What really cracks me up about "biblical Christians" is they will say, you just have to read the Bible, and interpret it for yourself, then THEY proceed to interpret it for you.
@@spacecoastz4026 Tell me then, anti-Catholic troll, how thousands of protestant sects all tell us “the Bible interprets itself. Just read it,” yet they provide vastly different interpretations? Sectarianism makes no sense and is not willed by God.
But isn't it the Holy Spirit that helps you interpret the Bible and give guidance and revelation? I've opened the Bible many times and the Lord gave me the exact guidance and spoke to me through His Word
@@toddgallo1759 because it says don't judge and all I see Protestantism do is judge the Catholic church John 6 and the last supper make me believe in the Eucharist James 2 24 tells me we are not saved by faith alone Thessalonians 2 15 says hold fast to the tradition we give you whether by letter or by word of mouth proving sola scriptura wrong John 20 21 23 proves that the apostles could bind and loose sin Purgatory is in Maccabees 2 12 41 46 yet Protestantism says Maccabees is not inspired proving that Protestantism cherry picks what they think belongs in the Bible discarding the rest of scripture completely Catholics read the Bible in context slowly Matthew 16 is ignored by Protestantism when it proves that the papacy is a gift from God Protestantism says the Bible says that the rosary is bad but it doesn't say anything against the rosary Protestantism treat Mary as a Devil Etc
@andreeattieh2963 Have you read all of John 6? Why did Jesus start by saying he that cometh to me will never hunger and he that believeth on me will never thirst? Why did Jesus switch from coming and believing to eating his flesh and drinking his blood? It's not a picture of the eucharist, it's Christ making a point to the hungry multitude that's seeking another free meal.
This is an amazing presentation. Thank you Catholic Truth. And most importantly, a huge thanks to you brother Bryan for your time, dedication and resources used to come up with this informative content. Catholic as always.
I noticed that Calvinist put the words of Paul before the words of Christ Himself. There are certain statements that Christ made that clearly point to the fact that an individual must live out his faith in charity in order to be saved. Yet the Calvinist says in order to understand the words of Christ one has to first understand the gospel as understood by Paul. The Calvinist view of God has more in common with the God of Islam. God’s love for you is more similar to the love one has for a pet as in comparison to the love of a father for his own child. They view God as an angry God who must be appeased. The same God who demands that the virgin be sacrificed in order to continue getting enough rain for your crops lest you starve.
There is a reason the term turko-calvinism became a thing over the past few hundred years. Calvinism is gnostic just as Islam is, in the very same ways that Islam is.
Yeah, I was thinking about the same thing. The Calvinist god is incompatible with the real God of the Bible. Though He is not shy from punishment, He doesn't want anyone to perish. We perish out of OUR own accord. That has been the case since the times of Adam & Eve. What's the point of Jesus dying a horrible death for the salvation of all if God had already created humans deemed for damnation and others for salvation? That's a really dangerous heresy which can only lead to more apostasy. Can't really blame an atheist for being an atheist due to being taught such a satanic gospel. I don't think Satan's biggest trick is to convince you he doesn't exist, but to convince you God will never forgive you.
Unless I’m mistaken but aren’t the Calvinists the ones who believe in “predetermination?” So what dose it actually matter to them what the Catholic Church dose or doesn’t teach? Nothing anyone dose or believes effects if their saved or not because it’s literally already been decided.
is God who: Appoints man to eternal life: Acts 13:48 "When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed." Chooses who is to be holy and blameless: Ephesians 1:4 "just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we be holy and blameless before Him." Predestines us to adoption: Ephesians 1:5 "He predestines us as sons trough Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will." Calls according to His purpose: 2 Timothy 1:9 "who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity." Chooses us for salvation: 2 Thessalonians 2:13 "But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth." Grants the act of believing: Philippians 1:29 "For you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake." Works faith in the believer: John 6:28-29 "Therefore they said to Him, “What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?” Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” Grants us repentance: 2 Timothy 2:24-25 "The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth." Causes us to be born again: 1 Peter 1:3 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." Makes us born again not by our will but by His will: John 1:12-13 "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." Draws people to Himself: John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day." Grants that we come to Jesus: John 6:65 "It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me." Predestines us to salvation: Romans 8:29-30 "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified." He does all this according to His purpose: Ephesians 1:11 "also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will We are saved by Grace trough faith. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 We receive faith trough hearing the Word of God. So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Romans 10:17 Why are people who believe in predestination concerned about people in the RCC? There are some in the church who who belong to God who need to hear the Gospel. If they are one of God's elect, they will believe in the Gospel at some point before they die. God will lose none who are His. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. Romans 8:30 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. John 6:37. “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. John 5:24
@@maximaphily601ever since Catholic Church put together a wide collection of texts and books (The Bible IS the word of God but written by mere men inspired by the Holy Spirit, the book itself didn´t fall from the skies) and defined which ones belong to the Old Testament and which ones to the New Testament, the Catholic Church has not modified the Bible. Last time the Bible was modified was by protestants who took some of the books they didn´t agree with and pretty much called the Catholic Church heretical for manipulating the Bible. Feel free to investigate the matter, I´m not lying to you.
4Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. 5But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed.
@@demonsnow1413 sad, but hopefully there is a seed that will grow back. I think some of the anger that gets pointed at the Catholic Church comes from the fact that most people intuit the truth there, even if they don’t want to admit that to themselves.
@demonsnow1413 -- Good. How about Catholicism's dogma on the immaculate conception of Mary? Since you're a devout Catholic, can you provide some biblical evidence to support that Mary was sinless? Thank you.
Good job, Brian! Calvinism has taught this “legal fiction” of justification for a long time. I recall the late RC Sproul teaching this heresy decades ago. MacArthur and his ilk, including James White, are still teaching this error. You are correct that “substitutionary atonement” as these Protestants teach it is false theology. Keep up the good work! 😊
@taylorrowe2002 Wrong. Calvinists and Catholics do NOT believe in practically the same gospel of justification. You should ask the Calvinists about that one! They will tell you a very different story…. 😜
@taylorrowe2002You can be saved, "yet carnal". This is made clear in scripture. Indeed the majority of saved believers do walk "yet carnal" and not "in the spirit". However faith *and* obedience is required, obedience is a work. But that work can only be done if you are truly walking in the spirit, as only the Holy Ghost can do that work in you. You cannot do it of yourself in the flesh. This is the issue..........................
Here is a copy of a comment I found below that shows some of the errors just in this one video. I didn't write it, but I too saw the errors. And in case you don't know, this channel scrubs comments that they don't like. After watching your presentation I would like to add some comments. You say at 6.02 mins mark “where does it say He (Jesus) substituted himself in our place”? I support the concept of substitutionary atonement because it is all over the bible that affirms that. The theme of substitution is found throughout the Old Testament as a precursor to the coming of Jesus Christ. The Passover feast conspicuously featured a substitute. In Exodus 12, God gives instruction to His people to prepare for the coming destroyer who would strike down the firstborn male of every family as a judgment upon Egypt. The only way to escape this plague was to take a perfect male lamb, kill it, and put the blood on the lintels and doorposts of their houses. God told them Exo12:13), That Passover lamb was a substitute for every male firstborn who would accept it…. God carried that theme of substitution into the New Testament with the coming of Jesus. He had set the stage so that mankind would understand exactly what Jesus came to do. Second Corinthians 5:21 says, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” God’s perfect Lamb took the sins of the world upon Himself, laid down His life, and died in our place (John 1:29; 1 Peter 3:18). The only acceptable sacrifice for sin is a perfect offering. If we died for our own sins, it would not be sufficient payment. We are not perfect. (John 10:18). There was nothing we could do to save ourselves, so God did it for us. The Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53 makes the substitutionary death of Christ abundantly clear: “He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed” All these verses in the NT debunked your claim that substitutionary death doesn’t appear in the NT.(verse 5).,.at 8:29 mins mark, you say “for God to take an innocent person and just destroy him and punish him and send him to hell to burn for our sins is wrong”. Please quote the subject verse to support your claim… At 6.20 mins mark You say “the new covenant is better and more perfect” BUT Heb8:6 doesn’t say that in the RNASB quote “ 6 Now he has obtained so much more excellent a ministry as he is mediator of a better covenant, enacted on better promises.” same as in KJV as well but you added in “perfect” which is not mentioned…. Please support your theory on “ bapstismally regenerated to go to heaven” by some biblical evidence. … .Are you implying James and Paul contradicts each other in their soteriology? But the bible doesn’t contradict itself so there must be something wrong in your interpretation. .. At 18:42 you say in Rom4 ”Abraham works here’s talking about the Mosaic law”. FYI Mosaic law didn’t come into effect until 430 years, so how is that Abraham observing the Mosaic law?..… the bible affirm faith is necessary for salvation as good works do not merit salvation. No one can "buy" heaven with enough good works, or good enough motives but we are created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” … At 25.08 mins mark; you say “where it says all your sins are forgiven past, present and future ” and you request for a verse to support it. Here it is; In Hebrews 10:10, the writer says, “We have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (ESV, emphasis added). Because of the blood of Jesus Christ, we have been “made perfect forever” (verse 14), God will remember our sins no more (verse 17), and “there is no longer any offering for sin” (verse 18, ESV). But if only our past sins are forgiven, then none of this is true, and we would stand condemned before God. Yet the writer of Hebrews clearly expresses that the sacrificial death of Jesus was offered once for all. Therefore, we know that the blood of Jesus covers our past, present, and future sins (1 John 1:7)… In 1 John 2:12, the apostle writes, “I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven for his name’s sake” (ESV, emphasis added). Are only our past sins forgiven? No, all of our sins are forgiven! In the original language, the words translated “have been forgiven” refer to a past action that continues in the present. Now, it sure looks like Jesus is forgiving people at the cross. After all, we do find the words “forgive them” coming out of Jesus' mouth. But in both of our examples from Luke, Jesus says, “Your sins [plural] are forgiven.” In other words, “All of your sins are forgiven.”. At 28.5 mins mark you say “your name can be blotted out of the book of life in John3:5.” Here is the quote of John3:5; (Joh 3:5) Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” FYI this verse didn’t intend to communicate to us that our name can be blotted out as it I is falsely claimed by you… You quoted Heb10:26 and say a believer can lose their salvation which I respectfully disagree because this verse is referring to those unbelieving Hebrews fense sitters having turned his back on the truth, and with full knowledge choosing to willfully and continually sin of unbelief, the apostate is then beyond salvation because he has rejected the one true sacrifice for sins: the Lord Jesus Christ. If Christ’s sacrifice is rejected, then all hope of salvation is gone. To turn away willfully from this sacrifice leaves no sacrifice; it leaves only sin, the penalty for which is eternal death. This passage is not speaking of a believer who falls away, but rather someone who may claim to be a believer, but truly is not. Anyone who apostatizes is proving he never had genuine faith to begin with (1 John 2:19)… Such a person does not sin because of ignorance, nor is he carried away by momentary temptations he is too weak to resist. The willful sinner sins because of an established way of thinking and acting which he has no desire to give up. The true believer, on the other hand, is one who lapses into sin and loses temporary fellowship with God. But he will eventually come back to God in repentance because his heavenly Father will continually woo and convict him until he can’t stay away any longer. The true apostate will continue to sin, deliberately, willingly and with abandon. …In conclusion, I noticed many Catholics completely bowed down and even kissed the statute of Mary’s feet. Is that biblical practice though I know you would say they only venerate and not worship Mary? Historically, schools of theology have used the term “worship” as a general term which included both adoration and veneration.
@@spacecoastz4026 You are reading your theology into the text. Scripture does not teach that Jesus’ death was a “substitution” for us. It teaches that Jesus offered himself freely in order to satisfy God’s justice out of love. John Calvin was wrong. Jesus never became sinful in order to pay for our sins in any substitutionary way. Jesus did not go to Hell and suffer for three days either. That is ridiculous. Jesus death was a Paschal Sacrifice for sin, but not a substitution. In the Old Testament the blood of bulls and goats could not “substitute” for the sins of people. They were offerings of a temporary nature. In regard to baptismal regeneration, there are plenty of resources to explain the Scriptural teaching. I recommend the Catechism of the Catholic Church as well as the Roman Catechism. Copying and pasting is not the way to gain a biblical education. You should invest in a program of biblical study. To be educated is to be a better person. 👍
Once in a while you hear something said and instantly know that it is wrong. As soon as this guy said "substitution" my brow furrowed and it completely grated against my soul. I just knew it was wrong but couldn't explain it Then you explained to me why this assertion was wrong. Your a good man doing good work sifting out what is true and what isn't. Helps a lot buddy.
Some write that the Eucharist is “Symbolic”. Do they also think that Jesus died “Symbolically” on the Cross?? That God saved us with "Symbols" and images ?? The Eucharist and the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross are inseparable: They are the God's plan to save us. We cannot accept one and deny the other.
Im not a Catholic but u are exactly right. I was raised a hardcore Baptist and their theology is so full of holes that its mind blowing. If u are a good Catholic following the teachings of the historical church u are a christian. God bless
@@georgepierson4920 You are the one saying all are dead in God. You like putting false words into others mouths, don't you! I am sorry that your English comprehension is so poor that you don't know that a person has to die in the flesh first, before become alive in the spirit. Assuming they abide in Christ.
God is God of the living not the dead so saints aren't dead ...if they are saints they are alive in heaven and alive in the mystical body of christ in which we are connected to God's mystical body.@@maximaphily601
An Ex Proud Evangelical Protestant here.. The more you learn our Church Fathers,the more will bring you Closest to the truth that Catholic is the irrefutable Church that Jesus Christ Himself established... The rest are Bogus Churches.. I was borned Protestant, BUT I'LL DIE A CATHOLIC!!! PERIOD
@@maximaphily601 Even the Church Fathers ( History) are there in the bible. Read Job 8:8-10. Christ Himself established His own Church. Matthew 16:18-19 Lastly, nowhere in the bible it say Bible Alone.. rather it says in 1 Timothy 3:15 the Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth.. Even you gonna use 2 Timothy 3:16 as means to justify the "Bible alone" doctrine, your wrong.. it only implies to guide a person in spiritual needs. But clearly the bible prohibits the self interpretation. 👉 2 Peter 1:20 & 3:16 That is why ordinary people needs Priest to guide them in reading the scripture. 👉 Acts 8: 30-32..
I don't know if anyone else has encountered this or is bothered by it, but I find it troubling when either Protestants or Catholics say, "Catholic versus Christian." As I transition from Southern Baptist to Catholic, I see that Catholics are the original Christians.
Yes and I really don't like it because they're suggesting we're not even Christians. Imagine how it complicates my communication with Protestants when I pray in their online communities. I was told all kinds of things including that the Catholic Church is satanic. On the other hand I have the impression that this "Catholic vs. Christian" is a kind of marketing shortcut. The videos are titled this way because this attracts viewers. And also it's a bit funny they're talking about how "Christianity" says this and that while actually they mean only their own specific kind of Protestantism which I often don't really know what it precisely is. Ironic, isn't it.
@weaponofchoice-tc7qsas I understand it they don't reject it per se but they don't believe it does anything. They say it's just a symbol and a public proclamation of something that has already happened when the person believed. I was shocked when I first heard this. They say it's something like a wedding ring. Just a sign.
Catholics often get confused by the question (and ones like it) because we don't have a "soundbite" that we use to "save" people as we evangelize. As a former non-denominational, when I teach my middle school religious education class, I teach them common protestant language they'll hear, along with an intelligent response, so they don't get tripped up by these kinds of questions. "Are you saved? Do you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ? Do you know the gospel message?" I appreciate you tackling these topics and wish more Catholics understood these nuances.
I left Calvinism early last year and have been reconstructing my faith since then, without presuppositions. Since then, I find myself identifying more with Catholic brethren than Calvinist. Especially when learning actual church history. I don't go so far as venerating Mary as highly as Catholics, nor prayer with dead saints to help petition on our behalf, but otherwise, I wouldn't be too far from Catholicism. It is faith alone, but faith in Christ alone while working the good works laid out for us beforehand. Lots to unpack, but removing the lenses is key, and seeing the joy of Christ and the Holy Spirit filling me as I find my salvation in Him, and who I am in Him.
That’s beautiful❤️ - keep delving into the writings of the Christians that learned the faith at the very feet of the Apostles themselves, and their own students as well. They know better than 21st century believers what Jesus wanted passed on to us. Also, if you haven’t already (keeping in mind the ingrained Calvinist training about Mary) explore what the Church specifically teaches about Mary and about praying to the Saints in Heaven. Here’s a bit: We are the Body of Christ. Nowhere does the Bible say that believers are amputated from the Body of Christ when they “fall asleep”. Isn’t there a possibility that that, too, is a presupposition? Jesus said clearly: “God is the God of the Living, not the Dead”. Did He mean God is only God of those on Earth, or that we continue to be alive in Christ? In the book of Revelation (8:3-4), it says the angels offer to God the prayers of the saints. Often ignored verse. Regarding the Body and Blood of Christ: St Paul rebukes the Corinthians (11:26-27) for partaking of the Lord’s supper unworthily (my words) telling them that is the reason some are SICK & DYING. Another thing about Mary: God chooses to work powerfully through her to this day (she was the person who brought me to Christ) innumerable miracles for those who ask her for her intercession. After all, at slightly more than a glance at her Son, Jesus performed His 1st public miracle…..despite it “not yet being His Hour. In other words, He allowed the Hour of His Passion and Death to be moved up on the timeline just to please her. And this is pretty cool: The Church has preserved at least one piece of iconography painted by the Apostle Luke….and it’s of Mary. ❤
@@TrueChristianityWithSandra while I appreciate your input, I have looked into the veneration of Mary and prayer with the saints. That was one of the first big studies, after Calvinist dogma, which I thought would be very important since many reformers rejected those doctrines as well. What I find more appealing is prayer with the saints in heaven than prayer to Mary, unless you account her as equal with the other saints, separate only in her earthly life. I find many arguments from silence as to her assumption and being made queen of heaven, but what I found was an incredible amount on this topic from the 5th and 6th century gnostics which were heterodoxical writings, of which we would both discount. I do not argue against personal experiences, but when it comes to the practiced beliefs of the early church, I found no doctrine of assumption of Mary, nor her acting as an angel or as one with authority over Christ. The best argument, as you put forward, would be at the wedding at Cana, but it can also be understood as an obedience to Christ's earthly mother, as well as a display of faith on her part for God to act provide for this family friend. I see no logical reason to continue the argument further lest we make much of little unnecessarily and put man on the pedestal with God or near God and blaspheme either by choice or by accident. The Bible and early church documents continually tell me that faith is in Christ alone, God does not share His glory, and He is the only one to be worshipped. It fits with what was revealed from Genesis all the way through the incarnation of Christ. I thank you for your concern in my search, but we will have to agree to disagree on these points, though I would still hold you in regard as a sister in Christ and pray for your well-being and continuation in the faith to the end as I hope to meet you in person at the feet of Christ some day.
@@Elmarias777 Thank you for your thoughtful reply. If you’re familiar with the Early Church Fathers - especially those from the first and second century - then you will also be aware that they believed in the Eucharist being the real Body and Blood of Christ. No matter what some reformer thought through their self-interpretation of Scripture, you cannot deny that those who learned the faith directly from John the Apostle or from John’s own disciples would obviously know the true Christian Faith far better than the men who came 1500 years later. In fact, if you’ve read the writings they left us you’re also aware that they name the Catholic Church as the true Christian Church and refer to its hierarchy (Bishops, Priests, & Deacons). On a purely logical level, you can also admit that Bible Alone Christianity cannot be the historical Christianity. After all, the Printing Press wasn’t even invented until the mid-1400’s. And the Bible wasn’t compiled until over 300 yrs after Christ. Peace❤️
@sandra4065 Like I stated earlier, my main hangup with the RCC and I see in history the deviation and additions added for the two topics I mentioned. I agree with most of what you said, though the word catholic can be taken a few ways, and our understanding of church heirarchy is different, but I would be mostly in agreement. At communion, I do believe and feel the presence of God in the elements. The early church discipled in homes and wherever else they could gathet and were taught orally, as well as from Torah and when they came along, the apostolic letters. Not quite sure what your point on the printing press had to do with what you were saying, so I cannot speak to that but I gave what response was accurate to that point? Anyhow, i do hold pretty well to the 5 solas, although I do what the calvinist reformers did and redefined them to make them more historically accurate 😉 and more in line with eastern orthodoxy, which is more where i fall theologically, at least in closeness in doctrine. God bless
Better get some great Lenses Elmer so you dont get sucked in by the Roman Vatican. There's a reason God and Christ Jesus have such disdain and concentrated vehemence against the Roman Catholic Vatican and Churches in the End Time world, of REVELATION, we are now going into. How could you possibly think you'll be saved when you think the best Church is the one most full of Evil ! Not my words,...God's and ...Christ Jesus's. !!
Marvelous! Brian, What a great works and noble acts, in debunking these Calvinese blasphemer. I guess that he had no better work.. The least he could do is to evangelise to those who doesn't know about JESUS. On behalf of billions of Catholics in the universe, I am very proud of you. Keep up with your excellent work. GOD BLESS!
I recommend three excellent resources on Mariology: “Behold Your Mother” by Tim Staples, “Jesus and the Jewish Roots of Mary” by Brant Pitre, and “Hail Holy Queen” by Dr. Scott Hahn. 😊
And this is exactly the problem with protestantism, they all say they agree on the essentials, but what he just said that if u dont believe in his gospel then ur not saved, hello this is a Salvation issue. And this is what I kept seeing as a protestant, every time I would go online to study all I kept seeing was how prots were bashing other prots left & right about how their not true Christians, & all them saying the Bible is very clear, but yet they all have a diff interpretation of the Bible alone & every1 kept using the same exact scripture to defend their position, that if another angel or anybody teaches you another gospel let him be accursed. Every single denomination uses this verse to defend their interpretation of the Bible alone it's ridiculous. I'm so glad u did a rebuttal on this man, bc a couple years ago I was writing him, we talked for around two weeks, I was discussing the canonization of the Bible, asking him who canonized the books of the Bible, & how do u kno u have the correct Canon. But all he kept telling me was how there's historical manuscripts that can prove the Bible is true 🤦🏻♂️ I'm telling him I'm a Christian I believe the Bible is the true word of God, and he told me how it was going to cost me a $150 for him to do the research about the cannon. I mean talk about a tool of satan. But I kept asking, then he Finally answered my question after like two weeks, he said oh u believe it was the Roman Catholic Church that canonize the books the Bible, and then he blocked me after that... So I'm happy you guys are finally exposing this man, bc he really thinks he's teaching Biblical theology, when his Gospel is not Christianity.. God bless u all my Brothers, & Sisters 💯🙏🏼📿🌹🇻🇦💪🏻
On top of that I often hear things like many Christians are not really Christians because they don't truly have a personal relationship with Jesus. I wonder how that is assessed. How does one know where is the dividing line? I'd rather go with the Catholic understanding that everyone that has been validly baptized is a Christian. It's their responsibility how they then live their faith.
I think it's both. Objectively, we become justified, born again, and become part of the body of Christ through baptism. But as true Christians, we also must live out our faith in obedience and in relationship with Jesus. That's because it makes you a Christian, but true Christians live it out. Does that make sense?
@@barborazajacova7633yeah they can't find the dividing line, and they say to have a relationship, bc they dont want to believe Christianity is a religion, they believe a religion is to bind and bound you down. A lot of them will say We have a relationship with Jesus, you just have a religion and all religions are created by the devil🤦🏻♂️ Then when u show them scripture even though James 1:27 says Christianity is religion, & Instead of repenting and admit that their erroneous, they just try to explain it away & say what James is really saying etc etc, NO' he clearly says Christianity is religion Period. Bc they'd take all religions as being evil, made to control people, & its bc Religion has Authority, so they say u don't need to be in religion, you just have to have a relationship, bc they dnt want to follow authority, they want their own rules to be free, not realizing they're the ones following their flesh, & worldly desires. So you're right how do they know what is a true relationship if you're following your own interpretation of the Bible aline, bc the Bible doesn't explain what are the exact essentials, it doesn't give us a complete list of the essentials😢🎉, as Protestants love to say we all believe in the essentials. So when u ask them okay what are those, bc the Bible doesn't give us a complete explicit list of the essentials. That's what we need to keep pointing that out to them, bc when I was a protestant that was a question I couldn't answer, & if one is being faithful & honest they will admit that there is division inside of protestantism on the essentials 💯
Another terrific job, Bryan! I've seen some of the shorts of this guy, commented on a few to determine his basis of reference; but never received any straight feedback. He claims "we are saved by believing the Gospel"... No! He obviously never read John 5:39.... Thanks Bryan!
Just providing a source if anyone wants to look deeper into the subject. The brother in this video provides a good and sufficient answer regarding rebutting the penal substitution from the reformed version. Love you brother, and keep doing God’s work for the Catholic church
I can’t believe I used to believe that God would pour out his wrath on his innocent son. What a twisted view of the father. Vicarious satisfaction is the truth. Praise God for his goodness
A devout Catholic in the comments here believes that Catholics wrote the new testament. I've seen this thousands of times. No fellow Catholic ever contradicts them. Catholics are free to believe anything they want. And they do. All that matters to the CC is that the faithful drop their dimes in the basket. Never know when a priest is gonna have to get out of town in a hurry.
Here are some simple arguments: 1. Why does the Catholic church add to scripture? Have its own docrtrines of men as being equal with scripture? e.g. Immaculate Conception re Mary 2. Why does the Catholic church want to unify with the religions of the world which are antichrist, against scripture? 3. Why is the Catholic church hoisting up the rainbow flag, which is clearly a sin? I could go on..................
@@maximaphily601 Deuterocannon was defined in early councils you don't have any ground to call it an addition. Apostles taught more things than were just in scripture, 2 Thessalonians 2:15. The current Pope is interested in peaceful dialogues and bringing others to Christ through loving them. Read a whole Pope speech instead of just the MSNBC headline. The Church has and still condemns LGBTQ. The Vatican never flew a pride flag. If a priest does so he acts on his own authority and not with the consent of the church. 1. Why do protestants remove books of scripture? 2. Why do protestants hold traditions of men ie, baptism as only a symbol, once saved always saved, rapture, etc... 3. Why do protestant churches fly pride flags? If one protestant does something wrong it's representative of all protestants correct?
@@alexjoneschannel "Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son." No other relgion on the planet declares Jesus as the Christ, the Word, God incarnate. They are all antichrist. 2 John 1:10 If *anyone* comes to you and does *not* bring this doctrine, *do not receive him* into your house nor greet him; True Christians do not tend to the concerns of this world, our kingdom is not of this world, its politics, or religions. We are not to enterain or attempt any unification with them. We are to be HOLY! 2 Cor 6 14 Do not be *unequally yoked together with unbelievers.* For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness?........Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? 17 Therefore...“Come out from among them And be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, Plenty of dirty laundry with the Pope and Catholic church...................
@@alexjoneschannel Let's just go to say, the National Catholic Reporter shall we: 'Tthe Catholic Church, guided by Pope Francis, has quietly shown welcome to the LGBTQ community, while avoiding changes to doctrine. "Catholic LGBTQ ministry has been expanding astronomically in the last decade," said Francis DeBernardo, executive director at New Ways Ministry, a Catholic outreach program aimed at promoting inclusion and justice for the LGBTQ community, in a comment to Religion News Service on June 24. "Pope Francis' welcoming statements and gestures are the main reason for this greater openness to LGBTQ people," he added. Oh, you mean the Pope did not outright condmen sin as sin? I guess Jesus should have said to the woman caught in adultery, "well, you did your best, if you can go and sin no more that would be best, but if you cannot do so, just keep practicing what you practice and in love you will make it anyhow". Get real, you are sleeping.................... What else did they report: "Six transexual women from different cultural and social backgrounds walked into the Vatican for a private audience with Francis on June 22.... One of the transgender women who visited the pope, Alessia, said the meeting with Francis "was emotional" and "they felt welcomed." "On Pride Month I think this is an important message," she said. " Should not the message have been "Go and sin no more"..........................
I’ve been a housewife and mom for 23 years. I have a great life and am so thankful we’ve been able to make it happen. I wouldn’t trade staying home with my kids for ANY career! We women bought the lie that we could have it all! It’s a lie. One will suffer, either your career or your household. No one thinks about finding fulfillment in staying home by finding hobbies and activities you love to do that renew you, but I can’t imagine having time to paint, decorate the home, sew, visit with friends, etc if I had a job. If you can stay home and raise your children, do it! Children are better for it, and you will have more of what’s important to show for it when you get older.
No where in Romans 1 is The New Testament mentioned. But I would actually agree with you. Yes, the new testament is about the Gospel and the gospel is about how Jesus saves us. That’s about as deep as Protestants go. This is their shortcoming. HOW DOES JESUS SAVE US? They don’t know how to answer that. Protestants simply can not answer that effectively. They will say his work on the cross is what saves us. And we would agree that the redemptive work of Christ; His passion, death, resurrection, and ascension are the source of grace and salvation. But how are the merits of the cross SPECIFICALLY applied to each and every individual? Protestants would say by faith alone. Catholics would say Faith is merely the first step. The gateway into the life of God. Once entered into this life of grace (by faith), one must REMAIN IN IT by growing in grace and the theological virtue of faith hope and love. One must frequent the sacraments. THE SACRAMENTS ARE WHAT MAKE THE GRACE OF THE CROSS PERSONAL AND APPLICABLE TO EACH AND EVERY INDIVIDUAL. The sacraments are salvation. The sacraments are the grace dispensed by Jesus from his cross. This is the gospel. That Jesus saves us by his death through the sacraments. And we must cooperate with the grace He gives us or else we deny him and perish and lose eternal life by rejecting His grace.
Just think about the False Church of Martin Luther the false church of the protestants. Just listen to what they’re saying and this is what they’re saying in different words. “For 1500 years give or take, everyone got it wrong but they are correct!” They literally showed up yesterday and somehow they know the message of the Bible better than the authors of the Bible and yes, the Bible is a Catholic book written by the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church is the church of the apostles. This is an extraordinary claim. Can you imagine? Here let me post this a statement that was posted by someone else on UA-cam a while back. I simply cannot say it better my self. “Funny how the Catholic church GAVE the world the bible, has preached it and carried it to the 4 corners of the globe for Johnny-come-latelies that arrived on the scene 500 years ago, know all about it ! LOL! LOL! Tell us the real meanings and try to get some of your Thousands of disagreeing, splitting up, arguing denominations to agree on ANYTHING that the bible means --LOL!
When St. Paul was struck from his horse and was confronted by the Lord Jesus Christ “Saul Saul, why dost thou persecute me”, Paul then believed and had a deep faith in Christ from that point forward. According to this British guy’s logic, Paul then never needed to write his letters and epistles, all he had to do was sit around and be happy that he was saved through faith alone. Yes, it is ironic Brian. The “faith alone” line they beat to death (without regard to the many verses that counter their “interpretation”) would never have existed without Paul’s personal works from faith, through suffering and perseverance throughout his entire mission, which resulted in his writings (writings are works) even from a prison cell.
8 Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy-meditate on these things. 9 The things which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these do, and the God of peace will be with you. 10 But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly that now at last your care for me has flourished again; though you surely did care, but you lacked opportunity. 11 Not that I speak in regard to need, for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content: 12 I know how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. 13 I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. Philippians chapter 4 It's not ironic....it's called faith...and faith alone..and responding to God. Paul's ministry to the Gentile world, given to him directly from the risen Christ, is not about his works, but about revealing the Gospel message to the world. Paul didn't look at it as something he was doing, but what God was doing through him for us.
@@spacecoastz4026 Let’s take the words from the Master Himself, above and beyond our dearly beloved Apostle Paul, of whom we all respect and love and learn from. Matthew 5:16 Jesus said, “Let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.” Christians
@@FrankenSensei2 Just remember. All Scripture are inspired words from God. Some apply to different times, different audiences, different circumstances, but they are all inspired words. Yes, let our lights shine before others to give glory to God.
Some think that it can happen that Bible verses "cancel" each other. It's FALSE ! Every Bible verse IS VALID. And that is why we must read them with the Spirit of Truth and the Intelligence of the Scriptures, as Jesus teaches us very well in several passages of the Gospel. The letter condemns. The Spirit liberates!
i just learned something. I had not realised that substitutuonary atomement was not Catholic doctrine and that it does not predate Calvin. Obviously I have a lot to learn about Catholic doctrine!
"who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness-by whose stripes you were healed." I Peter 2:24 "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." II Corinthians 5:21 "And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross." Colossians 2:13-14 "For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit," I Peter 3:18
@@mack6429None of these verses teach this principle as stated by Calvin himself in Institutes of Christian Religion, “Therefore, our Lord came forth very man, adopted the person of Adam, and assumed his name, that he might in his stead obey the Father; that he might present our flesh as the price of satisfaction to the just judgment of God, and in the same flesh pay the penalty which we had incurred…” The issue with Calvin from how I understand it is he goes way too far with equating the “just penalty due to sin” to each individual human being and in a way this actually belittles Christ’s sacrifice as it in no way is the equal penalty due but very clearly it is extravagantly gratuitous in relation to the sinfulness of all mankind. The Father showing the extent of His love for us rather than an unjust punitive measure against His own Son. I don’t think Calvin’s argumentation is quite as nuanced to address this effectively without creating a semi schizophrenic relationship between the persons of the Trinity.
@@mack6429 Blah blah blah. Where is “substitutionary atonement” in these verses? Did you even bother listening to Bryan’s presentation? Rather, Jesus is the Lamb of God Who takes away the sins of the world. Read Hebrews: Jesus is the new high priest, Who perpetually stands in place of the Passover Lamb, so that we no longer have to make bloody sacrifices in the Temple. Just as the Jews ate the Passover Lamb, so too must we Christians eat the flesh of Christ in the Eucharist.
@@OzCrusader you don't see atonement because you do not have eyes to see, or ears to hear. Let me ask you about your eucharist. Why do priest regularly replace the eucharist used for adoration?? Do you even know?
It was nice of the anti-catholic to confirm that there is a gospel outside of the Bible. The one that was preached before the Bible was written and compiled. I'd guess that wasn't his intent though? Likely, he doesn't even realize that he just rebutted Bible only protestantism
The idea of salvation being immutable is their problem. Once saved always saved is just nonsense. Christ taught that some seed falls on rock ground, springs up and then having no roots simply die off. These words refer to the idea that some hear the gospel, believe and then fall into apostasy. Salvation can be gained and then lost.
Not really. Rather they hear the words, start to feel the move toward God, but then allow the world to pull them back away. Why, because they have no roots. What are roots? Understanding and reading the Word of God, going to a good bible-based church, being in fellowship with others, etc. This wasn't an example of losing salvation...this was an example of not obtaining salvation through true faith. Now, if you still think you can loose salvation...that YOU are who holds it all together, that YOU can mess it up....then YOU probably will, thus you may not be saved to begin with.
I found a video where he said Jesus did go to both the hell of the righteous dead as well as the hell of the damned. He didn't outright say Jesus burned in this video but seeing that we believe Jesus had a human soul and that his human soul descended when it separated at death I am not seeing how his human soul went to the hell of the damned without getting burned at least a little. Just my 2 cents. God Bless
@@Matt-1926 Did the three Hebrew boys thrown into the firy furnance "burn" or were they preserved throught it? Is God not able to perform such miracles? So why could not Jesus too (being God) also not "burn in hell". Now I am not agreeing with John McArthur, just making a point about making assumptions or suppositions as was made on this video. you cannot call out one persons for doing it, then do it yourself. John Mc *NEVER* said that Christ would *BURN* in hell. That was the speaker on this video making things up to sensationalize it.
@@maximaphily601 *_Did the three Hebrew boys thrown into the firy furnance "burn" or were they preserved throught it?_* They were preserved through it. But I don't think this applies because Jesus wasn't preserved through his brutal death so if His descent into Hell was to include the Hell of the damned I'm not seeing why the miracle would occur? I do want to add that I don't believe He went to the Hell of the damned, I believe He went to Abraham's bosom/paradise. *_John Mc NEVER said that Christ would BURN in hell. That was the speaker on this video making things up to sensationalize it._* I'm not going to argue this point because I agree I haven't found it. Although I do want to add from my understanding Calvin did argue that Jesus ‘descent into hell’ was not merely descending into physical death and the grave. He believes it represents biblical teaching that Jesus suffered not just bodily pain but all the torments that a soul in hell, cut off from God’s presence, would experience. Not saying this proves anything just wanted to point out that this line of thought is out there. God Bless
I called out IthinkBiblically some months ago. Won't go into what it was. But after days of my relentless messages proving things taught and stated to be inaccurate particularly from a historical documented record of Church history, but some scripture also, the entire video was taken down. The messaging between myself and others was so impactful he thought the easiest way to hide the fact he was "being exposed" was simply to remove the entire video. Rather than simply be humble or God forbid, acknowledge error or even misunderstanding. Then, next step was to ensure that any of my messages on his other videos were hidden from public viewing. Meaning, I simply now use one of my many, many, many UA-cam ID's to message his channel under a different ID and IP address. It shows lack of credibility when any channel blocks messages. Argue or debate your point through scripture, historical record, facts. Don't be like a Democrat marxist and hide the truth so your narrative is the one heard the loudest.
Protestants understand that the very foundation of their doctrines are "unbiblical", as well, dont they? One of their main doctrines is Sola Fide (Faith Alone), which is predicated on the more foundational doctrine of Sola Scriptura (scripture alone). Therfore, Protestants would have to be able to uphold Sola Scriptura in order for Sola Fide to be upheld. However, Sola Scriptura is a self-defeating doctrine because there would need to be an intra-scriptural reference as to how many, and what books, constitue the canon of scripture. There isn't however, and this would mean that Protestants themselves are appealing to an authority that is outside of, and above scripture to determine the canon of scripture in the first place. That defeats the concept of Sola Scriptura altogether, and by extension, Sola Fide as well. I asked iThinkBiblically to explain this (or any other Protestants on the channel), but have yet to hear an explanation.
I actually answered this comment, but now I see that my comment is deleted. When stuff like this happens, you know your not dealing with a channel that is truthful.
@@spacecoastz4026 Well your comment alledging something was deleted still posted, as did all of your other comments on this channel. Feel free to give your response again. I am curious to know your thoughts.
*Sola Scriptura is a self-defeating doctrine because there would need to be an intra-scriptural reference as to how many, and what books, constitue the canon of scripture.* That's a false assumption and argument. Either you believe in the Word of God, or you don't. And if you don't, then the bible simply becomes the word of man. If Scripture isn't inspired by the Holy Spirit, then it's just a fable or make-believe story, without any divine substance. Scripture tells us that ALL Scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit, and gives us everything that we need for proper doctrine and for living our lives for God. God preserved His Word for the world, using men or all different standards and character, to bring us to Christ. So if Scripture Alone is not valid, then nothing is valid because now you are relying on man for doctrine and not God. And Scripture clearly teaches that salvation is through Christ by Faith in Him and Him alone. For there is no other way to God but through Christ, and not of works. To read the New Testament and walk away thinking that it's more than just faith in Christ for salvation is being willfully blind or extremely prideful. To think that somehow the blood of Christ is insufficient for your salvation is not accepting the Gospel. To think that your works can somehow atone for that which Christ on the cross was unable to do is sinful Pride. The same sin of the devil. There is no "defeating of Sola Scripture or Sola Fide unless you simply refuse to believe in God's Word and accept the simplicity of the Gospel.
@@spacecoastz4026 I would agree with most of your first paragraph. But the the first and last sentences of that paragraph highlight my point even further. Your first sentence of, "that's a false assumption and argument", is a baseless claim. You never provide any scriptural evidence as to how my claim is false and your claim of Sola Scriptura is scripturally supported. Then your last sentence of, "If Scripture Alone is not valid, then nothing is valid because now you are relying on man for doctrine and not God", highlights my point exactly. Due to the fact there is no intra-scriptural reference as to how many, or what books, constitue the canon of scripture (as well as there being no scriptural reference to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura in those books), Protestants would be relying on "man-made doctrines." This shows the self-defeating ramifications of a concept like Sola Scriptura. These man-made doctrines of the Protestant Reformation are also why there are thousands upon thousands of Protestant denominations. Protestants place themselves at the center of their faith, instead of The Holy Trinity. They tell themselves they have the correct interpretation of scripture, and if someone disagrees, they just break off and form another denomination. Clearly you haven't studied the Catholic Church beyond a couple 7th Day Adventist pamphlets and Living Waters UA-cam videos. Because if you did, you'd understand that The Catholic Church doesn't believe in or teach a works-based salvation. Nothing we do can add to what Christ did on the cross. It was Christ alone who redeemed Mankind and gave us a chance at everlasting life. However, as scripture states in James 2:26, "So as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." If it is simply belief in Christ as the Son of God that we need, don't forget that scripture also states in James 2:19 that, "Even the demons believe." So if belief is the only thing one needs, how does that make them different than a demon? It pains me to see Protestants have as much zeal and passion for Christ, as they do hatred for the church He started. Christ proclaimed that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church, so Satan, being deceitful, convinced Man to create their own churches. This is not to say that other ecclesial communities don't have some truth, but only the Catholic Church has the fullness of truth and the protection of Christ. Remember Matthew 7:22-24. I pray that you honestly keep looking into what the Catholic Church teaches and that you keep watching Catholic apologetics videos. I also pray that if today you hear His voice, that you do not harden your heart.
I noticed that you made it look like you played my video through but you didn't. But can you tell me in what sense you believe that Jesus died "for" our sins? Do you think the OT sacrifices point to Christ? Weren't the sins of Israel placed upon the sacrifice in Leviticus 16? Doesn't St Peter say that Christ bore our sins in his body on the cross? If this is all true how can you deny substitutional atonement?
I wrote two comments on the I Think Biblically channel, encouraging people (including the host) to watch this video. Sadly, it appears both my comments were quickly deleted.
Yes I Thnk Bib. does this all the time. In fact he deleted an entire video when it was proven through rational valid argument of his error. He just removed the entire video. And he is known to block messages from public view that might disagree with him.
Of course they were. >_< Another way you could try it is to leave a comment, saying that a lot of the things he says about Catholicism just aren't true, and leave it at that. Then go back in a couple of days and edit your comment, adding a link to this video. He won't check the edited comment, most likely. :)
@@CatholicTruthOfficialThis only works if he has not already blocked you from having your messages seen by the public. You can post all you like, see all your posts, but no one else can read them. You can only test this by setting up an alternative user, and have that user log in, to see if you can read the message posted under the other user. He has poor form for it on IthinkBib.
The Infallibility of the Pope Since 1870, with Pope Pius IX, the Catholic Church has taught the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. The Vatican Council then declared that The Vatican Council has defined as "a divinely revealed dogma" that "the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra -- that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church -- is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church's consent" (Catholic Encyclopedia) On June 20, 1894, Pope Leo XIII was bold enough to claim that the Popes “hold upon the earth the place of God Almighty” Of course, this was nothing new because the Vatican Council of 1870 had already proclaimed that: The Pope is Christ in office, Christ in jurisdiction and power...we bow down before thy voice, O Pius, as before the voice of Christ, the God of truth; in clinging to thee, we cling to Christ. (Babylon Mystery Religion, p. 103). The first being to ever liken himself to God was Lucifer (Isa. 14:12-15), and the last will be Antichrist (II Ths. 2:3-4), so the Pope isn't in very good company. King Herod, who also followed the Roman religion, was killed by God for allowing people to credit him with infallibility (Acts 12:21-23). God's word is the only infallible Authority in Christianity. No man is infallible. The Bible record is quite clear about that: God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar..." (Rom. 3:4) To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isa. 8:20) Surely men of low degree are vanity, and men of high degree are a lie: to be laid in the balance, they are altogether lighter than vanity." (Psa. 62:9)
Someone asks where is the devotion to Mary in the scriptures ? Here is the answer: Rev 12.1: “A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head". If Mary is Queen (moreover the mother of a King is always a Queen) then we must render her a devotion.
@@adelbertleblanc1846 Hi friend, I don't have any teaching. The Holy Ghost needs to lead you to all Truth. I belong to no denomination of men. Matters not what I say! You need to cast off ALL denonminational (including Catholic) teachings and go to the Word. Friend, what does Rev 4:1 (as one example of several) clearly inform you of: “Come up hither, and I will show you what must take place after this.” This is immediately after the letters to the 7 churches in Rev 2/3. Do you believe on the Word? What does it say clearly? Anything after Rev 4:1 is yet future, *MUST* take place after this............ Rev 12 is but future. Has nothing to do with Mary, Jesus, Israel. I don't know any denomination (Catholic, Protestant) that teach it correct! They all rely on their dogmas and doctrines, rather than turn to the simple Word of Truth.
@@maximaphily601 Can You explain to me Revelation 12 folowing Your comprehension ? (Remind) - Dont strike with verses and verses ! Juste answer my question !
@@adelbertleblanc1846 Hi friend, just telling you what something is, is a meaningless exercise. Because you need to take all scripture into context. There are dozens of complementary scriptures you also need to understand from Genesis through the OT (particularly Esther and Song of Solomon) and the New Testament. If I just say "this is black" or "this is white" it means nothing in of itself. That is why I gave you Rev 4:1 to start to have you meditate on the Word. It clearly tells you that all of Revelation from that moment, is "yet future" from the time John was called to heaven in the spirit. This means, Rev 12 cannot be historical, so cannot be Mary giving birth to Jesus, or Israel giving birth to Jesus, as most of the church today, Catholic and Protestant, teach. You don't want verses and verses, but for the Holy Ghost to move in you, you need to have dozens of verses that taken together reveal this truth to you. But what I will tell you up front is what those who are being led by the Holy Ghost do understand (and there are very few!). Remember what Jesus said, that the way to eternal life is hard, few find it, the path and gate is strait and narrow. Do you think everyone in the Catholic church is going? Would not be too hard then, would it! Take Jesus at His Word. The Woman is the Church (body of Christ, the true organic one, not any denomination of man); the Man Child are the overcomers who are born out of the body of Christ (a small remnant while the church sleeps). All are saved believers, but the Man Child has a special reward for overcoming and not sleeping as the church does today. Have you received the full truth that God is taking out a remnant, a rib company of people just as Adam slept to make Eve. God is taking out a rib company of people while the body of Christ (the second Adam) sleeps. I am not just talking about the church but the body of Christ filled with the spirit. God caused the sleep. That is why church as a whole is sleeping. It is God’s judgment, they reject the truth of the bride, of being made perfect. They believe they will get to heaven before they will be perfect. There is an overcoming group of people being made perfect in this hour........... Her child became a man child, he developed, grew up. Within the church today there is a remnant. Just as God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, He took out a rib, God is taking out a rib company of people out of the church while the church sleeps. Jesus is the last Adam, and just like the first Adam God is taking out of His body a people close to His heart. That He is going to make a bride, a wife, for the Last Adam. He is going to have some overcomers.
If there is any Catholic who has never made the way of the cross in his life then he will not understand what St Paul taught. Otherwise, we Catholics do understand much better that Jesus redeemed us by dying on the cross. Congrats B. M. I appreciate your work very much. Good bless.
2 Peter chapter 2 : “But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them-bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.”
Me: waiting to see how much of things we can agree on with calvinists CT: "We were in an agreement with him up to this point" 5:00 welp that didn't last long 😂
It seems to me that there are three "stages", if you will, of salvation: initial salvation, continued salvation, and final salvation. The problem with the majority of "faith alone" arguments is that they deny works have anything to do with any stage of salvation, but that renders continued salvation useless as a category, so they get rid of it, leaving their stages as follows: 1. Initial salvation 2. ??? 3. Final salvation With nothing for us to do between initial and final salvation, the only conclusion is "once saved, always saved." This, I believe, is why nearly everyone who believes the Solae also believes in OSAS.
@Jin-yi4hk no, it wouldn't meet the Catholic narrative to say no works are required of you to maintain your salvation...then again, it wouldn't meet the biblical narrative either, so I'm not sure why you would want to argue that point.
Isaiah 53 is helpful: Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. 5But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. 6We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
Yes, this is a great symbolic imagery and foreshadowing for the Messiah. But it doesn't mean that Jesus had a substitutionary atonement. At least not the _Calvinist_ version of it.
As Catholics, we affirm a TYPE of substitutionary atonement known as satisfaction theory. In place of our punishment, Christ satisfies the wrath of God through his infinitely valuable sacrifice. His sacrifice is the substitute for our punishment. What we actually deny is PENAL substitutionary atonement (PSA) which teaches God the Father poured out his wrath onto the son - he takes our punishment from God in our place as the substitute rather than paying for our redemption with a sufficient sacrifice as a substitute.
You can apply all the labels, definitions, and doctrines of men. Why don't you just stand on the Word alone? All denominations, all of them, have this issue and all are wrong in different ways. Best you read Isaiah 53 to see it was the *WILL* of the Father to bruise Him, crush Him. Christ gave Himself up voluntarily to please the Father yes, but it was the definite will of the Father that this be done. Christ only came to do the will of the Father, otherwise you lack understanding of His entire ministry here on earth.
@@thecatechumenYou too, Catholic is but a denomination friend. Any "church" that adds dogma and doctrine to the Word, makes the Word void. Scripture is clear.
@@thecatechumenAre you Catholic because you support the Roman church's attempt to unify all the relgions of the world, that is antichrist? Or support the hoisting of the rainbow flag, because that is obedience? Or support the blood butchery of past history of an insitution that killed innocent blood? Which Catholic are you holding up to? No true church would have any of this history I am afraid to inform you. And there is much more.
His comments at 22:02... The arrogance to say we are "innocent" because Jesus died for us... sheesh. That's like saying you're innocent if someone else gets accused of a crime you committed and they were found guilty so you walk free. Nope, you still committed the crimes (or in this case... constantly sin), you are guilty and you know it.
I read my Bible and I realized I must leave the Catholic Church and join the Seventh-Day Adventist ... Baptist ... Church of Christ ... Methodist ... Pentecostals ... Methodists ... Church of the Open Bible Holy Rollers ... the Church of What's Happening Now ............
I would say God is infinitely holy, and Heaven is a place of perfection and perfect holiness. Every sin is an eternal sin against him with eternal consequences. The Bible says nothing impure or unclean can enter heaven, and the penalty for sin is death and hell (Rom 6:23). However, God loves us so much that he doesn't want us to go to hell, so, like any good parent, he gave up his life for us. He came to Earth in the person of Jesus Christ to take our sins and guilt by dying a gruesome death for us on the cross. He had all of his skin ripped off, and he shed all of his blood so that anyone at any time can come to him to find complete forgiveness of sins, redemption, and new life. Then I would tell him that true repentance is turning away from our sins and trusting in Jesus and what he did for us on the cross. Then, I would challenge him to do that, and to give his life to Christ.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial the theology of Christianity is simply a continuation of God’s revelation to the Israelites and Substitutionary atonement pointed to the cross for a reason.
I have a question : What evidence for the “5 solas” ? Who gives any guarantee about them ? - Because none of the fathers of the church and none saint spokes about this "5 solas" - Who invented that ? Do You have any idea ?
Bryan I was watching a video about our lady it's so beautiful,Our lady was 14-16 yrs old when she gave birth to Jesus.Before she died she wanted the apostles to be with her she needed to speak to them.Our lady died at 56yrs old. Sorry she was 72 yrs old when died, and when she died there was the smell of roses and heavenly scent filled the air.There was other people who was there with our lady and whoever was ill was cured.She had a peaceful death.Our lady never aged She always stayed young looking.She died with true love. After 3 days our lady assumption into heaven before the coronation of our lady Queen of heaven.
@@OzCrusader id like to know where she heard this too, I'm interested in knowing how she knows this when historically no one knows many of this things about Mary.
I tried having some discussions with Calvinists regarding salvation, but I had to stop when they all kept saying "Repentance is the fruit of salvation" meaning you don't repent until after you are already saved. If that's the case, what's the point of repentance?
They should be focusing on fruits worthy of repentance, not repentance being a fruit of salvation. It is a process, the fruit should be in more abundance with time.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Why do Catholics add to scripture, rather than stand on it alone? Why all the extra doctrines of men? They are as bad in doing so as Calvinists.
Were saved by the works of Jesus Christ, not our own. Were saved by the works of Jesus Christ and his works alone. Were not saved, were not declared righteous by God because of our own works. Were saved and declared righteous by God by the works of Jesus Christ. by his faithfulness. You would agreed right Bryan?
Try aging pathetic protestant enjoy your eternal puishnment 🤢🤢 He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.' Then the righteous will answer him and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?' And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.' Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.' Then they will answer and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?' He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.' And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." Matthew 25:33-46
We would agree with almost all of that. We agree that we are not saved by our works. But by what Christ did for us on the cross. We agree that it is not our righteousness but Christ's righteousness. The only difference is that we don't believe we are illegally imputed. Even while we are still technically a dung hill of sin, but rather, we believe that God actually transforms us interiorly. He makes us righteous with his righteousness the more he sanctified us.
Be nice, Bible man. He could be very sincere and just asking questions. Many protestants test the waters with their arguments against the Catholic Church to see if they hold up. That is well within their rights.
Brian, you cannot say that Jesus satisfies divine justice and at the same time say He was not a substitutionary atonement. I understand that you presented St. Anselm’s theory as permissible, but I would argue it is the only correct view. Otherwise you are forced to the extremes of penal sub or the Pelagian view of the cross.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Substitutionary atonement simply means that Jesus died for our sake. Protestants make the mistake of saying Jesus died in our place. This is really the disagreement I find when speaking with Protestant friends. I believe firmly in the necessity of cross and satisfactory nature of it established by the Council of Trent, but never Calvin’s model. Great points on 1 Corinthians 15 and the on-going aspects of salvation. God bless you, Brian 🙏🏽❤️
True faith(saving faith) is obedience. Hebrew 3:18-19John 3:36Jm 14-26. If any protestant says salvation by faith alone and means mere intellectual recognition then that person is not saved in the first place. I am a protestant.
@@sansebastiansj "You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone." James 2:24 You have to be a decent person + have faith in Christ to go to heaven, a man can't live a life as a sinner and have faith and go to heaven
@@theperson4yearsago565 No one is decent until is saved by the blood of Christ. Never before. After you are saved and sealed in Christ you do good works. Your good works mean nothing to God if you are not first saved by Christ. This is the gospel. Christ came to earth to take our punishment upon himself. What you are talking about is not a saved person. A saved person receives the Holy Ghost. The old becomes new creation in God to do His work He made for those who trust in Him.
The Worship of Mary Mary worship actually began in the fifth century A.D. when the term "Mother of God" was applied to her in the Council of Ephesus. In 1854, Pope Pius IX proclaimed the Immaculate Conception of Mary by stating that she was "preserved exempt from all stain of original sin". St. Bernard stated that she was crowned "Queen of Heaven" by God the Father, and that she currently sits upon a throne in Heaven making intercession for Christians. The Bible says in I Timothy 2:5, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." Yet, the Catholic Church teaches that Mary is to be honored as the great "Mother of God". Romans 3:23 says that "all have sinned", which includes Mary. We know it includes Mary, because she was commanded to offer a sacrifice of atonement for her sins in Luke 2:24 fullfilling O.T. prophecy (Leviticus 12:8), and she spoke of needing a "Saviour" in Luke 1:47. Sinless perfect people dont ask for a savoir. Notice in Luke 11:27 a woman cries out to Jesus and says, "Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked." Does Jesus commend her for these words? No, he is very quick to keep the emphasis off of Mary. He replies in verse 28 with, "Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it." Jesus had a perfect opportunity to praise and exalt Mary, but he chose not to do so. The Catholics make much of Luke 1:42 where Mary is said to be blessed "among women", but in Judges 5:24, Jael is said to be blessed "above" women. So, if there were a Queen of Heaven, Jael would make a far better candidate than Mary. It is taught in the Catholic Church that Mary remained a perpetual virgin after Jesus was born, but Matthew 1:25 says that Jesus was only her "firstborn" son. That is, there were others born later. Matthew 13:55 tells us that James, Joses, Simon, and Judas (not Iscariot) were brothers of Jesus. Galatians 1:19 speaks of James the Lord's brother, and Psalm 69:8 also speaks of Mary's other children. According to God's word, she did not remain a virgin, and she is not a virgin today. There is no such person as the Virgin Mary. The idea of a female deity is nothing new. Most all pagan societies worshipped female goddess long before Mary was born, and many of them also believed in immaculate conceptions. The Scandinavians worshipped Disa; the Druids worshipped the Virgo-Patitura as the "Mother of God"; the Germans worshipped Hertha; the Greeks worshipped Aphrodite; the Egyptians worshipped Isis, and the Romans worshipped Venus and Fortuna. In the Bible, we find that pagan goddesses are very common also. The Ephesians worshipped Diana (Acts 17:27). As early as Judges 2:13 (about 1400 B.C.), we find the worship of a goddess named "Ashtaroth". Throughout God's word, the Israelites would wander after these false goddesses and bring God's wrath upon their nation (Jud. 10:6, I Sam. 7:3-4, 12:10, I Kgs. 11:5, II Kgs. 23:13, etc.) The term "queen of heaven" is a common Catholic term for Mary, but the avid Bible student will notice that this was really a false goddess (Jer. 44:16-25)! Can't you see how deceitful Satan has been? This heathen goddess was gradually brought into the Catholic Church under the name of "Mary" in order to attract the pagans to the new Roman system, the "Holy Roman Empire". In reality, it's the same old pagan worship that God has forbidden for centuries! Should we pray to Mary? No, because no one in the Bible ever prays to Mary. In fact, the last time we read of Mary in the Bible she is praying along with the disciples (Acts 1:14), not being prayed to by them. Mary never allowed anyone to exalt her in the Bible, and she never assumes a position of authority over other Christians. In fact, Mary gives only one command in the whole Bible. This is a command which should be noted and remembered by all professing Christians the world over. In John 2:5, Mary the mother of Jesus says, "Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it." Mary didn't say to follow her or pray to her. She said to obey the Lord Jesus Christ! Friend, Mary worship is totally pagan and totally forbidden in God's word.
Why do you hold to the word “one” when it refers to mediator in scripture don’t hold to it when Jesus say you have but ONE teacher? You have no other teachers in your life? And Mary has to be a queen in heaven because Jesus is a king in the Davidic line and being such, the mother is the queen as has been practiced in scripture. Also, people in heaven are alive in Christ, not dead.
@@1611AuthorizedVersionThat’s all you’ve got. No ability to defend the point that “one” does not mean only. Does “firstborn” mean the first one born in every case in scripture? Get out of Fundamentalism!
@@Earthtime3978 One mediator doesn't mean just 1 but many mediators ?? What kind of backwards comprehension nonsense is that ? And "first Born" or 1/one in this case is actually - only - 1 but "one" mediator is not just 1/one but many "lesser mediators" What utter made up nonsense...
My brother. Just stop it. You've commented on Brian's videos before with much pride and disrespect. You're mistaken on many things. Please stop harassing people to build up your spiritual pride. Remember Jesus commandment and try harder to love others. Peace be with you. 😁✝️⛪🕊️🤍
@@JesusChurchBibleThis is UA-cam I can comment where I please to. He does apologetics and people engage, kinda what happens when you attack other faiths on a daily basis. It’s not harassment lol, stop getting defensive dude.
If Catholics adhere to the Word,then why do they continually put women and converts in leadership roles.This goes directly against the sacred teachings.
Because you are misinterpreting scripture. Women in leadership, along with converts is a discipline, not a doctrine or a dogma. Meaning it's not something that's set in stone. A protest and don't hold to other disciplines in scripture and sleep just fine. They eat meat from animals, their women do not head coverings in church, their women speak in church, And they do not give all their money to the pastor to distribute among the church and the poor people in the church as the early church. So this is a picking and choosing of disciplines we wish to follow. Also, karma if we are going to go strictly by what the Bible says. Then we should only be worshiping in houses, not in churches.
As a Catholic, I think of 1 John 2:1-2, "My little children, these things I write to you, that you may not sin. But if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the just: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." (DRB) I think that "propitiation" is the act of appeasing and satisfying the debt incurred by sin. Or as some translations have it as "expiation" which is an act of atonement. I don't see any problem with Jesus as the substitutionary sin offering, the substitutionary atonement for sin. Having said this, I want to be clear that I think many mistranslate 2 Corinthians 5:21, as it has to be taken into account that what we see when speaking of Jesus' sacrifice on Calvary is what we read about in Leviticus 4...He is the sin offering, the subsitutionary sin offering, as Jesus never sinned. (Hebrews 4:15) Where I see the problem creeping in is with the belief in penal substitution/atonement. I had always believed that the the plan of reconciliation, the actual plan of salvation, formulated by God right then and there in the Garden of Eden at the moment of the fall of man (Adam & Eve's disobedience to the will of God) was one of love for mankind and it was Jesus' loving sacrifice that satisfied the wrath and will of God the Father. Love going up, rather than wrath coming down. God is love. (1John 4:8) God does not become sin. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church: Paragraph 614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all other sacrifices. (Cf. Heb 10:10) First, it is a gift from God the Father himself, for the Father handed his Son over to sinners in order to reconcile us with himself. At the same time it is the offering of the Son of God made man, who in freedom and love offered his life to his Father through the Holy Spirit in reparation for our disobedience. (Cf. Jn 10:17-18; 15:13; Heb 9:14; 1 Jn 4:10.) Jesus substitutes his obedience for our disobedience Paragraph 615 "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous." (Rom 5:19.) By his obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering Servant, who "makes himself an offering for sin", when "he bore the sin of many", and who "shall make many to be accounted righteous", for "he shall bear their iniquities". (Is 53:10-12.) Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father. (Cf. Council of Trent (1547): DS 1529) Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam
From the Catechism: "2181 The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants) or dispensed by their own pastor.119 Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin." So to be a mortal sin it would have to be done deliberately without good excuse and done with full knowledge of how seriously wrong it is. So it would be wrong (rash judgment) to assume that another person is in mortal sin because he missed Msss without any other context.
@@scottgun OK so I take it by the response is that you cannot point to anthing in the Word, so you deflect with childish play. It is written, “‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’” "Thus *making void* the *word of God* by *your tradition* that you have *handed down.* And many such things you do.” No different today! Catholics, all denominations, each have their "traditions, dogma, doctrines" they hand down that make void the Word. _If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them._ There is plenty more in the Word to inform us that we are not to add to it, not to speak other than to it, not to live by anthing other than it, that all the traditions of men make void the Word, the list can go on if you like. you are just confused in a tradition and doctrine of men, that is all. They will argue there is nothing that says "bible alone", and ignore the many verses that tell you it in a more detailed way (if you care to be obedient to the Word). They Holy Ghost leads you to all truth. But as most today lack the Holy Ghost, they are spritually discerned.
Nope. Our Lord didn't write biblical texts or command anyone to do so in His earthly ministry. Instead, He gave teaching authority and the power to bind and loose to the Apostles (and their successors, see Acts). Sola Scriptura isn't in Scripture. Not even implicitly.
I think you had the better arguments, Bryan, but your Protestant opponent had the cooler accent. Do you think you could cultivate an Australian accent for us? (if that was Australian, sometimes I get the different accents mixed up)
Was Peter the First Pope? Catholic tradition teaches that while Christ is in Heaven, the Pope is the appointed head of the church on earth. However, the Bible never mentions anyone being the head of the church except Jesus Christ Himself (Eph. 5:23). In Matthew 16:18, Jesus says to Peter, 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. According to the Catholic Church, this is where Jesus appointed Peter to be the first Pope, the earthly head of the church. That is, the Catholics teach that "this rock" is a reference to Peter. The Scriptures are quite clear in stating that the Rock is Jesus Christ and no one else. In fact, Peter himself testifies of this truth when he calls Jesus the "chief cornerstone" in I Peter 2:6. Paul tells us in I Corinthians 3:11 that Jesus Christ is the "foundation". He then says in I Corinthians 10:4 that Jesus Christ is the "Rock". The reader might also give some consideration to the words of Moses in Deuteronomy 32:29-31. The "rock" in Scripture is the Lord Jesus Christ, not Peter. Catholics argue that Peter is the "rock" of Matthew 16:18 because the word "Peter" is from the Greek word "petros", meaning “a piece of rock” or "a stone". However, the word "rock" in Matthew 16:18 is from the word "petra", which is a "mass of rock", like a large slab, not a small stone. Jesus Christ is the foundation (I Cor. 3:11), the perfect match for the "rock" ("petra") of Matthew 16:18. Christ is clearly the Rock in Scripture (II Sam. 22:32, Psa. 40:2, 42:9, 89:26, 92:15, 94:22, Acts 4:11-12). As for Peter being the first Pope, the sincere Bible student should note the following facts: 1. The word "Pope" is never mentioned once in God's word. 2. Peter was married (Mat. 8:14; I Cor. 9:5), while the Popes are not. 3. Peter refused to allow others to bow down to him (Acts 10:25-26), but the Popes allow such practices. 4. Peter didn't think very highly of tradition (I Pet. 1:18), yet tradition is a major authority in the Catholic Church. 5. Peter believed in waiting for the "crown of glory" (I Pet. 5:4), while all Popes believe in wearing a crown now. 6. If Peter was the Pope in Rome, as the Catholics teach, then why did Paul not mention him in his letter to the Romans? In Romans chapter 16, Paul gives the names of over twenty church members, yet he fails to mention Peter. How could this have happened if Peter was the Pope in Rome? 7. If Peter was the head of the church, why did Paul have to set him straight on doctrine in Galatians 2:11? 8. If Peter was the Pope, then why didn't he say so in his epistles? He simply labeled himself "an apostle of Jesus Christ" (I Pet. 1:1) and nothing more. 9. Paul wrote 100 chapters with 2,325 verses, while Peter wrote only 8 chapters with 166 verses. Why would "the Pope" write less? 10. Paul spoke of Peter, James, and John (not just Peter) being pillars in the church (Gal. 2:9). Peter is never magnified above the other Apostles. 11. Don't forget that it was Peter who denied the Lord Jesus Christ three times in one night (Mat. 26:69-75). Does this sound like something that would be done by the head of the church? 12. The Catholics believe that Peter was the first Pope in Rome, but the New Testament never speaks of Peter being anywhere near Rome. The Bible never even hints of Peter being a Pope. This whole doctrine is Catholic tradition, having been concocted for the purpose of lording over the common people of the church. It lacks any Scriptural support.
What's your take on the De Auxiliis controversy, Molinism (Congruism) and Augustinianism? Did you know that both of these theological opinions are still allowed in the Church, even though most people have never even heard of Augustinianism? What do Protestants make of Philippians 2:13 anyway: '(...)For it is God who WORKS in you, to will and to act' ??? Nobody said sanctification was the work of Man... It's the work of GOD - and that's why good works ARE possible!
Catechism of the Catholic Church takes the traditional view, setting Jesus’ death firmly in God’s plan. “Jesus’ violent death was not the result of chance in an unfortunate coincidence of circumstances, but is part of the mystery of God’s plan,” the Catechism says. It goes on to say that “Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father.” And it’s clear it is his death that is atoning, not his whole life: “Christ’s death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the definitive redemption of men, through the ‘Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world,’ and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which restores man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the ‘blood of the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’ ”
“But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works” (Rom. 4:5-6 NKJV). Paul says that a person is justified not when he ceases being ungodly but while he or she is ungodly, and that God imputes righteousness apart from works-not apart from works alone or through works that are performed in cooperation with God’s grace, but by faith apart from works.
Romans 2:6-7 Here’s what Paul says: For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. Now learn the difference between mosaic law which Paul was speaking about in (Rom. 4:5 and Good works😜😜
The Authority of the Written Word The Roman Catholic Church has given tradition much weight when establishing and practicing her beliefs, yet the Bible clearly warns against this. In Matthew 15:3, the Lord Jesus Christ says, "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" Paul says, in Colossians 2:8, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." Catholic writings are filled with phrases like "the Church teaches" or "tradition teaches" or "the Church has traditionally taught". In light of the above Scripture, shouldn't true Christian writings be filled with phrases like "the Bible says" or "according to the Scriptures"? Friend, are you following God's pure words or are you following man's tradition? Perhaps you're thinking, "This is anti-Catholic hate literature!" No, actually, this tract is based on God’s word. If you doubt it, please check the references for yourself. What have you got to lose? Even when Rome professes to believe the Bible, we must remember that the Catholic bible is very different from the written word of God. The Catholic Church includes several books in their Old Testament that are not God's word. The Catholic Council of Trent of 1541 placed a curse upon everyone who does not accept the Apocrypha as inspired Old Testament Scripture (See Catholic Encyclopedia). In doing so, the famous council pronounced a curse upon Jesus Christ and the New Testament writers! In Matthew 23:35, Jesus said that the Old Testament began with Abel (The Book of Genesis) and ended with Zecharias (II Chronicles). Since the Hebrew Old Testament ends with II Chronicles, there is no room left for the Apocryphal books. This explains why the Lord Jesus and the New Testament writers never refer to the Apocrypha or quote it. These writings were not accepted as Scripture. So Jesus, Peter, James, Paul, John, Luke, and the rest are officially cursed by the Roman Catholic Church. Lest someone claim that this is no longer a Catholic belief, we refer the reader to page 61 of the Catholic publication, Faith of Our Fathers, by Cardinal Gibbons: If only one instance could be given in which the Church ceased to teach a doctrine which had been previously held, that single instance would be the death blow of her infallibility. So there is no absolute Final Authority in the Catholic Church. There are dual authorities: tradition and the Catholic bible, which is entirely unscriptural (Isa. 8:20, Mat. 4:4, Col. 2:8, Mat. 15:3). God's word alone should be the Final Authority of any Christian institution.
Hey, Brian, I Know you Believe That Gospel, we Orthodox Do As Well. It's unfortunate that my mother, my aunts, and uncles never Heard The Gospel When they were In The Roman Catholic Church Back In the 1940's and 1950's. The nuns and priests who taught them, they never told them The Gospel. However, my aunt Did Hear The Gospel Later From One Catholic Priest, Thankfully. But I'm not sure why these nuns and priests they had didn't Share them The Gospel. I Know you Do, I Can Tell, Because you Ae Open About It. In Orthodoxy, One Of The Best Quotes I Read On What The Gospel Is Would Be From Saint Theophan, The Recluse, he Said It Very Well In his Writings!!
Welcome. The Catholic Church has not taken an official stand on this, especially of late. It leaves the option open for both to be believed. Neither have to be incompatible with each other.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial I know what the church teaches and what the pope has said on the matter. I'm asking in relation to what this specific person who presented this information believes is true.
@@grandsonofman Well, whatever this Apologist thinks, it will be merely an opinion. Wish I could help but I just found this channel myself. Perhaps he did an earlier video on this topic? I’d be curious to hear different takes on it as well👍🏼❤️
There is no other passage in the New testament other than John 6: 35-56 where Jesus emphasizes his teaching repeatedly. In the Gospel of John, four times our Lord says that he is the bread and five times He says that its his flesh we have to eat. He instituted this sacrament by giving his flesh to eat in the upper room in Jerusalem on the eve of the Passover (Matthew 26:26-28) We understand that Eucharistic sacrament he instituted was again celebrated at Emmaus after his resurrection (Luke 24: 30-31). Yet, those who vehemently align themselves to idea of Sola Scriptura cannot abide by the most emphasized aspect in the New testament. John 6:35: 35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst. 48I am the bread of life. 50 this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.” 53Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. 55For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Matthew 26:26-28: 26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 27Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins. Luke 24: 30-31: 30And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them. 31With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight.
Faith alone or faith without works is empty and even Jesus himself refutes it. Faith alone is the excuse to continue sinning rather then trying to overcome and repent for your sins.
This repetition is a dangerous practice. It breeds familiarity, laziness, even arrogance and elitism in some. Remember what Jesus said of prayer: 7 And when you pray, *do not use vain repetitions* as the heathen do. The chanting of mantras is the most popular form of worship in Hinduism - this repitition is no different in practice to reciting the Nicene Creed. God is not seeking it. Further, what does this Creed say: 1. re: Holy Spirit: _with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified_ You will not find one scripture to support this error......... We are not to worship the Holy Ghost! Big error. 2. _We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church_ You can believe what you want, but even the demons believe-and shudder. Stick to the Word, you won't go wrong (both written and logos). Throw out all these dogmas and doctrines of men, they only lead you to one place............ and it is not where you want to go. The way is narrow - *FEW* find eternal life - unless you question Jesus who says so.
@@maximaphily601 How can it be dangerous if it’s a creed of the church that summarizes the glorious Gospel? Is the gospel dangerous, is that what you’re saying? Repetition is not bad, it’s only bad when it’s vain. I guess you never read Psalm 136, it has a lot of repetition. You are also condemning confessional Protestants like Lutherans who also recite the creed on Sunday. Also you don’t believe in the Holy Spirit? That’s heresy!
@@MkvineAs asked, quote me just one scripture (should be easy to do if it is part of the "gospel"), that requries us to worship the Holy Ghost. If you cannot find one, then you know just on that point alone, you have vain repitition in reciting this.
@@MkvinePS: Don't put words into other's mouths either. I would never condmen anyone, saved or unsaved! You said it, not me. Only God can do that. Anyone who recites doctrines of men like this, is equally guilty of vain repitition.
So... it was Death that punished an innocent man/Jesus, not God. Is that why Judas freaked out & tried to do a take back when he heard Jesus was sentenced to die or was it bc he really felt bad? I'm sorry if I'm way off. Im just trying to learn.
Idolatry in the Catholic Church The Catholic religion is filled with all sorts of symbols, images, and relics. The Creed of Pope Pius IV states the following: I most firmly assent that the image of the Christ, of the Mother of God, ever Virgin, and also of other saints ought to be had and retained, and that due honor and veneration are to be given them. The Catechism of the Council of Trent states that It is lawful to have images in the Church, and to give honor and worship unto them . . . It's lawful to honor and worship images, is it? According to the Bible it is unlawful! Exodus 20:4-5 says, Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. Image worship is unscriptural and will end with the eternal damnation of those who practice it (Rev. 14:11). Other practices such as using prayer beads, prayer wheels, crosses and relics are foreign to the Bible. The sad fact is that Roman Catholicism is a faithless religion where people refuse to walk by faith. Catholics insist on having a material religious set-up where everything can be seen (statues, crosses, bread, wine, rosaries, etc.). God's desire is for Christians to walk by faith, not by sight (II Cor. 5:7). Idolatry is wicked, and it is strictly forbidden in the Bible.
What really cracks me up about "biblical Christians" is they will say, you just have to read the Bible, and interpret it for yourself, then THEY proceed to interpret it for you.
Stop with the word interpret and just read it. It's not that hard.
@@spacecoastz4026 and if people can just read it, why do they need someone to explain it to them?
Exactly, nobody just reads it. But they all put their own interpretation and spin on it.
@@spacecoastz4026
Tell me then, anti-Catholic troll, how thousands of protestant sects all tell us “the Bible interprets itself. Just read it,” yet they provide vastly different interpretations? Sectarianism makes no sense and is not willed by God.
But isn't it the Holy Spirit that helps you interpret the Bible and give guidance and revelation? I've opened the Bible many times and the Lord gave me the exact guidance and spoke to me through His Word
As a former Calvinist, I rejected the "faith alone" and prefer the phrase, "faith that works".
Ayyy let’s go!!! I was a moderate Calvinist but now I am converting to Catholicism!!
Hey! Praise God for both of you!
Faith that works is right!
@@CatholicTruthOfficial thank you! Currently going through RCIA and I don’t regret it at all!
Cool! I for once never bought the "once saved always saved". I prefer to rephrase it to "once saved always pray" 😂
Just reading the Bible makes me more Catholic
x2
Me too!
How does reading the Bible make you more catholic?
@@toddgallo1759 because it says don't judge and all I see Protestantism do is judge the Catholic church
John 6 and the last supper make me believe in the Eucharist
James 2 24 tells me we are not saved by faith alone
Thessalonians 2 15 says hold fast to the tradition we give you whether by letter or by word of mouth proving sola scriptura wrong
John 20 21 23 proves that the apostles could bind and loose sin
Purgatory is in Maccabees 2 12 41 46 yet Protestantism says Maccabees is not inspired proving that Protestantism cherry picks what they think belongs in the Bible discarding the rest of scripture completely
Catholics read the Bible in context slowly
Matthew 16 is ignored by Protestantism when it proves that the papacy is a gift from God
Protestantism says the Bible says that the rosary is bad but it doesn't say anything against the rosary
Protestantism treat Mary as a Devil
Etc
@andreeattieh2963 Have you read all of John 6? Why did Jesus start by saying he that cometh to me will never hunger and he that believeth on me will never thirst? Why did Jesus switch from coming and believing to eating his flesh and drinking his blood? It's not a picture of the eucharist, it's Christ making a point to the hungry multitude that's seeking another free meal.
This is an amazing presentation. Thank you Catholic Truth. And most importantly, a huge thanks to you brother Bryan for your time, dedication and resources used to come up with this informative content.
Catholic as always.
You are very welcome! Thank you for watching!
I noticed that Calvinist put the words of Paul before the words of Christ Himself. There are certain statements that Christ made that clearly point to the fact that an individual must live out his faith in charity in order to be saved. Yet the Calvinist says in order to understand the words of Christ one has to first understand the gospel as understood by Paul.
The Calvinist view of God has more in common with the God of Islam. God’s love for you is more similar to the love one has for a pet as in comparison to the love of a father for his own child.
They view God as an angry God who must be appeased. The same God who demands that the virgin be sacrificed in order to continue getting enough rain for your crops lest you starve.
There is a reason the term turko-calvinism became a thing over the past few hundred years.
Calvinism is gnostic just as Islam is, in the very same ways that Islam is.
I've heard protestant sermons more often site the epistles and OT than the gospels.
Yeah, I was thinking about the same thing. The Calvinist god is incompatible with the real God of the Bible. Though He is not shy from punishment, He doesn't want anyone to perish. We perish out of OUR own accord. That has been the case since the times of Adam & Eve. What's the point of Jesus dying a horrible death for the salvation of all if God had already created humans deemed for damnation and others for salvation? That's a really dangerous heresy which can only lead to more apostasy. Can't really blame an atheist for being an atheist due to being taught such a satanic gospel. I don't think Satan's biggest trick is to convince you he doesn't exist, but to convince you God will never forgive you.
Unless I’m mistaken but aren’t the Calvinists the ones who believe in “predetermination?” So what dose it actually matter to them what the Catholic Church dose or doesn’t teach? Nothing anyone dose or believes effects if their saved or not because it’s literally already been decided.
because they are bigot?
is God who:
Appoints man to eternal life:
Acts 13:48 "When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed."
Chooses who is to be holy and blameless:
Ephesians 1:4 "just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we be holy and blameless before Him."
Predestines us to adoption:
Ephesians 1:5 "He predestines us as sons trough Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will."
Calls according to His purpose:
2 Timothy 1:9 "who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity."
Chooses us for salvation:
2 Thessalonians 2:13 "But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth."
Grants the act of believing:
Philippians 1:29 "For you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake."
Works faith in the believer:
John 6:28-29 "Therefore they said to Him, “What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?” Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.”
Grants us repentance:
2 Timothy 2:24-25 "The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth."
Causes us to be born again:
1 Peter 1:3 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead."
Makes us born again not by our will but by His will:
John 1:12-13 "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God."
Draws people to Himself:
John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day."
Grants that we come to Jesus:
John 6:65 "It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me."
Predestines us to salvation:
Romans 8:29-30 "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified."
He does all this according to His purpose:
Ephesians 1:11 "also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will
We are saved by Grace trough faith.
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.
Ephesians 2:8-9
We receive faith trough hearing the Word of God.
So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Romans 10:17
Why are people who believe in predestination concerned about people in the RCC? There are some in the church who who belong to God who need to hear the Gospel. If they are one of God's elect, they will believe in the Gospel at some point before they die.
God will lose none who are His.
Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.
Romans 8:30
All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.
John 6:37.
“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.
John 5:24
I’ve often pondered the same thought
@taylorrowe2002 If true what you say, then why does the Catholic church leave the Bible and add to it?
@@maximaphily601ever since Catholic Church put together a wide collection of texts and books (The Bible IS the word of God but written by mere men inspired by the Holy Spirit, the book itself didn´t fall from the skies) and defined which ones belong to the Old Testament and which ones to the New Testament, the Catholic Church has not modified the Bible. Last time the Bible was modified was by protestants who took some of the books they didn´t agree with and pretty much called the Catholic Church heretical for manipulating the Bible. Feel free to investigate the matter, I´m not lying to you.
Finally someone deals with that channel. That, alongside "treasurechrist" are two of the most toxic calvinist channels out there
I commented on his video.. defending my Catholic faith.
We’re there other Catholics there?
4Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
5But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
@@conservativecatholic9030 Just ones who left the faith...
@@demonsnow1413 sad, but hopefully there is a seed that will grow back. I think some of the anger that gets pointed at the Catholic Church comes from the fact that most people intuit the truth there, even if they don’t want to admit that to themselves.
@demonsnow1413 -- Good. How about Catholicism's dogma on the immaculate conception of Mary? Since you're a devout Catholic, can you provide some biblical evidence to support that Mary was sinless? Thank you.
Good job, Brian! Calvinism has taught this “legal fiction” of justification for a long time. I recall the late RC Sproul teaching this heresy decades ago. MacArthur and his ilk, including James White, are still teaching this error. You are correct that “substitutionary atonement” as these Protestants teach it is false theology. Keep up the good work! 😊
@taylorrowe2002 Wrong. Calvinists and Catholics do NOT believe in practically the same gospel of justification. You should ask the Calvinists about that one! They will tell you a very different story…. 😜
@taylorrowe2002You can be saved, "yet carnal". This is made clear in scripture. Indeed the majority of saved believers do walk "yet carnal" and not "in the spirit". However faith *and* obedience is required, obedience is a work. But that work can only be done if you are truly walking in the spirit, as only the Holy Ghost can do that work in you. You cannot do it of yourself in the flesh. This is the issue..........................
MacArthur is a modern day pharasy. He has condemned EVERYONE including Billy Graham, Mother Teresa and Dr Martin Luther King.
Here is a copy of a comment I found below that shows some of the errors just in this one video. I didn't write it, but I too saw the errors. And in case you don't know, this channel scrubs comments that they don't like.
After watching your presentation I would like to add some comments.
You say at 6.02 mins mark “where does it say He (Jesus) substituted himself in our place”? I support the concept of substitutionary atonement because it is all over the bible that affirms that. The theme of substitution is found throughout the Old Testament as a precursor to the coming of Jesus Christ. The Passover feast conspicuously featured a substitute. In Exodus 12, God gives instruction to His people to prepare for the coming destroyer who would strike down the firstborn male of every family as a judgment upon Egypt. The only way to escape this plague was to take a perfect male lamb, kill it, and put the blood on the lintels and doorposts of their houses. God told them Exo12:13), That Passover lamb was a substitute for every male firstborn who would accept it….
God carried that theme of substitution into the New Testament with the coming of Jesus. He had set the stage so that mankind would understand exactly what Jesus came to do. Second Corinthians 5:21 says, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” God’s perfect Lamb took the sins of the world upon Himself, laid down His life, and died in our place (John 1:29; 1 Peter 3:18). The only acceptable sacrifice for sin is a perfect offering. If we died for our own sins, it would not be sufficient payment. We are not perfect. (John 10:18). There was nothing we could do to save ourselves, so God did it for us. The Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53 makes the substitutionary death of Christ abundantly clear: “He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed” All these verses in the NT debunked your claim that substitutionary death doesn’t appear in the NT.(verse 5).,.at 8:29 mins mark, you say “for God to take an innocent person and just destroy him and punish him and send him to hell to burn for our sins is wrong”. Please quote the subject verse to support your claim…
At 6.20 mins mark You say “the new covenant is better and more perfect” BUT Heb8:6 doesn’t say that in the RNASB quote “ 6 Now he has obtained so much more excellent a ministry as he is mediator of a better covenant, enacted on better promises.” same as in KJV as well but you added in “perfect” which is not mentioned….
Please support your theory on “ bapstismally regenerated to go to heaven” by some biblical evidence. …
.Are you implying James and Paul contradicts each other in their soteriology? But the bible doesn’t contradict itself so there must be something wrong in your interpretation. ..
At 18:42 you say in Rom4 ”Abraham works here’s talking about the Mosaic law”. FYI Mosaic law didn’t come into effect until 430 years, so how is that Abraham observing the Mosaic law?..…
the bible affirm faith is necessary for salvation as good works do not merit salvation. No one can "buy" heaven with enough good works, or good enough motives but we are created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” …
At 25.08 mins mark; you say “where it says all your sins are forgiven past, present and future ” and you request for a verse to support it. Here it is; In Hebrews 10:10, the writer says, “We have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (ESV, emphasis added). Because of the blood of Jesus Christ, we have been “made perfect forever” (verse 14), God will remember our sins no more (verse 17), and “there is no longer any offering for sin” (verse 18, ESV). But if only our past sins are forgiven, then none of this is true, and we would stand condemned before God. Yet the writer of Hebrews clearly expresses that the sacrificial death of Jesus was offered once for all. Therefore, we know that the blood of Jesus covers our past, present, and future sins (1 John 1:7)…
In 1 John 2:12, the apostle writes, “I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven for his name’s sake” (ESV, emphasis added). Are only our past sins forgiven? No, all of our sins are forgiven! In the original language, the words translated “have been forgiven” refer to a past action that continues in the present. Now, it sure looks like Jesus is forgiving people at the cross. After all, we do find the words “forgive them” coming out of Jesus' mouth. But in both of our examples from Luke, Jesus says, “Your sins [plural] are forgiven.” In other words, “All of your sins are forgiven.”. At 28.5 mins mark you say “your name can be blotted out of the book of life in John3:5.” Here is the quote of John3:5; (Joh 3:5) Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” FYI this verse didn’t intend to communicate to us that our name can be blotted out as it I is falsely claimed by you…
You quoted Heb10:26 and say a believer can lose their salvation which I respectfully disagree because this verse is referring to those unbelieving Hebrews fense sitters having turned his back on the truth, and with full knowledge choosing to willfully and continually sin of unbelief, the apostate is then beyond salvation because he has rejected the one true sacrifice for sins: the Lord Jesus Christ. If Christ’s sacrifice is rejected, then all hope of salvation is gone. To turn away willfully from this sacrifice leaves no sacrifice; it leaves only sin, the penalty for which is eternal death. This passage is not speaking of a believer who falls away, but rather someone who may claim to be a believer, but truly is not. Anyone who apostatizes is proving he never had genuine faith to begin with (1 John 2:19)…
Such a person does not sin because of ignorance, nor is he carried away by momentary temptations he is too weak to resist. The willful sinner sins because of an established way of thinking and acting which he has no desire to give up. The true believer, on the other hand, is one who lapses into sin and loses temporary fellowship with God. But he will eventually come back to God in repentance because his heavenly Father will continually woo and convict him until he can’t stay away any longer. The true apostate will continue to sin, deliberately, willingly and with abandon.
…In conclusion, I noticed many Catholics completely bowed down and even kissed the statute of Mary’s feet. Is that biblical practice though I know you would say they only venerate and not worship Mary? Historically, schools of theology have used the term “worship” as a general term which included both adoration and veneration.
@@spacecoastz4026 You are reading your theology into the text. Scripture does not teach that Jesus’ death was a “substitution” for us. It teaches that Jesus offered himself freely in order to satisfy God’s justice out of love. John Calvin was wrong. Jesus never became sinful in order to pay for our sins in any substitutionary way. Jesus did not go to Hell and suffer for three days either. That is ridiculous. Jesus death was a Paschal Sacrifice for sin, but not a substitution. In the Old Testament the blood of bulls and goats could not “substitute” for the sins of people. They were offerings of a temporary nature. In regard to baptismal regeneration, there are plenty of resources to explain the Scriptural teaching. I recommend the Catechism of the Catholic Church as well as the Roman Catechism. Copying and pasting is not the way to gain a biblical education. You should invest in a program of biblical study. To be educated is to be a better person. 👍
Once in a while you hear something said and instantly know that it is wrong. As soon as this guy said "substitution" my brow furrowed and it completely grated against my soul. I just knew it was wrong but couldn't explain it Then you explained to me why this assertion was wrong. Your a good man doing good work sifting out what is true and what isn't. Helps a lot buddy.
Some write that the Eucharist is “Symbolic”. Do they also think that Jesus died “Symbolically” on the Cross?? That God saved us with "Symbols" and images ?? The Eucharist and the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross are inseparable: They are the God's plan to save us. We cannot accept one and deny the other.
I'm not a Catholic, but I've watched some of Caleb's work and it's incredibly shoddy. He should pursue another vocation.
Maybe suggest it. 🤷♂️ At the least l, pray for him.
Im not a Catholic but u are exactly right. I was raised a hardcore Baptist and their theology is so full of holes that its mind blowing. If u are a good Catholic following the teachings of the historical church u are a christian. God bless
Are you a true Christian if you ask dead saints to mediate and intercede for you rather than Jesus Christ? Or a true Catholic? There is a difference.
@@maximaphily601 Jesus said that all are alive in God. You say that all are dead in God. Who is telling the truth, is it Jesus or you?
@@georgepierson4920 You are the one saying all are dead in God. You like putting false words into others mouths, don't you! I am sorry that your English comprehension is so poor that you don't know that a person has to die in the flesh first, before become alive in the spirit. Assuming they abide in Christ.
God is God of the living not the dead so saints aren't dead ...if they are saints they are alive in heaven and alive in the mystical body of christ in which we are connected to God's mystical body.@@maximaphily601
Wrong brother catholicism is a false teaching not the Gospel of JESUS !!
An Ex Proud Evangelical Protestant here..
The more you learn our Church Fathers,the more will bring you Closest to the truth that Catholic is the irrefutable Church that Jesus Christ Himself established... The rest are Bogus Churches..
I was borned Protestant, BUT I'LL DIE A CATHOLIC!!! PERIOD
May God continue blessing you!🙏
Welcome home
I am on my way to becoming Catholic. Currently doing RCIA!
Forget the church fathers, Christ alone, the Word alone. Forget all denominations, they are all wrong. Which English translation are you reading?
@@maximaphily601
Even the Church Fathers ( History) are there in the bible. Read Job 8:8-10.
Christ Himself established His own Church. Matthew 16:18-19
Lastly, nowhere in the bible it say Bible Alone.. rather it says in 1 Timothy 3:15 the Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth..
Even you gonna use 2 Timothy 3:16 as means to justify the "Bible alone" doctrine, your wrong.. it only implies to guide a person in spiritual needs. But clearly the bible prohibits the self interpretation.
👉 2 Peter 1:20 & 3:16
That is why ordinary people needs Priest to guide them in reading the scripture.
👉 Acts 8: 30-32..
I don't know if anyone else has encountered this or is bothered by it, but I find it troubling when either Protestants or Catholics say, "Catholic versus Christian." As I transition from Southern Baptist to Catholic, I see that Catholics are the original Christians.
@@CatholicChristSaves938 there is a Catholic UA-camr who does a segment (or it's the name of his channel) Protestant versus Christian.
All are Christians who follow Christ. Just belong to the Catholic Church, the true universal Christian church.
Yes and I really don't like it because they're suggesting we're not even Christians. Imagine how it complicates my communication with Protestants when I pray in their online communities. I was told all kinds of things including that the Catholic Church is satanic. On the other hand I have the impression that this "Catholic vs. Christian" is a kind of marketing shortcut. The videos are titled this way because this attracts viewers. And also it's a bit funny they're talking about how "Christianity" says this and that while actually they mean only their own specific kind of Protestantism which I often don't really know what it precisely is. Ironic, isn't it.
@weaponofchoice-tc7qsas I understand it they don't reject it per se but they don't believe it does anything. They say it's just a symbol and a public proclamation of something that has already happened when the person believed. I was shocked when I first heard this. They say it's something like a wedding ring. Just a sign.
Would any original Christian add to the Word?
Catholics often get confused by the question (and ones like it) because we don't have a "soundbite" that we use to "save" people as we evangelize. As a former non-denominational, when I teach my middle school religious education class, I teach them common protestant language they'll hear, along with an intelligent response, so they don't get tripped up by these kinds of questions. "Are you saved? Do you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ? Do you know the gospel message?" I appreciate you tackling these topics and wish more Catholics understood these nuances.
I left Calvinism early last year and have been reconstructing my faith since then, without presuppositions.
Since then, I find myself identifying more with Catholic brethren than Calvinist. Especially when learning actual church history.
I don't go so far as venerating Mary as highly as Catholics, nor prayer with dead saints to help petition on our behalf, but otherwise, I wouldn't be too far from Catholicism. It is faith alone, but faith in Christ alone while working the good works laid out for us beforehand.
Lots to unpack, but removing the lenses is key, and seeing the joy of Christ and the Holy Spirit filling me as I find my salvation in Him, and who I am in Him.
That’s beautiful❤️ - keep delving into the writings of the Christians that learned the faith at the very feet of the Apostles themselves, and their own students as well. They know better than 21st century believers what Jesus wanted passed on to us. Also, if you haven’t already (keeping in mind the ingrained Calvinist training about Mary) explore what the Church specifically teaches about Mary and about praying to the Saints in Heaven. Here’s a bit: We are the Body of Christ. Nowhere does the Bible say that believers are amputated from the Body of Christ when they “fall asleep”. Isn’t there a possibility that that, too, is a presupposition? Jesus said clearly: “God is the God of the Living, not the Dead”. Did He mean God is only God of those on Earth, or that we continue to be alive in Christ? In the book of Revelation (8:3-4), it says the angels offer to God the prayers of the saints. Often ignored verse. Regarding the Body and Blood of Christ: St Paul rebukes the Corinthians (11:26-27) for partaking of the Lord’s supper unworthily (my words) telling them that is the reason some are SICK & DYING. Another thing about Mary: God chooses to work powerfully through her to this day (she was the person who brought me to Christ) innumerable miracles for those who ask her for her intercession. After all, at slightly more than a glance at her Son, Jesus performed His 1st public miracle…..despite it “not yet being His Hour. In other words, He allowed the Hour of His Passion and Death to be moved up on the timeline just to please her. And this is pretty cool: The Church has preserved at least one piece of iconography painted by the Apostle Luke….and it’s of Mary. ❤
@@TrueChristianityWithSandra while I appreciate your input, I have looked into the veneration of Mary and prayer with the saints. That was one of the first big studies, after Calvinist dogma, which I thought would be very important since many reformers rejected those doctrines as well.
What I find more appealing is prayer with the saints in heaven than prayer to Mary, unless you account her as equal with the other saints, separate only in her earthly life.
I find many arguments from silence as to her assumption and being made queen of heaven, but what I found was an incredible amount on this topic from the 5th and 6th century gnostics which were heterodoxical writings, of which we would both discount.
I do not argue against personal experiences, but when it comes to the practiced beliefs of the early church, I found no doctrine of assumption of Mary, nor her acting as an angel or as one with authority over Christ. The best argument, as you put forward, would be at the wedding at Cana, but it can also be understood as an obedience to Christ's earthly mother, as well as a display of faith on her part for God to act provide for this family friend. I see no logical reason to continue the argument further lest we make much of little unnecessarily and put man on the pedestal with God or near God and blaspheme either by choice or by accident.
The Bible and early church documents continually tell me that faith is in Christ alone, God does not share His glory, and He is the only one to be worshipped.
It fits with what was revealed from Genesis all the way through the incarnation of Christ.
I thank you for your concern in my search, but we will have to agree to disagree on these points, though I would still hold you in regard as a sister in Christ and pray for your well-being and continuation in the faith to the end as I hope to meet you in person at the feet of Christ some day.
@@Elmarias777 Thank you for your thoughtful reply. If you’re familiar with the Early Church Fathers - especially those from the first and second century - then you will also be aware that they believed in the Eucharist being the real Body and Blood of Christ. No matter what some reformer thought through their self-interpretation of Scripture, you cannot deny that those who learned the faith directly from John the Apostle or from John’s own disciples would obviously know the true Christian Faith far better than the men who came 1500 years later. In fact, if you’ve read the writings they left us you’re also aware that they name the Catholic Church as the true Christian Church and refer to its hierarchy (Bishops, Priests, & Deacons).
On a purely logical level, you can also admit that Bible Alone Christianity cannot be the historical Christianity. After all, the Printing Press wasn’t even invented until the mid-1400’s. And the Bible wasn’t compiled until over 300 yrs after Christ. Peace❤️
@sandra4065 Like I stated earlier, my main hangup with the RCC and I see in history the deviation and additions added for the two topics I mentioned. I agree with most of what you said, though the word catholic can be taken a few ways, and our understanding of church heirarchy is different, but I would be mostly in agreement. At communion, I do believe and feel the presence of God in the elements. The early church discipled in homes and wherever else they could gathet and were taught orally, as well as from Torah and when they came along, the apostolic letters. Not quite sure what your point on the printing press had to do with what you were saying, so I cannot speak to that but I gave what response was accurate to that point?
Anyhow, i do hold pretty well to the 5 solas, although I do what the calvinist reformers did and redefined them to make them more historically accurate 😉 and more in line with eastern orthodoxy, which is more where i fall theologically, at least in closeness in doctrine.
God bless
Better get some great Lenses Elmer so you dont get sucked in by the Roman Vatican. There's a reason God and Christ Jesus have such disdain and concentrated vehemence against the Roman Catholic Vatican and Churches in the End Time world, of REVELATION, we are now going into. How could you possibly think you'll be saved when you think the best Church is the one most full of Evil ! Not my words,...God's and ...Christ Jesus's. !!
I as a former nondenominational that converted to Catholicism in 2015, I approve of your rebuttal against the reformed wacko.
Marvelous! Brian, What a great works and noble acts, in debunking these Calvinese blasphemer. I guess that he had no better work.. The least he could do is to evangelise to those who doesn't know about JESUS. On behalf of billions of Catholics in the universe, I am very proud of you. Keep up with your excellent work. GOD BLESS!
I recommend three excellent resources on Mariology: “Behold Your Mother” by Tim Staples, “Jesus and the Jewish Roots of Mary” by Brant Pitre, and “Hail Holy Queen” by Dr. Scott Hahn. 😊
Thanks for the book recommendations! I'm starting RCIA this month, just wanted you to know your comment was really helpful!
And this is exactly the problem with protestantism, they all say they agree on the essentials, but what he just said that if u dont believe in his gospel then ur not saved, hello this is a Salvation issue.
And this is what I kept seeing as a protestant, every time I would go online to study all I kept seeing was how prots were bashing other prots left & right about how their not true Christians, & all them saying the Bible is very clear, but yet they all have a diff interpretation of the Bible alone & every1 kept using the same exact scripture to defend their position, that if another angel or anybody teaches you another gospel let him be accursed. Every single denomination uses this verse to defend their interpretation of the Bible alone it's ridiculous.
I'm so glad u did a rebuttal on this man, bc a couple years ago I was writing him, we talked for around two weeks, I was discussing the canonization of the Bible, asking him who canonized the books of the Bible, & how do u kno u have the correct Canon.
But all he kept telling me was how there's historical manuscripts that can prove the Bible is true 🤦🏻♂️ I'm telling him I'm a Christian I believe the Bible is the true word of God, and he told me how it was going to cost me a $150 for him to do the research about the cannon.
I mean talk about a tool of satan. But I kept asking, then he Finally answered my question after like two weeks, he said oh u believe it was the Roman Catholic Church that canonize the books the Bible, and then he blocked me after that...
So I'm happy you guys are finally exposing this man, bc he really thinks he's teaching Biblical theology, when his Gospel is not Christianity..
God bless u all my Brothers, & Sisters 💯🙏🏼📿🌹🇻🇦💪🏻
🙏🙏❤️
On top of that I often hear things like many Christians are not really Christians because they don't truly have a personal relationship with Jesus. I wonder how that is assessed. How does one know where is the dividing line? I'd rather go with the Catholic understanding that everyone that has been validly baptized is a Christian. It's their responsibility how they then live their faith.
I think it's both. Objectively, we become justified, born again, and become part of the body of Christ through baptism. But as true Christians, we also must live out our faith in obedience and in relationship with Jesus. That's because it makes you a Christian, but true Christians live it out. Does that make sense?
@@barborazajacova7633yeah they can't find the dividing line, and they say to have a relationship, bc they dont want to believe Christianity is a religion, they believe a religion is to bind and bound you down.
A lot of them will say
We have a relationship with Jesus, you just have a religion and all religions are created by the devil🤦🏻♂️
Then when u show them scripture even though James 1:27 says Christianity is religion, &
Instead of repenting and admit that their erroneous, they just try to explain it away & say what James is really saying etc etc, NO' he clearly says Christianity is religion Period.
Bc they'd take all religions as being evil, made to control people, & its bc Religion has Authority, so they say u don't need to be in religion, you just have to have a relationship, bc they dnt want to follow authority, they want their own rules to be free, not realizing they're the ones following their flesh, & worldly desires.
So you're right how do they know what is a true relationship if you're following your own interpretation of the Bible aline, bc the Bible doesn't explain what are the exact essentials, it doesn't give us a complete list of the essentials😢🎉, as Protestants love to say we all believe in the essentials.
So when u ask them okay what are those, bc the Bible doesn't give us a complete explicit list of the essentials.
That's what we need to keep pointing that out to them, bc when I was a protestant that was a question I couldn't answer, & if one is being faithful & honest they will admit that there is division inside of protestantism on the essentials 💯
@@onlylove556 the CC substitutes a relationship with Christ with a cracker. Hope that works out for you
Another terrific job, Bryan! I've seen some of the shorts of this guy, commented on a few to determine his basis of reference; but never received any straight feedback. He claims "we are saved by believing the Gospel"... No! He obviously never read John 5:39.... Thanks Bryan!
Just providing a source if anyone wants to look deeper into the subject. The brother in this video provides a good and sufficient answer regarding rebutting the penal substitution from the reformed version. Love you brother, and keep doing God’s work for the Catholic church
He is wrong about everything cause the catholic church is a false gospel not the gospel of JESUS CHRIST.
Finnally, someone calling out !thinkBiblically.
I can’t believe I used to believe that God would pour out his wrath on his innocent son. What a twisted view of the father. Vicarious satisfaction is the truth. Praise God for his goodness
Exactly!
A devout Catholic in the comments here believes that Catholics wrote the new testament. I've seen this thousands of times. No fellow Catholic ever contradicts them. Catholics are free to believe anything they want. And they do. All that matters to the CC is that the faithful drop their dimes in the basket. Never know when a priest is gonna have to get out of town in a hurry.
I don't think I've ever heard a decent argument against the Catholic Church from a protestant. Doubt I will ever hear one
Here are some simple arguments:
1. Why does the Catholic church add to scripture? Have its own docrtrines of men as being equal with scripture? e.g. Immaculate Conception re Mary
2. Why does the Catholic church want to unify with the religions of the world which are antichrist, against scripture?
3. Why is the Catholic church hoisting up the rainbow flag, which is clearly a sin?
I could go on..................
@@maximaphily601 Deuterocannon was defined in early councils you don't have any ground to call it an addition. Apostles taught more things than were just in scripture, 2 Thessalonians 2:15. The current Pope is interested in peaceful dialogues and bringing others to Christ through loving them. Read a whole Pope speech instead of just the MSNBC headline. The Church has and still condemns LGBTQ. The Vatican never flew a pride flag. If a priest does so he acts on his own authority and not with the consent of the church.
1. Why do protestants remove books of scripture?
2. Why do protestants hold traditions of men ie, baptism as only a symbol, once saved always saved, rapture, etc...
3. Why do protestant churches fly pride flags?
If one protestant does something wrong it's representative of all protestants correct?
@@alexjoneschannelFriend I cannot speak to Protestants, let them defend themselves! I am of no denomination.
@@alexjoneschannel "Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son." No other relgion on the planet declares Jesus as the Christ, the Word, God incarnate. They are all antichrist.
2 John 1:10 If *anyone* comes to you and does *not* bring this doctrine, *do not receive him* into your house nor greet him;
True Christians do not tend to the concerns of this world, our kingdom is not of this world, its politics, or religions. We are not to enterain or attempt any unification with them. We are to be HOLY!
2 Cor 6
14 Do not be *unequally yoked together with unbelievers.* For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness?........Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever?
17 Therefore...“Come out from among them And be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean,
Plenty of dirty laundry with the Pope and Catholic church...................
@@alexjoneschannel Let's just go to say, the National Catholic Reporter shall we:
'Tthe Catholic Church, guided by Pope Francis, has quietly shown welcome to the LGBTQ community, while avoiding changes to doctrine. "Catholic LGBTQ ministry has been expanding astronomically in the last decade," said Francis DeBernardo, executive director at New Ways Ministry, a Catholic outreach program aimed at promoting inclusion and justice for the LGBTQ community, in a comment to Religion News Service on June 24.
"Pope Francis' welcoming statements and gestures are the main reason for this greater openness to LGBTQ people," he added.
Oh, you mean the Pope did not outright condmen sin as sin? I guess Jesus should have said to the woman caught in adultery, "well, you did your best, if you can go and sin no more that would be best, but if you cannot do so, just keep practicing what you practice and in love you will make it anyhow".
Get real, you are sleeping....................
What else did they report:
"Six transexual women from different cultural and social backgrounds walked into the Vatican for a private audience with Francis on June 22.... One of the transgender women who visited the pope, Alessia, said the meeting with Francis "was emotional" and "they felt welcomed." "On Pride Month I think this is an important message," she said. "
Should not the message have been "Go and sin no more"..........................
I’ve been a housewife and mom for 23 years. I have a great life and am so thankful we’ve been able to make it happen. I wouldn’t trade staying home with my kids for ANY career! We women bought the lie that we could have it all! It’s a lie. One will suffer, either your career or your household. No one thinks about finding fulfillment in staying home by finding hobbies and activities you love to do that renew you, but I can’t imagine having time to paint, decorate the home, sew, visit with friends, etc if I had a job. If you can stay home and raise your children, do it! Children are better for it, and you will have more of what’s important to show for it when you get older.
The New Testament was made for The Eucharist.
No where in Romans 1 is The New Testament mentioned. But I would actually agree with you. Yes, the new testament is about the Gospel and the gospel is about how Jesus saves us. That’s about as deep as Protestants go. This is their shortcoming. HOW DOES JESUS SAVE US?
They don’t know how to answer that. Protestants simply can not answer that effectively. They will say his work on the cross is what saves us. And we would agree that the redemptive work of Christ; His passion, death, resurrection, and ascension are the source of grace and salvation. But how are the merits of the cross SPECIFICALLY applied to each and every individual? Protestants would say by faith alone. Catholics would say Faith is merely the first step. The gateway into the life of God. Once entered into this life of grace (by faith), one must REMAIN IN IT by growing in grace and the theological virtue of faith hope and love. One must frequent the sacraments. THE SACRAMENTS ARE WHAT MAKE THE GRACE OF THE CROSS PERSONAL AND APPLICABLE TO EACH AND EVERY INDIVIDUAL.
The sacraments are salvation. The sacraments are the grace dispensed by Jesus from his cross. This is the gospel. That Jesus saves us by his death through the sacraments. And we must cooperate with the grace He gives us or else we deny him and perish and lose eternal life by rejecting His grace.
No. Not at all. It's all about being saved by Christ through Faith. Period.
The Catholic Church has taught that we are saved by Christ and Faith for 2000 years. So...
@@CatholicTruthOfficialyeah faith plus..
@@spacecoastz4026
I have once again reported you to YT for misinformation and harassment. Go and pester muslims.
Just think about the False Church of Martin Luther the false church of the protestants. Just listen to what they’re saying and this is what they’re saying in different words.
“For 1500 years give or take, everyone got it wrong but they are correct!” They literally showed up yesterday and somehow they know the message of the Bible better than the authors of the Bible and yes, the Bible is a Catholic book written by the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church is the church of the apostles.
This is an extraordinary claim. Can you imagine? Here let me post this a statement that was posted by someone else on UA-cam a while back. I simply cannot say it better my self.
“Funny how the Catholic church GAVE the world the bible, has preached it and carried it to the 4 corners of the globe for Johnny-come-latelies that arrived on the scene 500 years ago, know all about it ! LOL! LOL! Tell us the real meanings and try to get some of your Thousands of disagreeing, splitting up, arguing denominations to agree on ANYTHING that the bible means --LOL!
When St. Paul was struck from his horse and was confronted by the Lord Jesus Christ “Saul Saul, why dost thou persecute me”, Paul then believed and had a deep faith in Christ from that point forward. According to this British guy’s logic, Paul then never needed to write his letters and epistles, all he had to do was sit around and be happy that he was saved through faith alone.
Yes, it is ironic Brian. The “faith alone” line they beat to death (without regard to the many verses that counter their “interpretation”) would never have existed without Paul’s personal works from faith, through suffering and perseverance throughout his entire mission, which resulted in his writings (writings are works) even from a prison cell.
8 Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy-meditate on these things. 9 The things which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these do, and the God of peace will be with you.
10 But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly that now at last your care for me has flourished again; though you surely did care, but you lacked opportunity. 11 Not that I speak in regard to need, for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content: 12 I know how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. 13 I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.
Philippians chapter 4
It's not ironic....it's called faith...and faith alone..and responding to God. Paul's ministry to the Gentile world, given to him directly from the risen Christ, is not about his works, but about revealing the Gospel message to the world. Paul didn't look at it as something he was doing, but what God was doing through him for us.
@@spacecoastz4026 Let’s take the words from the Master Himself, above and beyond our dearly beloved Apostle Paul, of whom we all respect and love and learn from.
Matthew 5:16 Jesus said, “Let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.” Christians
@@FrankenSensei2 Just remember. All Scripture are inspired words from God. Some apply to different times, different audiences, different circumstances, but they are all inspired words. Yes, let our lights shine before others to give glory to God.
Some think that it can happen that Bible verses "cancel" each other. It's FALSE ! Every Bible verse IS VALID. And that is why we must read them with the Spirit of Truth and the Intelligence of the Scriptures, as Jesus teaches us very well in several passages of the Gospel. The letter condemns. The Spirit liberates!
i just learned something. I had not realised that substitutuonary atomement was not Catholic doctrine and that it does not predate Calvin. Obviously I have a lot to learn about Catholic doctrine!
"who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness-by whose stripes you were healed."
I Peter 2:24
"For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."
II Corinthians 5:21
"And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross."
Colossians 2:13-14
"For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,"
I Peter 3:18
@@mack6429None of these verses teach this principle as stated by Calvin himself in Institutes of Christian Religion, “Therefore, our Lord came forth very man, adopted the person of Adam, and assumed his name, that he might in his stead obey the Father; that he might present our flesh as the price of satisfaction to the just judgment of God, and in the same flesh pay the penalty which we had incurred…”
The issue with Calvin from how I understand it is he goes way too far with equating the “just penalty due to sin” to each individual human being and in a way this actually belittles Christ’s sacrifice as it in no way is the equal penalty due but very clearly it is extravagantly gratuitous in relation to the sinfulness of all mankind. The Father showing the extent of His love for us rather than an unjust punitive measure against His own Son.
I don’t think Calvin’s argumentation is quite as nuanced to address this effectively without creating a semi schizophrenic relationship between the persons of the Trinity.
@@mack6429
Blah blah blah. Where is “substitutionary atonement” in these verses?
Did you even bother listening to Bryan’s presentation?
Rather, Jesus is the Lamb of God Who takes away the sins of the world. Read Hebrews: Jesus is the new high priest, Who perpetually stands in place of the Passover Lamb, so that we no longer have to make bloody sacrifices in the Temple. Just as the Jews ate the Passover Lamb, so too must we Christians eat the flesh of Christ in the Eucharist.
@@OzCrusader you don't see atonement because you do not have eyes to see, or ears to hear.
Let me ask you about your eucharist. Why do priest regularly replace the eucharist used for adoration?? Do you even know?
@@mack6429
Replace the Eucharist with what?
It was nice of the anti-catholic to confirm that there is a gospel outside of the Bible. The one that was preached before the Bible was written and compiled.
I'd guess that wasn't his intent though? Likely, he doesn't even realize that he just rebutted Bible only protestantism
The idea of salvation being immutable is their problem. Once saved always saved is just nonsense. Christ taught that some seed falls on rock ground, springs up and then having no roots simply die off. These words refer to the idea that some hear the gospel, believe and then fall into apostasy. Salvation can be gained and then lost.
Not really. Rather they hear the words, start to feel the move toward God, but then allow the world to pull them back away. Why, because they have no roots. What are roots? Understanding and reading the Word of God, going to a good bible-based church, being in fellowship with others, etc. This wasn't an example of losing salvation...this was an example of not obtaining salvation through true faith.
Now, if you still think you can loose salvation...that YOU are who holds it all together, that YOU can mess it up....then YOU probably will, thus you may not be saved to begin with.
I've never heard John MacArthur say that Jesus burned in hell for three days. Anybody have a source video for that?
I found a video where he said Jesus did go to both the hell of the righteous dead as well as the hell of the damned. He didn't outright say Jesus burned in this video but seeing that we believe Jesus had a human soul and that his human soul descended when it separated at death I am not seeing how his human soul went to the hell of the damned without getting burned at least a little.
Just my 2 cents.
God Bless
@@Matt-1926 Did the three Hebrew boys thrown into the firy furnance "burn" or were they preserved throught it? Is God not able to perform such miracles? So why could not Jesus too (being God) also not "burn in hell". Now I am not agreeing with John McArthur, just making a point about making assumptions or suppositions as was made on this video. you cannot call out one persons for doing it, then do it yourself. John Mc *NEVER* said that Christ would *BURN* in hell. That was the speaker on this video making things up to sensationalize it.
@@maximaphily601 *_Did the three Hebrew boys thrown into the firy furnance "burn" or were they preserved throught it?_*
They were preserved through it. But I don't think this applies because Jesus wasn't preserved through his brutal death so if His descent into Hell was to include the Hell of the damned I'm not seeing why the miracle would occur?
I do want to add that I don't believe He went to the Hell of the damned, I believe He went to Abraham's bosom/paradise.
*_John Mc NEVER said that Christ would BURN in hell. That was the speaker on this video making things up to sensationalize it._*
I'm not going to argue this point because I agree I haven't found it.
Although I do want to add from my understanding Calvin did argue that Jesus ‘descent into hell’ was not merely descending into physical death and the grave. He believes it represents biblical teaching that Jesus suffered not just bodily pain but all the torments that a soul in hell, cut off from God’s presence, would experience.
Not saying this proves anything just wanted to point out that this line of thought is out there.
God Bless
I called out IthinkBiblically some months ago. Won't go into what it was. But after days of my relentless messages proving things taught and stated to be inaccurate particularly from a historical documented record of Church history, but some scripture also, the entire video was taken down. The messaging between myself and others was so impactful he thought the easiest way to hide the fact he was "being exposed" was simply to remove the entire video. Rather than simply be humble or God forbid, acknowledge error or even misunderstanding.
Then, next step was to ensure that any of my messages on his other videos were hidden from public viewing. Meaning, I simply now use one of my many, many, many UA-cam ID's to message his channel under a different ID and IP address. It shows lack of credibility when any channel blocks messages. Argue or debate your point through scripture, historical record, facts. Don't be like a Democrat marxist and hide the truth so your narrative is the one heard the loudest.
I admire you for being able to actually listen to them
Protestants understand that the very foundation of their doctrines are "unbiblical", as well, dont they? One of their main doctrines is Sola Fide (Faith Alone), which is predicated on the more foundational doctrine of Sola Scriptura (scripture alone). Therfore, Protestants would have to be able to uphold Sola Scriptura in order for Sola Fide to be upheld. However, Sola Scriptura is a self-defeating doctrine because there would need to be an intra-scriptural reference as to how many, and what books, constitue the canon of scripture. There isn't however, and this would mean that Protestants themselves are appealing to an authority that is outside of, and above scripture to determine the canon of scripture in the first place.
That defeats the concept of Sola Scriptura altogether, and by extension, Sola Fide as well.
I asked iThinkBiblically to explain this (or any other Protestants on the channel), but have yet to hear an explanation.
I actually answered this comment, but now I see that my comment is deleted. When stuff like this happens, you know your not dealing with a channel that is truthful.
@@spacecoastz4026 Well your comment alledging something was deleted still posted, as did all of your other comments on this channel. Feel free to give your response again. I am curious to know your thoughts.
@@CantStopTheMattWalsh But not the comment I posted to you yesterday?
*Sola Scriptura is a self-defeating doctrine because there would need to be an intra-scriptural reference as to how many, and what books, constitue the canon of scripture.*
That's a false assumption and argument. Either you believe in the Word of God, or you don't. And if you don't, then the bible simply becomes the word of man. If Scripture isn't inspired by the Holy Spirit, then it's just a fable or make-believe story, without any divine substance. Scripture tells us that ALL Scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit, and gives us everything that we need for proper doctrine and for living our lives for God. God preserved His Word for the world, using men or all different standards and character, to bring us to Christ. So if Scripture Alone is not valid, then nothing is valid because now you are relying on man for doctrine and not God.
And Scripture clearly teaches that salvation is through Christ by Faith in Him and Him alone. For there is no other way to God but through Christ, and not of works. To read the New Testament and walk away thinking that it's more than just faith in Christ for salvation is being willfully blind or extremely prideful. To think that somehow the blood of Christ is insufficient for your salvation is not accepting the Gospel. To think that your works can somehow atone for that which Christ on the cross was unable to do is sinful Pride. The same sin of the devil.
There is no "defeating of Sola Scripture or Sola Fide unless you simply refuse to believe in God's Word and accept the simplicity of the Gospel.
@@spacecoastz4026 I would agree with most of your first paragraph. But the the first and last sentences of that paragraph highlight my point even further. Your first sentence of, "that's a false assumption and argument", is a baseless claim. You never provide any scriptural evidence as to how my claim is false and your claim of Sola Scriptura is scripturally supported. Then your last sentence of, "If Scripture Alone is not valid, then nothing is valid because now you are relying on man for doctrine and not God", highlights my point exactly. Due to the fact there is no intra-scriptural reference as to how many, or what books, constitue the canon of scripture (as well as there being no scriptural reference to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura in those books), Protestants would be relying on "man-made doctrines." This shows the self-defeating ramifications of a concept like Sola Scriptura.
These man-made doctrines of the Protestant Reformation are also why there are thousands upon thousands of Protestant denominations. Protestants place themselves at the center of their faith, instead of The Holy Trinity. They tell themselves they have the correct interpretation of scripture, and if someone disagrees, they just break off and form another denomination.
Clearly you haven't studied the Catholic Church beyond a couple 7th Day Adventist pamphlets and Living Waters UA-cam videos. Because if you did, you'd understand that The Catholic Church doesn't believe in or teach a works-based salvation. Nothing we do can add to what Christ did on the cross. It was Christ alone who redeemed Mankind and gave us a chance at everlasting life. However, as scripture states in James 2:26, "So as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." If it is simply belief in Christ as the Son of God that we need, don't forget that scripture also states in James 2:19 that, "Even the demons believe." So if belief is the only thing one needs, how does that make them different than a demon?
It pains me to see Protestants have as much zeal and passion for Christ, as they do hatred for the church He started. Christ proclaimed that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church, so Satan, being deceitful, convinced Man to create their own churches. This is not to say that other ecclesial communities don't have some truth, but only the Catholic Church has the fullness of truth and the protection of Christ. Remember Matthew 7:22-24.
I pray that you honestly keep looking into what the Catholic Church teaches and that you keep watching Catholic apologetics videos. I also pray that if today you hear His voice, that you do not harden your heart.
I noticed that you made it look like you played my video through but you didn't. But can you tell me in what sense you believe that Jesus died "for" our sins? Do you think the OT sacrifices point to Christ? Weren't the sins of Israel placed upon the sacrifice in Leviticus 16? Doesn't St Peter say that Christ bore our sins in his body on the cross? If this is all true how can you deny substitutional atonement?
I wrote two comments on the I Think Biblically channel, encouraging people (including the host) to watch this video. Sadly, it appears both my comments were quickly deleted.
Yes I Thnk Bib. does this all the time. In fact he deleted an entire video when it was proven through rational valid argument of his error. He just removed the entire video. And he is known to block messages from public view that might disagree with him.
Of course they were. >_< Another way you could try it is to leave a comment, saying that a lot of the things he says about Catholicism just aren't true, and leave it at that. Then go back in a couple of days and edit your comment, adding a link to this video. He won't check the edited comment, most likely. :)
@@CatholicTruthOfficialThis only works if he has not already blocked you from having your messages seen by the public. You can post all you like, see all your posts, but no one else can read them. You can only test this by setting up an alternative user, and have that user log in, to see if you can read the message posted under the other user. He has poor form for it on IthinkBib.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Okay, I'll try what you've suggested. Thanks, Bryan, for the good work you do through this channel.
Matthew's Goats and Sheep's puts faith alone to the pit of the netherworld
Matt sheep and goats is not a judgment of Christians! So you err in that
The Infallibility of the Pope
Since 1870, with Pope Pius IX, the Catholic Church has taught the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. The Vatican Council then declared that
The Vatican Council has defined as "a divinely revealed dogma" that "the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra -- that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church -- is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church's consent" (Catholic Encyclopedia)
On June 20, 1894, Pope Leo XIII was bold enough to claim that the Popes “hold upon the earth the place of God Almighty” Of course, this was nothing new because the Vatican Council of 1870 had already proclaimed that:
The Pope is Christ in office, Christ in jurisdiction and power...we bow down before thy voice, O Pius, as before the voice of Christ, the God of truth; in clinging to thee, we cling to Christ. (Babylon Mystery Religion, p. 103).
The first being to ever liken himself to God was Lucifer (Isa. 14:12-15), and the last will be Antichrist (II Ths. 2:3-4), so the Pope isn't in very good company. King Herod, who also followed the Roman religion, was killed by God for allowing people to credit him with infallibility (Acts 12:21-23). God's word is the only infallible Authority in Christianity. No man is infallible. The Bible record is quite clear about that:
God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar..." (Rom. 3:4) To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isa. 8:20) Surely men of low degree are vanity, and men of high degree are a lie: to be laid in the balance, they are altogether lighter than vanity." (Psa. 62:9)
Someone asks where is the devotion to Mary in the scriptures ? Here is the answer: Rev 12.1: “A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head". If Mary is Queen (moreover the mother of a King is always a Queen) then we must render her a devotion.
Except friend, Revelation 12 has nothing to do with Mary. That is false teaching of the Catholics!
@@maximaphily601 What is then Your "rigth teaching" ? have You any idea ?
@@adelbertleblanc1846 Hi friend, I don't have any teaching. The Holy Ghost needs to lead you to all Truth. I belong to no denomination of men. Matters not what I say! You need to cast off ALL denonminational (including Catholic) teachings and go to the Word.
Friend, what does Rev 4:1 (as one example of several) clearly inform you of:
“Come up hither, and I will show you what must take place after this.”
This is immediately after the letters to the 7 churches in Rev 2/3. Do you believe on the Word? What does it say clearly? Anything after Rev 4:1 is yet future, *MUST* take place after this............ Rev 12 is but future. Has nothing to do with Mary, Jesus, Israel. I don't know any denomination (Catholic, Protestant) that teach it correct! They all rely on their dogmas and doctrines, rather than turn to the simple Word of Truth.
@@maximaphily601 Can You explain to me Revelation 12 folowing Your comprehension ?
(Remind) - Dont strike with verses and verses !
Juste answer my question !
@@adelbertleblanc1846 Hi friend, just telling you what something is, is a meaningless exercise. Because you need to take all scripture into context. There are dozens of complementary scriptures you also need to understand from Genesis through the OT (particularly Esther and Song of Solomon) and the New Testament. If I just say "this is black" or "this is white" it means nothing in of itself. That is why I gave you Rev 4:1 to start to have you meditate on the Word. It clearly tells you that all of Revelation from that moment, is "yet future" from the time John was called to heaven in the spirit. This means, Rev 12 cannot be historical, so cannot be Mary giving birth to Jesus, or Israel giving birth to Jesus, as most of the church today, Catholic and Protestant, teach.
You don't want verses and verses, but for the Holy Ghost to move in you, you need to have dozens of verses that taken together reveal this truth to you.
But what I will tell you up front is what those who are being led by the Holy Ghost do understand (and there are very few!). Remember what Jesus said, that the way to eternal life is hard, few find it, the path and gate is strait and narrow. Do you think everyone in the Catholic church is going? Would not be too hard then, would it! Take Jesus at His Word.
The Woman is the Church (body of Christ, the true organic one, not any denomination of man); the Man Child are the overcomers who are born out of the body of Christ (a small remnant while the church sleeps). All are saved believers, but the Man Child has a special reward for overcoming and not sleeping as the church does today.
Have you received the full truth that God is taking out a remnant, a rib company of people just as Adam slept to make Eve. God is taking out a rib company of people while the body of Christ (the second Adam) sleeps. I am not just talking about the church but the body of Christ filled with the spirit. God caused the sleep. That is why church as a whole is sleeping. It is God’s judgment, they reject the truth of the bride, of being made perfect. They believe they will get to heaven before they will be perfect. There is an overcoming group of people being made perfect in this hour...........
Her child became a man child, he developed, grew up. Within the church today there is a remnant. Just as God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, He took out a rib, God is taking out a rib company of people out of the church while the church sleeps. Jesus is the last Adam, and just like the first Adam God is taking out of His body a people close to His heart. That He is going to make a bride, a wife, for the Last Adam. He is going to have some overcomers.
If there is any Catholic who has never made the way of the cross in his life then he will not understand what St Paul taught. Otherwise, we Catholics do understand much better that Jesus redeemed us by dying on the cross. Congrats B. M. I appreciate your work very much. Good bless.
I found two Chick Tracts near the shopping carts at Aldi today, tossed them in the garbage, and thought of Bryan lol.
Haha! We have a fun video on my Chick also. ua-cam.com/video/t7ytOZ_L2t0/v-deo.html
2 Peter chapter 2 : “But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them-bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.”
Thank you so badly for this amazing vidio,Good morning from here,GBU🙏🙏🙏
You are very welcome!
Excellent Rebuttal Bryan , of this Calvinist Erroneous & Heretical Preacher teachings.
Well done Bryan 👍👍👍❤❤❤
God Bless You for Your Work 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Me: waiting to see how much of things we can agree on with calvinists
CT: "We were in an agreement with him up to this point" 5:00
welp that didn't last long 😂
It seems to me that there are three "stages", if you will, of salvation: initial salvation, continued salvation, and final salvation. The problem with the majority of "faith alone" arguments is that they deny works have anything to do with any stage of salvation, but that renders continued salvation useless as a category, so they get rid of it, leaving their stages as follows:
1. Initial salvation
2. ???
3. Final salvation
With nothing for us to do between initial and final salvation, the only conclusion is "once saved, always saved." This, I believe, is why nearly everyone who believes the Solae also believes in OSAS.
Dang, I should have watched the whole video before posting this.
@Jin-yi4hk no, it wouldn't meet the Catholic narrative to say no works are required of you to maintain your salvation...then again, it wouldn't meet the biblical narrative either, so I'm not sure why you would want to argue that point.
@@Jin-yi4hk You know, I was starting an argument, but your reply is far too true (and sad) for me to do anything except agree with you.
Hi There, God bless you.
Hey there, you too!
God bless you too!
Isaiah 53 is helpful:
Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
5But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
6We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to our own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
Yes, this is a great symbolic imagery and foreshadowing for the Messiah. But it doesn't mean that Jesus had a substitutionary atonement. At least not the _Calvinist_ version of it.
Good Bible reference. This guys channel is a complete farce. He doesn’t even know the details of Calvinism. Bumbling fool.
Great video CT! and great shirt! 🙏🙏🙏 -Matthew 5:12
As Catholics, we affirm a TYPE of substitutionary atonement known as satisfaction theory. In place of our punishment, Christ satisfies the wrath of God through his infinitely valuable sacrifice. His sacrifice is the substitute for our punishment. What we actually deny is PENAL substitutionary atonement (PSA) which teaches God the Father poured out his wrath onto the son - he takes our punishment from God in our place as the substitute rather than paying for our redemption with a sufficient sacrifice as a substitute.
You can apply all the labels, definitions, and doctrines of men. Why don't you just stand on the Word alone? All denominations, all of them, have this issue and all are wrong in different ways. Best you read Isaiah 53 to see it was the *WILL* of the Father to bruise Him, crush Him. Christ gave Himself up voluntarily to please the Father yes, but it was the definite will of the Father that this be done. Christ only came to do the will of the Father, otherwise you lack understanding of His entire ministry here on earth.
@@maximaphily601 I agree: “all denominations have issues and are wrong in different ways.” That’s why I’m Catholic!
Exactly! Well said.
@@thecatechumenYou too, Catholic is but a denomination friend. Any "church" that adds dogma and doctrine to the Word, makes the Word void. Scripture is clear.
@@thecatechumenAre you Catholic because you support the Roman church's attempt to unify all the relgions of the world, that is antichrist? Or support the hoisting of the rainbow flag, because that is obedience? Or support the blood butchery of past history of an insitution that killed innocent blood? Which Catholic are you holding up to? No true church would have any of this history I am afraid to inform you. And there is much more.
His comments at 22:02... The arrogance to say we are "innocent" because Jesus died for us... sheesh. That's like saying you're innocent if someone else gets accused of a crime you committed and they were found guilty so you walk free. Nope, you still committed the crimes (or in this case... constantly sin), you are guilty and you know it.
Exactly! 💯
I read my Bible and I realized I must leave the Catholic Church and join the Seventh-Day Adventist ... Baptist ... Church of Christ ... Methodist ... Pentecostals ... Methodists ... Church of the Open Bible Holy Rollers ... the Church of What's Happening Now ............
As a Catholic, if you have one minute to share the Gospel with a dying man, what do you say?
I would say God is infinitely holy, and Heaven is a place of perfection and perfect holiness. Every sin is an eternal sin against him with eternal consequences. The Bible says nothing impure or unclean can enter heaven, and the penalty for sin is death and hell (Rom 6:23). However, God loves us so much that he doesn't want us to go to hell, so, like any good parent, he gave up his life for us. He came to Earth in the person of Jesus Christ to take our sins and guilt by dying a gruesome death for us on the cross. He had all of his skin ripped off, and he shed all of his blood so that anyone at any time can come to him to find complete forgiveness of sins, redemption, and new life. Then I would tell him that true repentance is turning away from our sins and trusting in Jesus and what he did for us on the cross. Then, I would challenge him to do that, and to give his life to Christ.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Amen to this! Solid answer.
John MacArthur also denies The Blood Of Christ Needed For Salvation!!
Thankyou for making this
Our pleasure!
The worst part of this is that this guys don't even bother to ask if it is right what they say, they just 'shoot to kill' and get the 'reward'.
Substitutionary Atonement spans back to Genesis.
In Judaism, yes, but it's not a Christian teaching.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial the theology of Christianity is simply a continuation of God’s revelation to the Israelites and Substitutionary atonement pointed to the cross for a reason.
I have a question : What evidence for the “5 solas” ? Who gives any guarantee about them ? - Because none of the fathers of the church and none saint spokes about this "5 solas" - Who invented that ? Do You have any idea ?
Bryan I was watching a video about our lady it's so beautiful,Our lady was 14-16 yrs old when she gave birth to Jesus.Before she died she wanted the apostles to be with her she needed to speak to them.Our lady died at 56yrs old. Sorry she was 72 yrs old when died, and when she died there was the smell of roses and heavenly scent filled the air.There was other people who was there with our lady and whoever was ill was cured.She had a peaceful death.Our lady never aged She always stayed young looking.She died with true love. After 3 days our lady assumption into heaven before the coronation of our lady Queen of heaven.
That's amazing... How do you know all this information about Mary? She died at 56 and never aged? How do you know that?
✝️📿🙏😇❤️💚💙
I like this story Tanya, and heard some of it before. But I am curious about the source of your information. Please tell me where you learned this.
@@OzCrusader id like to know where she heard this too, I'm interested in knowing how she knows this when historically no one knows many of this things about Mary.
@@OzCrusader Sensus Fidelium ----- The Devotion to the Dormition and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary...Fr.Anthony Mary. F.SS.P.
I tried having some discussions with Calvinists regarding salvation, but I had to stop when they all kept saying "Repentance is the fruit of salvation" meaning you don't repent until after you are already saved. If that's the case, what's the point of repentance?
Exactly, it makes no sense.
They should be focusing on fruits worthy of repentance, not repentance being a fruit of salvation. It is a process, the fruit should be in more abundance with time.
We agree.
IF YOU AREN'T CATHOLIC ... YOU "AIN'T" CHRISTIAN
Catholics aren't real Christians, a real Christian doesn't worship Mary and the Pope.
And catholics don't worship Mary or the Pope, so I guess we are real Christians. ;)
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Why do Catholics add to scripture, rather than stand on it alone? Why all the extra doctrines of men? They are as bad in doing so as Calvinists.
Your comment is just as bad as the Calvanists who say the same about the Catholics. Where is love in all this?
Thank you for your videos. Unfortunately RCIA for me was basically non existent so you are really helping me understand the faith 🥰🫶🏼🙏🏼God bless you
So glad to hear it!
RCIA is useful. We need it. We have to begin it.
Protestants present a very easy heaven to attain. Good feeling is all that they want and preached.
iThinkBiblically is horrible. He’s so aggressive and nasty.
That's spiritual pride working. Satan loves how they divide Christianity.
@@JesusChurchBible correct on both counts, but plenty of it on this channel messaging too!
@@JesusChurchBibleThere’s 10,000+ worth of denominational division in Protestantism.
Were saved by the works of Jesus Christ, not our own. Were saved by the works of Jesus Christ and his works alone. Were not saved, were not declared righteous by God because of our own works. Were saved and declared righteous by God by the works of Jesus Christ. by his faithfulness. You would agreed right Bryan?
Try aging pathetic protestant enjoy your eternal puishnment 🤢🤢
He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.' Then the righteous will answer him and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?' And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.' Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.' Then they will answer and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?' He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.' And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
Matthew 25:33-46
We would agree with almost all of that. We agree that we are not saved by our works. But by what Christ did for us on the cross. We agree that it is not our righteousness but Christ's righteousness. The only difference is that we don't believe we are illegally imputed. Even while we are still technically a dung hill of sin, but rather, we believe that God actually transforms us interiorly. He makes us righteous with his righteousness the more he sanctified us.
Be nice, Bible man. He could be very sincere and just asking questions. Many protestants test the waters with their arguments against the Catholic Church to see if they hold up. That is well within their rights.
Sr. Mercier. Please keep debunking this lost Souls.... these videos are helpful... 🕊🙌🏻🙏🏻⛪️📿✝️🫶🏻🍷🍞
Brian, you cannot say that Jesus satisfies divine justice and at the same time say He was not a substitutionary atonement. I understand that you presented St. Anselm’s theory as permissible, but I would argue it is the only correct view. Otherwise you are forced to the extremes of penal sub or the Pelagian view of the cross.
Yes, we can say that, and It does not have to lead to a substitutionary atonement, at least not the Calvinistic version.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Substitutionary atonement simply means that Jesus died for our sake. Protestants make the mistake of saying Jesus died in our place. This is really the disagreement I find when speaking with Protestant friends. I believe firmly in the necessity of cross and satisfactory nature of it established by the Council of Trent, but never Calvin’s model. Great points on 1 Corinthians 15 and the on-going aspects of salvation. God bless you, Brian 🙏🏽❤️
True faith(saving faith) is obedience. Hebrew 3:18-19John 3:36Jm 14-26.
If any protestant says salvation by faith alone and means mere intellectual recognition then that person is not saved in the first place.
I am a protestant.
Faith alone cant save you, faith and good works will
That is exactly a false gospel. How do you even dare to think you sinner can do something to save yourself.
Yes, James 2:17& 26..
@@sansebastiansj
"You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone." James 2:24
You have to be a decent person + have faith in Christ to go to heaven, a man can't live a life as a sinner and have faith and go to heaven
@@theperson4yearsago565 No one is decent until is saved by the blood of Christ. Never before. After you are saved and sealed in Christ you do good works. Your good works mean nothing to God if you are not first saved by Christ. This is the gospel. Christ came to earth to take our punishment upon himself. What you are talking about is not a saved person. A saved person receives the Holy Ghost. The old becomes new creation in God to do His work He made for those who trust in Him.
@@sansebastiansj exactly what I said
Faith in Christ+ live righteously
The Worship of Mary
Mary worship actually began in the fifth century A.D. when the term "Mother of God" was applied to her in the Council of Ephesus. In 1854, Pope Pius IX proclaimed the Immaculate Conception of Mary by stating that she was "preserved exempt from all stain of original sin".
St. Bernard stated that she was crowned "Queen of Heaven" by God the Father, and that she currently sits upon a throne in Heaven making intercession for Christians.
The Bible says in I Timothy 2:5, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." Yet, the Catholic Church teaches that Mary is to be honored as the great "Mother of God".
Romans 3:23 says that "all have sinned", which includes Mary. We know it includes Mary, because she was commanded to offer a sacrifice of atonement for her sins in Luke 2:24 fullfilling O.T. prophecy (Leviticus 12:8), and she spoke of needing a "Saviour" in Luke 1:47. Sinless perfect people dont ask for a savoir.
Notice in Luke 11:27 a woman cries out to Jesus and says, "Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked." Does Jesus commend her for these words? No, he is very quick to keep the emphasis off of Mary. He replies in verse 28 with, "Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it." Jesus had a perfect opportunity to praise and exalt Mary, but he chose not to do so.
The Catholics make much of Luke 1:42 where Mary is said to be blessed "among women", but in Judges 5:24, Jael is said to be blessed "above" women. So, if there were a Queen of Heaven, Jael would make a far better candidate than Mary.
It is taught in the Catholic Church that Mary remained a perpetual virgin after Jesus was born, but Matthew 1:25 says that Jesus was only her "firstborn" son. That is, there were others born later. Matthew 13:55 tells us that James, Joses, Simon, and Judas (not Iscariot) were brothers of Jesus. Galatians 1:19 speaks of James the Lord's brother, and Psalm 69:8 also speaks of Mary's other children. According to God's word, she did not remain a virgin, and she is not a virgin today. There is no such person as the Virgin Mary.
The idea of a female deity is nothing new. Most all pagan societies worshipped female goddess long before Mary was born, and many of them also believed in immaculate conceptions. The Scandinavians worshipped Disa; the Druids worshipped the Virgo-Patitura as the "Mother of God"; the Germans worshipped Hertha; the Greeks worshipped Aphrodite; the Egyptians worshipped Isis, and the Romans worshipped Venus and Fortuna.
In the Bible, we find that pagan goddesses are very common also. The Ephesians worshipped Diana (Acts 17:27). As early as Judges 2:13 (about 1400 B.C.), we find the worship of a goddess named "Ashtaroth". Throughout God's word, the Israelites would wander after these false goddesses and bring God's wrath upon their nation (Jud. 10:6, I Sam. 7:3-4, 12:10, I Kgs. 11:5, II Kgs. 23:13, etc.) The term "queen of heaven" is a common Catholic term for Mary, but the avid Bible student will notice that this was really a false goddess (Jer. 44:16-25)! Can't you see how deceitful Satan has been? This heathen goddess was gradually brought into the Catholic Church under the name of "Mary" in order to attract the pagans to the new Roman system, the "Holy Roman Empire". In reality, it's the same old pagan worship that God has forbidden for centuries!
Should we pray to Mary? No, because no one in the Bible ever prays to Mary. In fact, the last time we read of Mary in the Bible she is praying along with the disciples (Acts 1:14), not being prayed to by them.
Mary never allowed anyone to exalt her in the Bible, and she never assumes a position of authority over other Christians. In fact, Mary gives only one command in the whole Bible. This is a command which should be noted and remembered by all professing Christians the world over. In John 2:5, Mary the mother of Jesus says, "Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it." Mary didn't say to follow her or pray to her. She said to obey the Lord Jesus Christ! Friend, Mary worship is totally pagan and totally forbidden in God's word.
They also have the false doctrine that Revelation 12, the Woman is Mary.............
Why do you hold to the word “one” when it refers to mediator in scripture don’t hold to it when Jesus say you have but ONE teacher?
You have no other teachers in your life?
And Mary has to be a queen in heaven because Jesus is a king in the Davidic line and being such, the mother is the queen as has been practiced in scripture.
Also, people in heaven are alive in Christ, not dead.
@@Earthtime3978 Reject God's word at your own peril.
@@1611AuthorizedVersionThat’s all you’ve got. No ability to defend the point that “one” does not mean only.
Does “firstborn” mean the first one born in every case in scripture? Get out of Fundamentalism!
@@Earthtime3978 One mediator doesn't mean just 1 but many mediators ??
What kind of backwards comprehension nonsense is that ?
And "first Born" or 1/one in this case is actually - only - 1 but "one" mediator is not just 1/one but many "lesser mediators"
What utter made up nonsense...
Ithinkbiblically is 100% correct. Rome does hold to a false gospel
Thank you for your opinion, and no facts. Feel free to disprove everything we said in the video.
All talk, no substance … sigh …
Yeah 100 billion % unbiblical, .. in Protestant sects.. lol
My brother. Just stop it. You've commented on Brian's videos before with much pride and disrespect. You're mistaken on many things. Please stop harassing people to build up your spiritual pride. Remember Jesus commandment and try harder to love others. Peace be with you. 😁✝️⛪🕊️🤍
@@JesusChurchBibleThis is UA-cam I can comment where I please to. He does apologetics and people engage, kinda what happens when you attack other faiths on a daily basis. It’s not harassment lol, stop getting defensive dude.
If Catholics adhere to the Word,then why do they continually put women and converts in leadership roles.This goes directly against the sacred teachings.
There are hypocrites everywhere. They pick and choose their scripture, and add to it to please themselves!
Kinda like “Animal Farm.”
Because you are misinterpreting scripture. Women in leadership, along with converts is a discipline, not a doctrine or a dogma. Meaning it's not something that's set in stone. A protest and don't hold to other disciplines in scripture and sleep just fine. They eat meat from animals, their women do not head coverings in church, their women speak in church, And they do not give all their money to the pastor to distribute among the church and the poor people in the church as the early church. So this is a picking and choosing of disciplines we wish to follow. Also, karma if we are going to go strictly by what the Bible says. Then we should only be worshiping in houses, not in churches.
Oink
I'm a proud Ex-Catholic.
The devil is a proud ex-follower of Christ and his kingdom also. 🤷♂️
@@CatholicTruthOfficial But the devil knows he is wrong...and we know we have the Word of God.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial You know the ancient Hebrews didn't even have a devil in their religious scriptures until Persian Zoroastrian influence.
I’ve met a few ex Catholics and they all have one thing in common : they lack knowledge of the faith.
SAD!
As a Catholic, I think of 1 John 2:1-2, "My little children, these things I write to you, that you may not sin. But if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the just: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." (DRB) I think that "propitiation" is the act of appeasing and satisfying the debt incurred by sin. Or as some translations have it as "expiation" which is an act of atonement. I don't see any problem with Jesus as the substitutionary sin offering, the substitutionary atonement for sin.
Having said this, I want to be clear that I think many mistranslate 2 Corinthians 5:21, as it has to be taken into account that what we see when speaking of Jesus' sacrifice on Calvary is what we read about in Leviticus 4...He is the sin offering, the subsitutionary sin offering, as Jesus never sinned. (Hebrews 4:15) Where I see the problem creeping in is with the belief in penal substitution/atonement. I had always believed that the the plan of reconciliation, the actual plan of salvation, formulated by God right then and there in the Garden of Eden at the moment of the fall of man (Adam & Eve's disobedience to the will of God) was one of love for mankind and it was Jesus' loving sacrifice that satisfied the wrath and will of God the Father. Love going up, rather than wrath coming down. God is love. (1John 4:8) God does not become sin.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church: Paragraph 614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all other sacrifices. (Cf. Heb 10:10) First, it is a gift from God the Father himself, for the Father handed his Son over to sinners in order to reconcile us with himself. At the same time it is the offering of the Son of God made man, who in freedom and love offered his life to his Father through the Holy Spirit in reparation for our disobedience. (Cf. Jn 10:17-18; 15:13; Heb 9:14; 1 Jn 4:10.) Jesus substitutes his obedience for our disobedience
Paragraph 615 "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous." (Rom 5:19.) By his obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering Servant, who "makes himself an offering for sin", when "he bore the sin of many", and who "shall make many to be accounted righteous", for "he shall bear their iniquities". (Is 53:10-12.) Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father. (Cf. Council of Trent (1547): DS 1529)
Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam
Question...if a catholic misses a day of obligation that's a mortal sin, right? If they die in mortal sin do they lose their salvation and go to hell?
From the Catechism: "2181 The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants) or dispensed by their own pastor.119 Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin."
So to be a mortal sin it would have to be done deliberately without good excuse and done with full knowledge of how seriously wrong it is. So it would be wrong (rash judgment) to assume that another person is in mortal sin because he missed Msss without any other context.
@@scottgunCan you point me to the scripture in the Word that says this. Everything else is but doctrines of men, wood, hay and stubble.
@@maximaphily601 Excellent description of Sola Scriptura
@@scottgun OK so I take it by the response is that you cannot point to anthing in the Word, so you deflect with childish play.
It is written, “‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”
"Thus *making void* the *word of God* by *your tradition* that you have *handed down.* And many such things you do.” No different today! Catholics, all denominations, each have their "traditions, dogma, doctrines" they hand down that make void the Word.
_If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them._
There is plenty more in the Word to inform us that we are not to add to it, not to speak other than to it, not to live by anthing other than it, that all the traditions of men make void the Word, the list can go on if you like. you are just confused in a tradition and doctrine of men, that is all. They will argue there is nothing that says "bible alone", and ignore the many verses that tell you it in a more detailed way (if you care to be obedient to the Word). They Holy Ghost leads you to all truth. But as most today lack the Holy Ghost, they are spritually discerned.
Nope. Our Lord didn't write biblical texts or command anyone to do so in His earthly ministry. Instead, He gave teaching authority and the power to bind and loose to the Apostles (and their successors, see Acts). Sola Scriptura isn't in Scripture. Not even implicitly.
I think you had the better arguments, Bryan, but your Protestant opponent had the cooler accent. Do you think you could cultivate an Australian accent for us? (if that was Australian, sometimes I get the different accents mixed up)
I will have to talk to Matt Fradd and get some private lessons haha.
Hey Brian, can you please debunk Kyle a guy who left catholicism for orthodoxy the schismatic sect?
Please send us an email. Michael Loften at Reason and Theology UA-cam tackles this topic more often. He is a former orthodox.
Is Hebrews 10:26 referring to venial sin to?
No
How do you know that? So you saying one could commit the worst venial sins a million times and still be in the state of grace?@@CatholicTruthOfficial
I now have the truth because I read my Bible ..... according to Me!
Source: me
Was Peter the First Pope?
Catholic tradition teaches that while Christ is in Heaven, the Pope is the appointed head of the church on earth. However, the Bible never mentions anyone being the head of the church except Jesus Christ Himself (Eph. 5:23). In Matthew 16:18, Jesus says to Peter,
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.
According to the Catholic Church, this is where Jesus appointed Peter to be the first Pope, the earthly head of the church. That is, the Catholics teach that "this rock" is a reference to Peter. The Scriptures are quite clear in stating that the Rock is Jesus Christ and no one else. In fact, Peter himself testifies of this truth when he calls Jesus the "chief cornerstone" in I Peter 2:6. Paul tells us in I Corinthians 3:11 that Jesus Christ is the "foundation". He then says in I Corinthians 10:4 that Jesus Christ is the "Rock". The reader might also give some consideration to the words of Moses in Deuteronomy 32:29-31. The "rock" in Scripture is the Lord Jesus Christ, not Peter.
Catholics argue that Peter is the "rock" of Matthew 16:18 because the word "Peter" is from the Greek word "petros", meaning “a piece of rock” or "a stone". However, the word "rock" in Matthew 16:18 is from the word "petra", which is a "mass of rock", like a large slab, not a small stone. Jesus Christ is the foundation (I Cor. 3:11), the perfect match for the "rock" ("petra") of Matthew 16:18. Christ is clearly the Rock in Scripture (II Sam. 22:32, Psa. 40:2, 42:9, 89:26, 92:15, 94:22, Acts 4:11-12).
As for Peter being the first Pope, the sincere Bible student should note the following facts:
1. The word "Pope" is never mentioned once in God's word.
2. Peter was married (Mat. 8:14; I Cor. 9:5), while the Popes are not.
3. Peter refused to allow others to bow down to him
(Acts 10:25-26), but the Popes allow such practices.
4. Peter didn't think very highly of tradition (I Pet. 1:18), yet tradition is a major authority in the Catholic Church.
5. Peter believed in waiting for the "crown of glory" (I Pet. 5:4), while all Popes believe in wearing a crown now.
6. If Peter was the Pope in Rome, as the Catholics teach, then why did Paul not mention him in his letter to the Romans? In Romans chapter 16, Paul gives the names of over twenty church members, yet he fails to mention Peter. How could this have happened if Peter was the Pope in Rome?
7. If Peter was the head of the church, why did Paul have to set him straight on doctrine in Galatians 2:11?
8. If Peter was the Pope, then why didn't he say so in his epistles? He simply labeled himself "an apostle of Jesus Christ" (I Pet. 1:1) and nothing more.
9. Paul wrote 100 chapters with 2,325 verses, while Peter wrote only 8 chapters with 166 verses. Why would "the Pope" write less?
10. Paul spoke of Peter, James, and John (not just Peter) being pillars in the church (Gal. 2:9). Peter is never magnified above the other Apostles.
11. Don't forget that it was Peter who denied the Lord Jesus Christ three times in one night (Mat. 26:69-75). Does this sound like something that would be done by the head of the church?
12. The Catholics believe that Peter was the first Pope in Rome, but the New Testament never speaks of Peter being anywhere near Rome.
The Bible never even hints of Peter being a Pope. This whole doctrine is Catholic tradition, having been concocted for the purpose of lording over the common people of the church. It lacks any Scriptural support.
What's your take on the De Auxiliis controversy, Molinism (Congruism) and Augustinianism?
Did you know that both of these theological opinions are still allowed in the Church, even though most people have never even heard of Augustinianism?
What do Protestants make of Philippians 2:13 anyway: '(...)For it is God who WORKS in you, to will and to act' ???
Nobody said sanctification was the work of Man...
It's the work of GOD - and that's why good works ARE possible!
Who created Christianity, its worship and its sacraments? - Jesus of Nazareth.
Who created Protestantism and its non-sacraments? -Martin Luther
Sacraments are not scriptural, hence part of the problem. Man has corrupted scripture to get doctrines of men, making the Word void, of no effect.
Catechism of the Catholic Church takes the traditional view, setting Jesus’ death firmly in God’s plan. “Jesus’ violent death was not the result of chance in an unfortunate coincidence of circumstances, but is part of the mystery of God’s plan,” the Catechism says.
It goes on to say that “Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father.” And it’s clear it is his death that is atoning, not his whole life: “Christ’s death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the definitive redemption of men, through the ‘Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world,’ and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which restores man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the ‘blood of the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’ ”
Thank you Sir.🙏🙏🙏❤❤❤.
“But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works” (Rom. 4:5-6 NKJV). Paul says that a person is justified not when he ceases being ungodly but while he or she is ungodly, and that God imputes righteousness apart from works-not apart from works alone or through works that are performed in cooperation with God’s grace, but by faith apart from works.
Romans 2:6-7 Here’s what Paul says:
For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.
Now learn the difference between mosaic law which Paul was speaking about in (Rom. 4:5 and Good works😜😜
The Authority of the Written Word
The Roman Catholic Church has given tradition much weight when establishing and practicing her beliefs, yet the Bible clearly warns against this. In Matthew 15:3, the Lord Jesus Christ says, "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" Paul says, in Colossians 2:8, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." Catholic writings are filled with phrases like "the Church teaches" or "tradition teaches" or "the Church has traditionally taught". In light of the above Scripture, shouldn't true Christian writings be filled with phrases like "the Bible says" or "according to the Scriptures"?
Friend, are you following God's pure words or are you following man's tradition? Perhaps you're thinking, "This is anti-Catholic hate literature!" No, actually, this tract is based on God’s word. If you doubt it, please check the references for yourself. What have you got to lose?
Even when Rome professes to believe the Bible, we must remember that the Catholic bible is very different from the written word of God. The Catholic Church includes several books in their Old Testament that are not God's word. The Catholic Council of Trent of 1541 placed a curse upon everyone who does not accept the Apocrypha as inspired Old Testament Scripture (See Catholic Encyclopedia). In doing so, the famous council pronounced a curse upon Jesus Christ and the New Testament writers!
In Matthew 23:35, Jesus said that the Old Testament began with Abel (The Book of Genesis) and ended with Zecharias (II Chronicles). Since the Hebrew Old Testament ends with II Chronicles, there is no room left for the Apocryphal books. This explains why the Lord Jesus and the New Testament writers never refer to the Apocrypha or quote it. These writings were not accepted as Scripture. So Jesus, Peter, James, Paul, John, Luke, and the rest are officially cursed by the Roman Catholic Church.
Lest someone claim that this is no longer a Catholic belief, we refer the reader to page 61 of the Catholic publication, Faith of Our Fathers, by Cardinal Gibbons:
If only one instance could be given in which the Church ceased to teach a doctrine which had been previously held, that single instance would be the death blow of her infallibility.
So there is no absolute Final Authority in the Catholic Church. There are dual authorities: tradition and the Catholic bible, which is entirely unscriptural (Isa. 8:20, Mat. 4:4, Col. 2:8, Mat. 15:3). God's word alone should be the Final Authority of any Christian institution.
I now know that Catholicism is not Christian
No you don't. It's the original Christian. #OGchristians
Hey, Brian, I Know you Believe That Gospel, we Orthodox Do As Well. It's unfortunate that my mother, my aunts, and uncles never Heard The Gospel When they were In The Roman Catholic Church Back In the 1940's and 1950's. The nuns and priests who taught them, they never told them The Gospel. However, my aunt Did Hear The Gospel Later From One Catholic Priest, Thankfully. But I'm not sure why these nuns and priests they had didn't Share them The Gospel. I Know you Do, I Can Tell, Because you Ae Open About It. In Orthodoxy, One Of The Best Quotes I Read On What The Gospel Is Would Be From Saint Theophan, The Recluse, he Said It Very Well In his Writings!!
First video I've seen of this channel, and my one question.
6 days and then rested?
Or Georges Lemaître's assessment?
Welcome. The Catholic Church has not taken an official stand on this, especially of late. It leaves the option open for both to be believed. Neither have to be incompatible with each other.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial I know what the church teaches and what the pope has said on the matter.
I'm asking in relation to what this specific person who presented this information believes is true.
@@grandsonofman Well, whatever this Apologist thinks, it will be merely an opinion. Wish I could help but I just found this channel myself. Perhaps he did an earlier video on this topic? I’d be curious to hear different takes on it as well👍🏼❤️
There is no other passage in the New testament other than John 6: 35-56 where Jesus emphasizes his teaching repeatedly. In the Gospel of John, four times our Lord says that he is the bread and five times He says that its his flesh we have to eat. He instituted this sacrament by giving his flesh to eat in the upper room in Jerusalem on the eve of the Passover (Matthew 26:26-28) We understand that Eucharistic sacrament he instituted was again celebrated at Emmaus after his resurrection (Luke 24: 30-31). Yet, those who vehemently align themselves to idea of Sola Scriptura cannot abide by the most emphasized aspect in the New testament.
John 6:35:
35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst.
48I am the bread of life.
50 this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die.
51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.”
53Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
Matthew 26:26-28:
26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 27Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.
Luke 24: 30-31:
30And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them.
31With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight.
I don't like this guy's theology, but I like his sweater lol
Lol
Faith alone or faith without works is empty and even Jesus himself refutes it. Faith alone is the excuse to continue sinning rather then trying to overcome and repent for your sins.
All these Bible only guys read scripture hundreds of ways, hence thousands of different churches that aren’t Catholic.
Yet only they are right, and everyone else is wrong.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Yes. And you could tell them this on line or elsewhere and they never address it.
We literally “recite” the Gospel every Sunday at Mass. It’s called the Nicene Creed!
This repetition is a dangerous practice. It breeds familiarity, laziness, even arrogance and elitism in some. Remember what Jesus said of prayer:
7 And when you pray, *do not use vain repetitions* as the heathen do.
The chanting of mantras is the most popular form of worship in Hinduism - this repitition is no different in practice to reciting the Nicene Creed. God is not seeking it.
Further, what does this Creed say:
1. re: Holy Spirit: _with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified_ You will not find one scripture to support this error......... We are not to worship the Holy Ghost! Big error.
2. _We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church_ You can believe what you want, but even the demons believe-and shudder.
Stick to the Word, you won't go wrong (both written and logos). Throw out all these dogmas and doctrines of men, they only lead you to one place............ and it is not where you want to go. The way is narrow - *FEW* find eternal life - unless you question Jesus who says so.
@@maximaphily601 How can it be dangerous if it’s a creed of the church that summarizes the glorious Gospel? Is the gospel dangerous, is that what you’re saying?
Repetition is not bad, it’s only bad when it’s vain. I guess you never read Psalm 136, it has a lot of repetition.
You are also condemning confessional Protestants like Lutherans who also recite the creed on Sunday.
Also you don’t believe in the Holy Spirit? That’s heresy!
@@MkvineIt does not summarise the Gospel, the answer is easy...............
@@MkvineAs asked, quote me just one scripture (should be easy to do if it is part of the "gospel"), that requries us to worship the Holy Ghost. If you cannot find one, then you know just on that point alone, you have vain repitition in reciting this.
@@MkvinePS: Don't put words into other's mouths either. I would never condmen anyone, saved or unsaved! You said it, not me. Only God can do that. Anyone who recites doctrines of men like this, is equally guilty of vain repitition.
So... it was Death that punished an innocent man/Jesus, not God. Is that why Judas freaked out & tried to do a take back when he heard Jesus was sentenced to die or was it bc he really felt bad? I'm sorry if I'm way off. Im just trying to learn.
"Gospel" has more than one definition... just like most words.
Exactly
Idolatry in the Catholic Church
The Catholic religion is filled with all sorts of symbols, images, and relics. The Creed of Pope Pius IV states the following:
I most firmly assent that the image of the Christ, of the Mother of God, ever Virgin, and also of other saints ought to be had and retained, and that due honor and veneration are to be given them.
The Catechism of the Council of Trent states that
It is lawful to have images in the Church, and to give honor and worship unto them . . .
It's lawful to honor and worship images, is it? According to the Bible it is unlawful! Exodus 20:4-5 says,
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.
Image worship is unscriptural and will end with the eternal damnation of those who practice it (Rev. 14:11).
Other practices such as using prayer beads, prayer wheels, crosses and relics are foreign to the Bible. The sad fact is that Roman Catholicism is a faithless religion where people refuse to walk by faith. Catholics insist on having a material religious set-up where everything can be seen (statues, crosses, bread, wine, rosaries, etc.). God's desire is for Christians to walk by faith, not by sight (II Cor. 5:7). Idolatry is wicked, and it is strictly forbidden in the Bible.