned again, " Called to be Saints,referring to the Brethrens,in the Church of God at Corinth, where paul was 👉called to be an Apostle of Jesus Christ,in the Church of God. 1 Cor.1:1-2 KJV Paul,called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ,through the will of God,and Sosthenes our brother, In the Church of God at Corinth,to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus,called to be Saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,both theirs and our's: Calling the Pope as "the head of The church" ?🤔 Exposing one of the many "fallacies" of the Catholic Church, 👎for the head of the Church ( the body) should be the Lord Jesus Christ,and not the pope.👎❌. Since you mentioned that the Pope is the head of the Catholic Church,therefore,it is not the true Church.🤔 👎❌😑 As it is written Colossians 1:18 KJV He is the head of the body, the Church.

So Paul was wrong then, who spoke to Peter for 15 days after the conversation of Matthew 16 took place? Oh, ok.

as a catholic i have a question, could not be possible that where Christ is really known among protestants (which you see by their fruits), can be something? I don't know, there can be a church there, there can be salvation there

No Jesus is the head not the pope .

So that means all those under the sway of the SSPX ar sin schism right, because they aren’t under obedience to either the local ordinary bishops or the Pope and still claim to be within the Catholic Church.

Hey Protestants/Evangelicals/Fundamentalists/Independents! Love scripture? Here ya' go! PETER as Shepherd and first Pope: Scriptural evidence and the structure of the primitive Church make it absolutely undeniable that Christ chose Peter and that Peter was first among the twelve. Depending on the translation, Peter is mentioned 195 times. The closest is John (the beloved disciple) at just 29 times. The rest even less. Consider: Jesus entered Peter’s house. (Matthew 8:14) Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter. (John 1:42) Jesus gave Peter the keys to the gates of Heaven. (Matthew 16:19) Jesus declared Peter to the the rock. (Matthew 16:18) Jesus made Peter shepherd. (John 21:15-17) Jesus told Peter to strengthen his brothers (Luke 22:32) Jesus paid the Temple tax only for Himself and Peter. (Matthew 17:24-27) Jesus preached from Peter's boat. (Luke 5:3) Jesus told Peter to "Follow me" (John 21:19) Jesus called only Peter to walk on the water. (Matthew 14:29) Jesus predicted Peter's three-fold denial. (Matthew 26:34) Jesus predicted Peter's repentance and three-fold affirmation. (Luke 22:32) Jesus prophesied only Peter's manner of death. (John 21:18-19) Jesus taught Peter forgiveness 70 times 7 times. (Matthew 18:21-22) Jesus spoke only to Peter at Gethsemane. (Mark 14:37) Peter is always listed first of the Apostles. (Matthew 10:2, Luke 6:14, Acts 1:13) Peter was first to confess Jesus as Messiah. (Matthew 16:18) Peter alone spoke at the Transfiguration. (Matthew 17:4, Mark 9:5, Luke 9:33) Peter pointed out the withered fig tree. (Mark 11:21) Peter entered the tomb first - John deferring to him. (Luke 24:12, John 20:3-4)) Jesus, after resurrecting, appeared FIRST to Peter, then to the twelve. (1 Corinthians 15:5) Peter was the only apostle to confess that he was a sinner. (Luke 5:8) Peter decided the manner of replacing Judas. (Acts 1:15-26) Peter spoke for the eleven at the Pentecost. (Acts 2:14-36) Peter was released from prison by the Angel. (Acts 12:6-11) Peter spoke for the eleven before the Council. (Acts 4:8-12) Peter held sin bound to Ananias and Sapphira. (Acts 5:1-10) Peter's shadow healed. (Acts 5:15) Peter declared the sin of Simony. (Acts 8:18-23) Peter revealed the salvation of Gentiles to the Church at Jerusalem. (Acts 11:1-18) The Angel told Cornelius to call for Peter. (Acts 10:3-8) The Holy Spirit fell upon the Gentiles as Peter preached to them. (Acts 10:44-45) At the empty tomb, the Angel said, "Go tell His disciples, and Peter." (Mark 16:7) Mary Magdalene ran to tell Peter and the beloved disciple. (John 20:2) The vision of all foods being clean was given only to Peter. (Acts 10:9-16) Peter's words silence the first council in Jerusalem. (Acts 15:7-12) Paul went to Peter to affirm that his Gospel was not in vain. (Galatians 1:18) Peter was given the revelation of the end of the world. (2 Peter 3:10-11) Peter taught that Paul’s words were easily twisted. (2 Peter 3:16) Peter taught that baptism now saves you (1 Peter 3:21) And many other references. One may deny that Peter was primary, but it takes an amazing ignorance or denial of scripture and history to do so. BELIEVE the bible.

All I know is that the bible says not to change one word or had to it . But they do all the time , so is the bible the word of God tgat can,t be changed or is it just another book which , they change all the time .

Protestants trump up Jerome for his initial false canon (though he clearly reverses course later), but then discard his papism/Catholicism. Picking and choosing is the root of heresy, literally.

You're going to have to go earlier for many Protestants, especially for those who buy into the Constantine-Catholic mythology. But for Eastern Orthodox, it should carry some weight. Interesting how Jerome notes the schisms in the East during his time and the ability of the Pope to issue new creed like with Filioque.

Excellent. Sharing. I heard that pre schism lots of eastern saints held to papal supremacy. That would be an interesting place to look.

She is Not Catholic, she is Episcopalian

I’m on a snow day with the kids and your videos are keeping me entertained between activities with them. Thank you.

Excellent content. Each video posted is like Christmas morning!

I don't understand how people make statements without having studied the scriptures fully. The Church, which is NOT the Roman Catholic system, is clearly taught to be the Body of Christ here on earth. We are joined to the Head of the Body by the Holy Spirit indwelling the believing sinner who is saved by grace, and cleansed by the precious blood of Christ. The Head of the Body is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. The Pope was born a sinner just like the rest of us, and if he is not born again of the Spirit of God, he is not even a member of the body of Christ, never mind being the Head of the body. If by some strange circumstance the Pope was actually a Christian, he might be the leading figure in an assembly in Rome, but he most definitely will NEVER be the Head of the Body of Christ. Christ has His own head attached to His torso and it is in Heaven interceding for us as our great High Priest.

I appreciate how thorough you were in your explanation.

Where's Peter at? Who's the Vicar!? Oh yea

The way I see it, it seems that the E. orthodox only changed their belief about the papacy, & revised history after the schism. It seems that every Christian sect (or individual) that wishes to remain apart from the Catholic Church & apart from communion with the pope, necessarily makes up arguments against everything they lack due to the separation, in order to rationalize & justify their continued separation.

Glory of our lady?. But Mary is not worshipped in Catholicism?.

Dearest Mother of Jesus & Blessed Virgin Mary pls interceed for President Donald Trump & Mrs Melania Trump.✝️🙏🛐🥀🩵

Exactly as the church describes. Not JESUS CHRIST! You seriously think Jesus would teach about such a serious subject in a parable & he would only refer to it once...? When you read before and after the scripture you actually get context. Try that...

This doesn't teach purgatory it teaches hell. The RCC is a foolish pagan religion that believes it can work it's way into heaven

"Beauty is a hook of the soul." (1:31:08) Yes, so true! I am very excited about what you & your team are doing. Thank you!

On it!

rosary, prehistorian pagan ritual

Another excellent video. You are building something great. 👍

This was fantastic. Thank you for your honesty.

How can the Roman Catholics who are ESAU'S seed who God hates, ( Malachi 1:2-3, Romans 9:13) decides what is or isn't the words of the God of Abraham Issac & Jacob?

Excellent. Thank you.

Great Presentation. Purgatory makes perfect sense and is a huge gift of Gods mercy. Think about it. No one enters heaven unless they are saints otherwise they would contaminate heaven. Purgatory is a spiritual washing machine that turns us into saints unless we become saints before we die in which case we go directly to heaven. Without purgatory most souls would go to hell. Take advantage of Divine Mercy Sunday every year.

As a Lutheran LCMS, I have no doubt about the faith being passed down from the Apostles but what Catholics fail to a knowledge, how they swayed away from the faith as early as 3-400 AD, which resulted in the splits of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox, Assyrian etc all the way down to Luther, who only wanted to reform the fallen apostate position of the Church. Todays Catholic Church in no way represents what the Apostles actually taught and believed, not to mention all the sinful practices of the church, the pedophilia and paying of indulgences as well as a “works” based faith. Paul tells us that in later times some would no longer adhere to sound doctrine. That includes Catholics

This channel is an answered prayer. Thank you for doing what you do.

The Apocrypha DOES repeat some of the actual Old Testament, so, in that regard, it has SOME truths in it. It ALSO has falsehoods. And once it contains a falsehood, it's no longer the Word of God. It is written AFTER the Old Testament is completed...every prophecy recorded, etc. in the period of Silence. It's not canon and to pretend otherwise is false teaching...and ADDING to God's Word in this manner comes with a hefty penalty.

Protestant here, this was awesome. Definitely going to consider treating the book of wisdom as inspired scripture

Joshua TCharles, I have seen how the mercy and grace of God has allowed you to reveal what I myself also experienced in my time with Calvinism. We were misled by the British Bible Societies, and this was a mistake. Because, like you, I realized that the books we commonly call apocryphal were not so for the early Christians, especially the Book of Wisdom, which is clearly a canonical book far from being apocryphal. Just as God revealed to Simon that Jesus was His Son, He has now revealed this important and transcendental truth to you. Here I want to help you with some verses cited by the first Christians of the first 5 centuries, at least 20 citations from them, taken from the deuterocanonicals. This shows us that Martin Luther, without being part of any Church council, declared the seven deuterocanonical books to be apocryphal. The same Bishop Saint Augustine of Hippo, in the last council, selected 73 books, and for him the deuterocanonicals were canonical, just as you have realized that Wisdom is not apocryphal. I give glory to God, and perhaps this will help you see that only Luther believed this absurdity that they were apocryphal. Here are the citations from the first centuries regarding the deuterocanonicals, always believed by the early Church. I congratulate you for sharing your enlightenment with the other brothers. Example: Bring the quotes from at least 20 Church Fathers of the first centuries Name of the Apostolic Father, year of the letter or book, title of the letter or book, and the quote referencing the deuterocanonicals. Paragraph with Examples of Early Church Father Citations: Joshua TCharles, your journey of discovery regarding the deuterocanonical books is truly inspiring and resonates with the experiences of many who have examined the historical evidence. The notion of these books being "apocryphal" is a relatively late development, as we see clear evidence of their use and acceptance by the early Church. Martin Luther’s rejection of these texts stands in stark contrast to the consensus of the first centuries, where these books were not seen as extra-biblical, but as part of the scriptural tradition. As you've eloquently recognized the canonical nature of Wisdom, let us delve into some examples from the early Church Fathers supporting this point of view and the other deuterocanonical books: Clement of Rome, circa 96 AD, Letter to the Corinthians, Clement quotes from Wisdom 12:12: "Who can say to you, What have you done?" and presents it as authoritative. Polycarp of Smyrna, circa 110 AD, Letter to the Philippians, This letter alludes to Tobit 4:10, "Almsgiving delivers from death," reflecting a familiar understanding of these texts. Didache, circa 100-150 AD, Didache, The Didache is a manual of Christian life which shows familiarity with Sirach, quoting phrases and using concepts found in the book. There are a number of passages throughout the Didache that have parallels with Sirach. Irenaeus of Lyons, circa 180 AD, Against Heresies, Irenaeus uses Baruch 4:36-37 as an authority to refute the Gnostics idea of the physical world. Tertullian,circa 200 AD, On Modesty, explicitly quotes Wisdom to show its authority Clement of Alexandria, circa 200 AD, The Instructor, Clement often quotes from Baruch and Wisdom as scripture, showing a high regard for the books. He also mentions Tobit and Judith. Origen of Alexandria, circa 230 AD, Commentary on Matthew, Origen cites Wisdom 10:4 showing its acceptance as divinely inspired text when mentioning Noah. Cyprian of Carthage, circa 250 AD, Treatise 1, Cyprian quotes Tobit 12:8, "Prayer is good with fasting, and alms," using it as an authoritative piece of God's teaching. Hippolytus of Rome, circa 225 AD, Commentary on Daniel, Hippolytus quotes from Susanna as part of the Old Testament Scripture in his commentary. Athanasius of Alexandria, circa 367 AD, 39th Festal Letter acknowledges the usefulness of several deuterocanonical books, for edification, but places them in a category different than the protocanonical writings. Hilary of Poitiers, circa 360 AD, Commentary on the Psalms, Hilary quotes and accepts Baruch as part of the prophetic books. Cyril of Jerusalem, circa 350 AD, Catechetical Lectures, Cyril quotes from Wisdom and other deuterocanonical texts. Ambrose of Milan, circa 380 AD, On Repentance, Ambrose uses Tobit and Wisdom for instruction, seeing them as part of the inspired scriptures. Basil of Caesarea, circa 370 AD, Letters, Basil cites the book of Baruch. Gregory of Nyssa, circa 380 AD, On the Making of Man, Gregory quotes Wisdom as an authoritative text. John Chrysostom, circa 400 AD, Homilies on Hebrews, John references to the deuterocanonical book of Tobit. Epiphanius of Salamis, circa 375 AD, Panarion, Epiphanius mentions the book of Judith, in his discussion of the biblical canon. Augustine of Hippo, circa 400 AD, On Christian Doctrine, Augustine affirms the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books, including Wisdom, and Tobit, as part of the Old Testament canon in the council of Carthage which he attended. Jerome, circa 400 AD, Against Rufinus, Jerome shows familiarity with Tobit, Judith, Baruch and Wisdom as books included in the Old Testament canon. Council of Hippo circa 393 AD, This Council, where St. Augustine was involved, officially listed the Deuterocanonical books as part of the Old Testament canon for the church. These examples showcase that the deuterocanonical books were not peripheral or late additions, but integral parts of the scriptural tradition for centuries, long before the Reformation. These citations of early church fathers highlight the wide acceptance of these texts from the first centuries of Christianity. Your recognition of the canonical value of these books is a return to the authentic, historical understanding of the Christian scriptures.

*But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.* *Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.* *But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.* *And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.*