Did Jesus Found the Roman Catholic Church?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- My website: www.jordanbcoop...
Patreon: / justandsinner
Twitter: / justandsinner
In this video, I address the claim that the Roman Catholic Church was founded directly by Jesus.
Don’t mind me, just here for the comment section.
Welcome. The comments and give you more information on the matter. Don't take anyone's statements as Truth, however, until you've researched their assertions well.
Some church fathers strayed from the earliest times. Its mentioned several times in the Bible and the church of Rome uses these people as proof of unbiblical doctrines
Well I know one thing for sure. I will never bow, kneel or whatever to the pope, never! Jesus is my Lord, and Peter was NOT the 1st pope.
Yeah, can you imagine Peter letting people bow before him?
( if you think you can, read Acts 10)
@@doubtingthomas9117 Indeed. Nice find in scripture, thanks. :)
@@our-days-are-short8254 you’re quite welcome 👍🏻
papacy debunked
I'm more blessed than mary
Proof = Luke 11:27-28
27 And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!”
28 But He said, “More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”
In Luke 11:27 that random woman LITERALLY said Jesus your mother is Blessed, but are Lord Jesus LITERALLY said Believers are more Blessed than mary. Amen and Amen
_
CHRIST alone
John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
ACTS 4:12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
There is only One Mediator between God and men, LORD Jesus Christ= 1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus.
Hebrew 9:15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.
Hebrew 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.
Hebrew 8:6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.
Ephesians 2:18 For through Him we both have access by One Spirit to the Father
John 15:5
5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.
Colossians 1:19-20
19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, 20 and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.
_
1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach
Paul allows bishops to get marry, but catholic church goes against paul.
1 Corinthians7 to say that paul gave the advice to stay unmarried. But they will not tell you that the same chapter they quote says 1 Corinthians 7:28 "even if you do marry, you have not SINNED". The passage literally says "young women, young men" and a bishop is supposed to be a Church ELDER.
All Believer of JESUS CHRIST are Royal Priest 1 Peter 2:5,9. Revelation 1:6
Work of God =
John 6:28 Then they said to Him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?”
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.”
_
Jesus said Matthew 23:9
9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
And also said Holy Father to Heavenly Father= John 17:11
11 Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are.
Jesus said call no one Father but still catholics call *pope holy father.
Sad.
A verse against the position of pope,
2 Thessalonians 2:4
4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
_
When a catholic argue about mary being the mother of God
Use this to defeat the argument.
Luke 8:21 But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”
Matthew 12:46-50
46 While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak with Him. 47 Then one said to Him, “Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You.”
48 But He answered and said to the one who told Him, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” 49 And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, “Here are My mother and My brothers! 50 For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother.”.
Mark 3:35 For whoever does the will of God is My brother and My sister and mother.”
John 19:26-27
26 When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!” 27 Then He said to the disciple, “Behold your mother!” And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home. ( Jesus basically said John is the son of mary, and mary is the mother of John from that time onwards).
By the way sarah is the mother of all Gal 4:21-26.
_
We should not pray to apostles
Romans 1:25
25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Acts 10:25-26
25 As Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying, “Stand up; I myself am also a man.”
Acts 14:15
15 and saying, “Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men with the same nature as you, and preach to you that you should turn from these useless things to the living God, who made the heaven, the earth, the sea, and all things that are in them,
Revelation 19:10
10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “See that you do not do that! I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren who have the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”
Revelation 22:8-9
8 Now I, John, saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who showed me these things.
9 Then he said to me, “See that you do not do that. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God."
Colossians 2:18
18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
You cannot go to Father through saints nor mary, you can only go to the Father through Lord Jesus Christ= John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
Ephesians 2:18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.
Holy Spirit intercedes for us=Romans 8:26
26 Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
And CHRIST as well=Romans 8:34
34 Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.
Hebrews 7:25
25 Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.
It's Christ and Holy Spirit who intercedes for us not apostles
Even old Old Testament says Christ intercedes for us Isaiah 53:12
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.
_
Apostles are allowed to marry,
1 Corinthians 9:1-5
If Peter (peter is cephas read John 1:42) the so called "first pope" was married, why does the catholic church doesn't allow "pope" to marry?
Lord did gave the keys of death and hades to Apostles. But after their death, only Lord Jesus has the keys of death and hades Revelation 1:18
_
Lord Jesus Christ died Once for all, re-sacrifice Him is putting Him to shame. Hebrews 6:4-6; 10:10,12,14; 9:26,28; 9:12; 1 Peter 3:18; Romans 6:10
_
The so called vicar of christ/ pope/holy father Peter called himself a fellow elder in 1 Peter 5:1, and as per the qualifications of elder in Titus 1:5-9 the elder is allowed to get married; then why does the "pope" is required to be celibate and catholic? ( when Peter was neither celibate nor catholic).
1)Peter was not perfect human nor was he a perfect disciple
2)He sank down while walking on water
3)Our Lord said to peter get behind me satan
4)Peter reject our Lord 3 times
5)Our Lord rebuked Peter for calling fire from heaven
6)Our Lord rebuked Peter when he cut of the soilders ear
7)Paul rebuked Peter for being hypocrite because he was acting different in front of Jews and different in front of gentiles.
8) Moses messed up, and he was a important part of Bible ( that's why he never entered the promised land),
9)David messed up ( and he has the Holy Spirit)
10)King Soloman messed up
11) Saul messed up and God regretted the decision (1 Samuel 15:10-11).
Hatrick (Saul then David then Soloman back to back messed up)
12)The apostles run away a day before Lord Jesus got locked up.
13)The early church messed up Rev 2:18-20, 1 Corinthians, Galatians.
14) Apostle John when receiving Revelation worshiped an angel and the angel said "see you do not do that. Worship GOD" Revelation 22:8-9
15) Paul and Barnabas both had a sharp disagreement on John Mark( Acts 15:36-41). And remember that both were Apostles filled with Holy Spirit.
16) Church in Revelation 2:1-6 Lord Jesus Himself said to the church of Ephesus that "I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars" but guess what that church still had problems and Lord also pointed that out "Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love......" So as you can see Churches can do Biblical and unbiblical things at the some time.
_
Breaking the 10 commandments by having statues, carved images, idols, changing the Lord's Sabbath to sunday.
You sound like a rebellious teenager that won’t listen an authoritarian figure. By the way you are wrong about St. peter, he was the first pope followed by Linus, Anacletus (Cletus) and Clement to name the first 4 popes out of a total of 266!!!
for us christians we have to be careful on this touchy subject. i am roman catholic,but i am allowed to go to any christian church and listen to the sermons. but we allsmsay jesus is saviour and died of our sins. i wish more people would read about catholicsm and understand what us roman catholics beleive in. but i can read on martian luther and at leaest i will understand what a lutheran beleives without pointing fingers and say i am right you are wrong. no body wins that aguement. God is the only one who can judge others not us. God is love and we all need to remember that.until jesus saya otherwise on the true church.
Catholics are not Christians
You talk about the Early Church a lot and I notice the books of the Early Church Fathers on your book shelves. Wish you would talk how the Early Church worshiped, what they believed.
As a Catholic I look at you as a brother and have nothing but love for you and my Lutheran brothers and sisters. We have way more in common than differences. We should focus more on that.
Love!
If it is by love you seek focus. Realize than, that it is through The lens of love we say. It is the very differences in our gospels that separates us. You teach the gospel that includes works as necessary for salvation. Similar to the Judaizers back in Paul’s day who wanted to add circumcision as a part of requirement for salvation. which is contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ teaches a gospel that is not through works, but by faith alone. because of the grace of God that we are saved onto eternal life. Nothing else matters that we agree on or disagree on more than this. Because nothing else determines your eternity with Christ.🕊
Explore the Faults teachings Of Roman Catholicism.
ua-cam.com/video/QVmnawGFaVs/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/04FZW81uSes/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/blvtzXuayX8/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/6DLgllRwNCk/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/play/PLSP1IO9h3J7sNPCx3RmNrFYjfYYRoE9fM.html
ua-cam.com/play/PL8E4l3Ss7gZgyZ2TCRINRPz_ZtxqmzDdI.html
ua-cam.com/video/d1xZTPY98Oc/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/TPG3vMeexks/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/9AsPuOxVZKw/v-deo.html
Mark Peterman James 2:24
@The Paraclete Roman Catholics prefer Popes to Jesus or myself (The Second Christ).
No way, your institution isn't Christian it is Globalist.
No, I'm sorry you have swallowed propaganda regarding Luther. Jesus DID found the church appointing Peter as leader of the apostles. Therefore, the Apostolic succession was created. No, it's not the Pope that is the essential focus it is the resurrection & the true presence of the body, soul & divinity of Jesus.
Yea And the split with the oriental non chalcedonians remember them?
Jesus was a Jew! He gave Peter, His Rock, the keys to His Kingdom…Heaven!
Jesus did not give the keys to a guy he called "Satan"....and to a guy who Denied Him....THREE TIMES! 😮
There is a Catholic monk on UA-cam that traced back his priestly line and found that it only goes back to 1504…. And then he looked up other priests he knew that were ordained in different parts of the world, and they all go back to that same person. He concluded that even tho the church didn’t appear to have a record of apostolic succession, he would take it as a matter of faith… but it’s *almost* like the apostolic succession claim is just a propaganda lie to discredit anyone that disagrees with Rome - and it began in the priests leading up to the official Reformation.
Nice story, but it isn't true.
Not to mention three popes at one time anathematizing each other in the Medieval times 😂
@@truecatholic8692Where is your proof are you just full of words
Sounds about right they follow the father of lies satan so i'm not surprised
@@beadoll8025 Easy. www.vatican.va/content/vatican/en/holy-father.index.html
Your whole video doesn't make sense. Jesus gave the keys of the KINGDOM to Peter and as early as AD110 Catholic Chruch was mentioned in one of the letter by st Ignatius of Antioch to Smyrna. Secondly all were in unity and only Catholics churches were around and Peter went to Rome and died There hence its the Holy See. The chair of St Peter. Plus during those times is when Quran was developed opposing Catholic churches teaching ( a common misconception) that we worship Mary ( Quran claims we believe Triune God as father son and Mary) which clearly states that church has always been Catholic and moreover Bible was complied by the authority Catholic church under the guidance of the Holy spirit , God is not the God of confusion. If Catholic church had the authority to complie the bible then it is still guided by the Holy Spirit until Jesus returns to take the kingdom of the keys which were given to Peter in apostolic succession infact 1st 3 Popes are mentioned in the Bible.. Peter, Linus and Clement. Until reformation everyone believed in the true presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. Then it become a symbol. Only Catholic church has kept the faith since 33AD so as to say the churchs consistent teachings since 2000 years. Its a hospital for sinners. Hence u see people doing wrong things. Plus the Eucharist miracles and uncorrupt bodies of saints and apparitions of our Lady. There is too much proof to deny Christs church.
yes
I don't understand. So you claim that thre is no church in the world which belief is correct, and we sholdn't worry about that?
He is incorrect. Jesus started the Catholic church in 33ad. All Protestants churches broke away from Catholic church and were started by men. Protestant churches often have conflicting doctrines. Only Catholic church has the 100% fullness of the Christian faith. Catholic church is the one true church of Jesus Christ.
@@johnyang1420 the caltholic church is a heretic group which left THE ONE AND HOLY CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH the ORTHODOX CHURCH. The Orthodox church is the word of Christ created by him.
Such is indeed quite often the claim of separatists in our day, Liudvikas: the truth has disappeared and thus we do how we please without anyone being guilty. Not so.
@@Μυλοπόταμος-ψ4ψ The Orthodox church is closer to the truth than the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church wasn't started by Jesus. As the Lutheran pastor said the Church of Jesus is the Apostolic Church. The Catholic Church is the combination of the Apostolic Church and tradition of man. The Bible condemns the tradition of man. The Orthodox church took a bit of tradition and it's not the true church. Mary is not a redeemer, Jesus said call no man father, the baptism of babies is not testifyied in the Bible,etc. These traditions and others are not in the Bible. Worship of icons is forbidden by Exodus 20. God bless you brother in Christ.
@@dariusmot8440 , Catholics don't believe Mary to be our "redeemer". With all due respect, the words of Darius Mot are not the Word of God. You surely ingulge in wholy trivial , vague and often directly nonsensical notions about Catholic faith. You surely have many misunderstandings, misrepresentations and caricatures. Additionaly your points are simply your personal opinion. Not authoritative. Martin Luther ( first Protestant ) had a little knowledge of Catholicism: " It is quite possible that Martin Luther may have confused one theological opinion with the official teaching of the church and initiated his program of reform on the basis of this misunderstanding" Oxford professor Alister McGrath.
The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. A little knowledge can be more dangerous than none at all, it creates the illusion of knowledge.
See Proverbs 9:1. The Founder, the House, and the Seven (7) Pillars.
God Himself is the Founder, the Wisdom of God.
The only Christian are the ones from the Catholic Church thanks very much
The only Christians are those who follows Jesus Christ. Being catholic doesn't make you Christians. And to claim only catholics can be Christian then you are giving another Gospel as catholics did not exist when Jesus was alive. Jesus tells us the believers where more then one gathers is his church a building isn't a church just bricks and stones the people's who believes in our lord Jesus Christ is the church.
@@davihendrickson3678
Ignatius of Antioch
Call the church of Jesus “Catholic church” for first time year AD 107 , Thus Catholic Church wrote the New Testament and the Catholic pope saint Dámasus year AD 382 collect all the scroll 📜 inside of the Catholic Church and made it book and He decided it word of god and Protestants believe it
The Catholic Church with
Romans Vatican
Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
Thessalonians
Hebrews
Etc etc 🌍
@@davihendrickson3678
All you Protestants are excatholic , you come from us Catholics , the Bible call you wolf Antichrist fake prophet
Acts 20
28Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 29For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
Matthew 7
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
1 John2:18-19
18Little children, it is the last hour: and as ye heard that antichrist cometh, even now have there arisen many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour. 19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest how that they all are not of us
@@memphis82eh I'm a lutheran not a protestant. We lutherans are evangelist Catholic. And fun fact it's you roman catholics that the bible calls the anti Christ ,wolves in sheep clothing ,false prophets, heretics,. You Roman catholic perverted scriptures, added and changed scriptures into y'all own liking which is a crime against God.
2 Corinthians 11:13-15 - For such [are] false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
Revelation 22:18 - For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Revelation 22:19 - And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.
Galatians 1:6-9 - I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: (Read More...)
2 Timothy 4:3 - For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
1 Corinthians 14:33 - For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
Deuteronomy 18:20-22 - But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
Leviticus 26:1 - Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up [any] image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I [am] the LORD your God.
Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Exodus 20:4-5
4 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.
5 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;
2 Thessalonians 2:4 - Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
1 Timothy 2:5 - For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
John 14:6 - Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Acts 4:12 -And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
2 John 1:9 -Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.
John 4:24 -God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
@@memphis82eh the church u are talking about are know called orthodox catholic not Roman catholic and secondly the NT was written by the 12 disciples not the roman catholic the Orthodox catholic took the NT and combined them into one whole book. And thirdly I'm a lutheran not a Protestant we Lutherans are evangelist Catholic.
I have always looked at the catholic Church as the first apostate church.
Can we go a bit further? Rome says that they claim to have the relics/bones of the famous historical figures so if a group is arguing that they are over 2,000 years old, how can they have the relics and bones of apostles ?
Didn't they go on crusades to take as much as they could especially truth & lock it all up away from the people. There was a lot of history manipulation by the RCC & Jesuits
This criticism makes zero sense. My wife has her father's ashes on the mantle. The Catholic Church claims they're over 2000 years old. As historical figures passed, they came into possession of bones and relics. How is this at all contradictory to anything? It's not like time is just two points with no connecting line. Do you think people can't collect things from any time outside of the beginning of their existence?
@@jaykwonzzzCatholic church is NOT 2000 yrs old!! Know your history & facts!! Constinople started the Roman Catholic Church, not Jesus!!
Jesus was a Jew!!
its not authentic,thats the explanation,even muslims in arab claims they have preserved abraham footprint
@@jaykwonzzzthey also had tons and tons of wood from the cross.
I think jesus through Peter did found the Catholic Church but since they're heterodox now they're not necessary.
That's why I'm not Catholic.
One only has to observe the 'Labarum' (PX) embroidered on catholic priests vestments to realise the 'catholic' church was founded in the summer Palace of roman emperor Constantine ( who later murdered his wife & son) This symbol is a combination of the pagan sun god saturn & Jesus. The Labarum was etched on the shields & banners of his soldiers as they sallied forth killing their enemies ( Millvanian bridge 312AD, 317AD against Lininius 324AD). It is a pagan not christian religion.
What a mess of lies. Stop reading internet garbage and pick up a book.
Is that also known as the Chi Rho symbol? The long stem of the "P" with the "X" through it? Catholic churches are beautiful, but sadly are temples of pagan worship indeed. It actually boils down to sun worship when one researches far enough.
@@doriesse824 All very true! Its important to reaslise the way Constantine incorporated his worship of the sun God Saturn into his whole philosophy of needing the backing of the 'gods' for his military campaigns! . Even Phillips bible, and others have the Chi Rho on th front covers and many priests even anglicans have it on their ceremonial vestments! blatantly pagan! So what do you feel is true worship|?
Didi Jesus found the Roman Catholic Church? BLEEP NO!! He founded a "universal" church (which the Greek word "catholicos" means) but its "Roman" character developed over centuries and included doctrines the apostles never alluded to in their writings. It's nothing but propaganda, and I spent most of my life worshipping as a Catholic.
"Did Jesus Found the Roman Catholic Church?"
Answer: Yes. The Church Jesus built on the foundation of the Apostles came to be called the "catholic" Church early in the 2nd century.
Please see my reply to the question posted by someone going under the name of The Blue Stone Project: "I pose this question rather. What church did Jesus found if it wasn't that which went to Rome and after much martyrdom, flourished as Catholic?"
I decided to copy my reply and repost it here:
The Church which Christ established isn't an organisation with an earthly CEO who runs things from a central location in Rome but is a community of regenerated people who have true faith in their hearts and look to Christ alone as their leader. The popes have usurped the position of Christ by saying that they have been appointed by Him to lead the Church and that they're incapable of leading it into apostasy because they're divinely mandated to carry out this leadership role. They try to substantiate this by reference to various passages in the Bible, in particular Matthew 16 which they misinterpret to falsely teach that Christ built His Church on Peter, and argue that he in turn passed his authority on to them. This is just a devilish deception by which the popes have introduced false teaching in opposition to the true Gospel, so in no way can the Roman Catholic church be considered to be the true Catholic Church which Christ established.
Christ founded a spiritual community of true believers not a sect of false teachers and their deceived followers. The one true Church isn't a visible organisation or church body but is a community of everyone in the entire world who possess true faith. Therefore the true Church is invisible because no one knows for sure who actually possesses true faith in their hearts or where they live over the whole earth.
So with regards to those who were martyred in the early centuries in Rome, we can be reasonably sure, although not absolutely sure, that they were indeed true Christians and therefore members of Christ's Church which was termed "Catholic". As for the Papacy that didn't come into being until a few centuries later (the early bishops of Rome weren't popes in the modern sense) so the local church in Rome was still authentically Catholic at that time. I mean it was Catholic in a derivative sense from the One True invisible Church. One can call the local church in Rome "Catholic" at that time because it didn't subvert the truth with false teaching.
So no, Christ didn't found the Roman Catholic church if by that is meant the organisation which is run from the Vatican under the control of the popes. Christ founded a spiritual community of people with true faith not an organisation run by the Antichrist.
@@Edward-ng8oo "What church did Jesus found"?
He founded His Church, which, by the early 2nd century was known as the "catholic" Church. This Church is the normative means by which the Gospel message and grace is spread to all.
@@AmericanBerean Your assertion that Christ founded the catholic Church is hardly controversial. I have no difficulty in agreeing with that. However it reveals you’re failing to grasp the points I made in my previous reply to you. I’m a member of the catholic Church, as are all true Christians, because “catholic” just refers to the one true universal Church. But I completely deny that this Church is the Roman Catholic church. The true catholic Church is the invisible worldwide community of all those, and only those, who have true faith in Christ. This faith is a rebirth into a living trust in Christ which changes a person so that he’s no longer the same person but rather lives for God instead of himself. It’s not some stale dead acknowledgement of the facts about Christ.
I think I shall simply repeat another reply I made to someone else so that you can hopefully grasp some of the issues at stake when you say that Christ founded the Roman Catholic Church:
Some of what you say I agree with and some of what you say I don't agree with. I don't accept for instance that the early bishops of Rome were popes in the Roman Catholic understanding of the term. They didn't have any universal power and authority over all the churches. The most they were was first among equals in relation to other bishops, but then only in a consultative capacity. Also from what I've read there's no proof that Peter was ever in Rome as the bishop there, although I know Roman Catholic sources will try and insist that he was, but then I don't give much credence to what they might assert.
Our differences are to some degree over the definition of the Church. I fully accept that Jesus founded the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and gave it the Holy Spirit and the authority to carry on the faith until the Second Coming of Christ. But what I don't accept of course is that this Church is the Roman Catholic church under the control of the popes.
What Protestants in general claim is that the Papacy is an intruder in the Church and that it gradually took over the reins of power as time went on. Gradually the true believers were outnumbered and outmaneuvered so that the papists took control and corrupted the message of the Gospel into a works-righteous scheme of earning salvation through doing things which they taught were good works like attending mass, becoming a monk, building churches, going on pilgrimages etc, and the papists also endorsed idolatrous practices like praying to Mary and the saints. So it was in this atmosphere that Martin Luther came to prominence through his rediscovery of the true Gospel of being righteous in God's sight through faith alone (as St. Paul in particular teaches in the Bible). Good works were then done not in order to be saved but as a consequence of being saved. Also the good works which were enjoined on the faithful were redefined as those works which were done in accordance with God's Commandments and not human ideas of what pleases God. So things like monasticism and pilgrimages fell by the wayside as being unnecessary and more importantly incompatible with the Gospel
Lastly, I don't agree with the Roman Catholic claim that the Church is supreme and the Bible came out of the Church. It's the other way round. The Bible is supreme because it's God's Word, and the Church came out of the Bible. It's the Bible as God's Word which gives birth to the Church because God's Word creates Christians through giving them the Holy Spirit. The Church didn't produce the Bible. What it did was recognise those Scriptures which were authentic and those which should be discarded. But it was the Holy Spirit who actually produced the Scriptures through inspiring the prophets and Apostles to write them.
@@Edward-ng8oo You're right, strictly speaking when you say the Roman Catholic Church is not the Catholic Church. But it is part of it, and the part in which resides the chief visible shepherd of the Catholic Church, the bishop of Rome (aka the pope). The Latin Rite of the Catholic Church (aka the "Roman" Catholic church) is one of a dozen or more Rites of the Catholic Church. All the Catholic churches (rites) are in full communion with the pope. Those not in full communion are not Catholic Church. They are Orthodox, or Protestant, or Coptic, etc.
The Church Jesus built on the foundation of the Apostles is not just a universal spiritual association. It is also a visible society with the Apostolic-successive bishops shepherding us. (did I describe the OT-NT basis of this, in previous post?)
This has been Truth from the beginning. Denial of it is new and novel, amounting to a doctrine of men. The early Christian writings show this. Does your position have any ancient writings illustrating that what I have told you is false?
And you’re a DOCTOR?
Like, a doctor in LGBT studies ? Or what the heck
It's simple, read your Bible. Man will deceive you but God's Word is Truth in essence.
Your solution to the question of whether the Roman Catholic church is the Church which Christ established is admirable. I'm glad you affirm that the truth is found in the Bible and we don't need human philosophy. If only the Roman Catholics would agree and would stop listening to their their popes who incorporate man-made teachings into their theology. They then might see that the Roman Catholic church isn't the Church which Christ established as Christ never made Peter a pope and the popes don't have any divine authority to rule in the Church. The true Church which Christ established is a spiritual community of all those who believe the Gospel as taught in the Bible, not the false gospel preached by the popes.
@@Edward-ng8oo
By what authority do you look to for correct interpretation of Scripture?
@@morelmaster Holy Spirit
@@Edward-ng8oo also Bible affirms the first 3 popes ( Peter , Linus and Clement) check Chruch history and read the Bible. Our first 3 popes are already in the Bible plus the word Catholic was used by St Ignatius of Antioch to Smyrna in AD 110 plus Catholic church complied the Bible you read today. Martin Luther wanted to remove James, revelation and other chapters from the Bible, whos authority? Holy spirit? Nah God is not the God of confusion
Simple Logic. Early Church was Catholic all believed for 1500 years the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist until reformation its now only a symbol. Since 33 Ad forces of darkness and spirit of the world has tried to eradicate Catholicism , from Catacombs to martyrs for Faith in each age . Catholic church rose against its enemies by thePower of the Holy spirit.
as Jesus said to Peter gates of hell will not prevail against his CHURCH
@@IconicIzzy1806
The early bishops of Rome weren't popes in the modern sense, that is universal bishops over the whole church. That was a development which didn't come about until the seventh century. Luther had this to say:
It is very easy to prove that the pope is neither the commander or head of Christendom, nor lord of the world above emperor, councils, and everything, as he lies, blasphemes, curses, and raves in his decretals, to which the hellish Satan drives him. He himself knows full well-and it is as clear as the dear sun from all the decrees of the ancient councils, from all the histories, from the writings of the holy fathers, Jerome, Augustine, and Cyprian, and from all of Christendom before the first pope, who was called Boniface III -that the bishop of Rome was nothing more than a bishop and should still be that. St. Jerome dared to say freely, “All bishops are equal, all together they have inherited the throne of the apostles,” and adds the example, “as the bishop of a small city-like Engubium and Rome, Regium and Constantinople, Thebes and Alexandria. (Luther's Works Vol 41.290)
In addition, St. Gregory, when it [the title “universal pope”] was offered to him by several great bishops, sharply refused it and writes that none of his predecessors had been so bold as to accept or wish to carry such a title, although the sixth council in Chalcedon had offered it to them; he closes by saying briefly and to the point that no one should call himself the highest bishop or head of the whole of Christendom, as many decrees also say, and furthermore, that the bishop of Rome too, though he is one of the greater ones, is nonetheless not to be called universalis, the head of “all” Christendom. (Luther's Works Vol 41.291)
But after Gregory’s death Sabinianus was a bishop for a year and a half; I count him among the popes, for he was a big monster, like a pope is, and wanted to burn the books of St. Gregory, his immediate predecessor-perhaps because in his writings St. Gregory did not want the papacy to be tolerated. Boniface III was elected after him. This is when God’s wrath began. This Boniface persuaded the regicide Phocas that he should be pope, or chief of all the bishops in the whole world. The bell was cast then, and the Roman horror accepted with joy, as the one who was now lord over all the bishops in the world. (Luther's Works Vol 41.291)
Luther by the way didn't reject the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist, and those who follow after him don't reject it either.
With regards the term "catholic", Roman Catholics are catholic in name only. Their beliefs concerning the mass being a sacrifice, prayer to Mary and the saints, purgatory, justification through faith and works etc means they don't possess the true faith as handed down by Christ and the Apostles. Therefore they're not part of the true Church which Christ promised the gates of hell wouldn't overcome. Hell has already overcome the popes and their followers. Recently it's become accepted Roman Catholic teaching that one doesn't even need to be a conscious follower of Christ in order to be saved, and that followers of other religions and none are also able to be saved as long as they're sincere etc. This is full blown apostasy. The Scriptures teach that unless one has conscious faith in Christ as one's Saviour one will be damned.
Those like myself, who agree with Luther, see the Papacy as the Antichrist described in 2 Thessalonians 2, and because the Antichrist won't be destroyed till Christ's second coming, so the popes' followers will still be in existence until then as well. Roman Catholics are horribly deceived and mistaken in thinking that the reason why their church still exists and can't be eradicated is because they're the true Church which Christ promised wouldn't be destroyed. No they're not the true Church. They're a false church which will be destroyed when Christ returns.
Catholics don't just make a claim. The word "Catholic" means universal. The Early Church was led by the first Pope, Peter.
Jesus said according to Matthew 16:18 "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."
Yes, you are from that Church, but your walked away from the Church Jesus created through the Apostles.
Martin Luther did start a new Church, it's called the Luthern Church.
Read the early church, it wasn't led by the bishop of Rome ... True courage is not to hold your convictions but to attack your convictions. Look at the Easter Orthodox claims, the bishop of Rome tried to establish his supremacy over the others and that's why they split.
The Catholic church was the first church founded by jesus..Martin Luther broke away from the church
False. Jesus and Paul founded the Eastern Orthodox Church. Jesus, Stephen, the eunuch, and Mark founded the Oriental Orthodox Church. Thaddeus, Bartholomew and Thomas founded the Church of the East. Each one claims to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. These claims are as legit as yours.
And false. The papacy broke away from the true church:
*Exsurge Domine*
*Bull of Pope Leo X issued June 15, 1520*
In virtue of our pastoral office committed to us by the divine favor we can under no circumstances tolerate or overlook any longer the pernicious poison of the above errors without disgrace to the Christian religion and injury to orthodox faith. Some of these errors *we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows:*
19. Indulgences are of no avail to those who truly gain them, for the *remission of the penalty due to actual sin in the sight of divine justice.*
bookofconcord.org/exsurge-domine.php
*An indulgence granted by authority of the Pope by Johann Tetzel in 1517.*
The text reads: _"By the authority of all the saints, and in mercy towards you, _*_I absolve you from all sins and misdeeds and remit all punishments for ten days."_*
academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Indulgence
*Pope Benedict IX and simony:*
“He was a son of Alberic III, leader of the Tusculani, and he simoniacally succeeded his uncles, Benedict VIII and John XIX.” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. II, page 274)
“Then on May 1 Benedict *sold his papal office* to his baptismal sponsor, the reforming archpriest John Gratian, Pope Gregory VI.” ( *New Catholic Encyclopedia,* vol. II, page 275)
Quoted from: answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2009/12/apostolic-succession.html?m=1
Very well said. This really lines up with 1 Corinthians 1:11-13.
Yesssss😂🎉
Your points are simply your personal OPINION... Not authoritative....
Hmmm, in other places you talk about unity. Oh wait, surely not unity with the papists ?!?
Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, built His Church on Peter the rock, way before the new testament was even written, or that later determined which of the over 75 letters written, were to be included in the new testament and which were not. Jesus Christ renamed Simon as Cephas, which is Aramaic for rock. ( John 1:42). The same Church authority in Peter the rock and sole key holder, who stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem, since Scripture alone could not. You are in my prayers Dr. Cooper as you journey toward Truth! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink
Jesus is the cornerstone that the builders rejected, it is upon Him that the church is built!
We have no way of ascertaining what exactly Jesus told Peter in the original Aramaic version of the Rock passage, so that argument is based on conjecture. We only have the Greek manuscripts that use two slightly different variations of the word “Petros” which means a rock or stone within the statement Jesus makes about Peter’s confession. Therefore I would suggest that you folks cease using this argument to justify Peter’s supremacy over the Church.
Absolutely false
@@SK-tr9ii That's not what the bible says.
❤🙏📿There Was Only One Church And That's Roman Catholic Church And The Founder Is Jesus Christ❤️🙏📿And The Other Churches They Are Manmade❤️🙏📿Yes I Bow To My Priest And Hold His Right Hand And Put It In My Forehead For A Blessings❤️🙏📿Proud To Be A Roman Catholic❤️🙏📿Amen
Everyone should just become Eastern Orthodox😂😁
*anglican. I'm leaning that way now lol, infant baptism is simply the hardest thing for me to accept. I agree with everything else pretty much.
@@Iffmeister The Anabaptists started non-infant baptism historically, that was continued in the 19-20th century "Spiritual (Aka Masonic) awakenings".
The Church has always held Infant Baptism.
No, we do not need EO church and 1000 traditions that contradicts Scripture :D
Ify Nsoha
Infant Baptism is in the Bible and it is taught by the Earliest of Church fathers.
Acts 16:15
15 When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home. “If you consider me a believer in the Lord,” she said, “come and stay at my house.” And she persuaded us.
Acts 16:33
33 At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his household were baptized.
Romans 5:12 connects with Acts 22:16
Romans: When Adam sinned, sin entered the world. Adam’s sin brought death, so death spread to everyone, for everyone sinned.
Acts: What are you waiting for? Get up and be baptized. Have your sins washed away by calling on the name of the Lord.
Huge verse!: Acts 2:38-39 reads...
“Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children”
You see the ending there? “For the promise is to you AND to your children”
Since everyone has sinned because of Adams original sin, baptism washes the original sin of the baby away since they have not committed any sins themselves yet.
We also see:
1 Peter 3:21-22 teaching Baptism saves...
“and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also-not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God.[a] It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand-with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.”
So if the infant or young child dies before they accept baptism themselves but they still have the stain of original sin of Adam where do they go?
Jesus also taught in Luke 18:16:
“Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God”
The early church fathers agreed with infant baptism as well!!!
Irenaeus
“He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age” (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).
Hippolytus
“Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them” (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).
Origen
“Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous” (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).
“The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit” (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).
Cyprian of Carthage
“As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born” (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).
“If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another” (ibid., 64:5).
Gregory of Nazianz
“Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!” (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7 [A.D. 388]).
“‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly [I respond], if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated” (ibid., 40:28).
John Chrysostom
“You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members” (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).
Augustine
“What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).
“The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic” (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).
“Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born” (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).
“By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration” (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).
Council of Carthage V
“Item: It seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children] from the barbarians” (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]).
Council of Mileum II
“[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration” (Canon 3 [A.D. 416]).
Glendalough Orthodox Initiative
8 minute video I think you should watch on this topic...
ua-cam.com/video/XbEzyAlvTaw/v-deo.html
God bless, ¡Viva Cristo Rey!
I still don’t know what your argument is for Jesus not being the founder of the Catholic Church. And if the Catholic Church (global, not just Roman) did split from the “Early Christian Church,” when did it happen? That’ll clue us to who the founder was.
Your presentation was not impressive and your defense was not persuasive, my good friend. Not on this video.
I do sense more dedication and honesty compared to most other Protestants, however. You are not so far off; both in mind and in heart.
Let me quote a few of your words: "It is what it is".
Now sit back and ask the Spirit and... aaaahhhh....!!
My friend; when you pose the question whether Jesus founded the Catholic Church.
I tell you: first ask yourself: what is it??
Start here. You will find the truth. God bless:
Stephen K. Ray
Crossing the Tiber: Evangelical Protestants Discover the Historical Church
Joe Heschmeyer
The Early Church Was the Catholic Church
Jimmy Akin
The Fathers Know Best: Your Essential Guide to the Teachings of the Early Church
Trent Horn
The Case for Catholicism: Answers to Classic and Contemporary Protestant Objections
I really like your comment at 10:04, "I don't like these gotcha lines that we throw our to tell someone they're wrong." Yes those gotcha lines can make us feel warm and fuzzy inside believing that the denomination we belong to just so happens to be God's favorite. So good news - I feel warm and fuzzy about my religion. Bad news - religion CANNOT get us to Heaven - ONLY JESUS can get us to Heaven. So if someone's Catholic or Lutheran or whichever church has not brought them to Jesus either they have failed their church or their church has failed them.
Amen, well and wisely & truthfully said.
You can’t trace your church back to the apostles and Catholics can. Therefore, you are not the original church
Pelagius, Origen, Hillary of Poitiers, Ambrosiaster and others taught Faith Alone.
Pelgaius, Origen are Heretics firstly lol. (Not making a good case here alresdy)
And Lol I'm sure if you pull it out of context you can.
@@kieran296 the Bible teaches Justification by faith alone and proof of Justification being works. Paul and James aren't contradicting each other, we simply have to say what they're actually saying. Justification, being declared righteous before God, happens through faith in Christ. But the evidence that one is truly regenerated and justified before God is faithfulness to Jesus Christ (works). Justification? By faith. Proof? By faithfulness
@Zyklon B Peterson I can refer you to a few sources if you are genuinely curious.
James isn't the "GOT EM" book. I mean, do people think we have James-free Bibles? Like, oh no, we added Sola Scriptura as one of the petals to the rose that represents our very core beliefs, but then... Oh noooo we forgot about James! Curses! Well, everything is already in stained glass and print, so it's too late to take it back now. We'll just hope no one notices as we translate the Bible into common tongue.
That's one of the reasons I even looked at becoming a Lutheran in the first place. They did not add to or take away from the scripture like other churches I attended. They handled it with great wisdom and understanding and let God's Word speak for itself. It was here I heard the true Gospel, after attending church all my life.
@Zyklon B Peterson Unfortunately you're labouring under a common misunderstanding that those who believe in "faith alone" are ignoring the fact that faith without works is dead.
I can assure you that this is completely mistaken. When Protestants or Lutherans in particular affirm faith alone they are specifically referring only to justification or to put it more plainly how a person can be regarded as righteous in God's sight. The Bible teaches that the only way we can be justified is through Christ who atoned for our sins and who offers us forgiveness through our faith alone in Him. Our works can't earn us forgiveness since we are sinners who can never perform a perfectly good work.
Now we come to the teaching that faith without works is dead. This is so obviously true and no one with any understanding would deny it. However good works are done in response to having already been justified in God's sight through our faith alone in Christ. Good works are therefore only necessary in the sense that they confirm that our faith (which alone renders us righteous) is genuine.
Hopefully you can now see that those who have a true understanding of justification through faith alone don't deny that faith without works is dead. We most definitely affirm that.
literally everyone is justified by faith as the NT teaches. (Luther added the word "alone" excluding the gifts of hope and charity that is greatest than faith)
Eternal life is knowing God (Jn. 17:3) and knowing God consists not only of having faith but also of abiding in love, through keeping the commandments of Christ ( 1 Jn 3: 10-24). For Saint John, abiding in eternal life is incompatible with abiding in death, but this does not entail that everyone who abides in eternal life is sinless; there is sin unto death ("mortal sin") and sin not unto death (1 Jn5:16-17). Only the former extinguishes spiritual life. Even when a baptized Christian commits sin unto death , the free gift of forgiveness, cleansing and reconciliation is available through confession ( 1 Jn 1:9).
Eternal life itself is not merely an infinite duration of conscious existence (even the damned have that) nor is it merely a promise about the future; rather, eternal life is a particular kind of life given and received as a gift here and now. It is a participation in the very life of God, who is love; hence to have eternal life is to abide in love, which both fulfills the law ( 1 Jn. 4:7-21; Rom. 13:8-10) and triunphs over death and darkness ( 1 Jn 1:1-7; 2:1-11; 4:4-21).
The gift of salvation is not based on a purely legal arrangament in which the "rightenouness of God" is an extrinsic and alien quality that is merely imputed to those who believe; rather, the gift of salvation is fundamentally a familial covenant relationship in which those who are by nature sinners and starnge to the covenant of promise are BY GRACE, THROUGH FAITH forgiven, cleansed and made sons of God who really participate in their Father's righteousness. Through faith in Christ, by the grace of God given in the sacraments, sinners truly become what God declares them to be. This great salvation flows directly from and is realized in union with Christ, the only begotten Son and Divine Word of God, who was born and lived among us, self-sacrifially died on the cross for our sins, was raised from the dead for our justification, ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father. Those who believe in Christ are delivered from the dominion of death and darkness into the realm of life and light ( Jn 3 :16-21); having the LOVE of God poured out into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, we are made partakers of the divine nature, living members of Christ Jesus and fellow citizens of the Kingdom of heaven (Rom. 5:5; 2 Peter 1:4; Eph 2:1.10, 11-22). God bless you richly.
Peeps, The Roman Catholic Church IS NOT "the catholic church". It's a terrible, wild, misrepresentation, bordering on open, deceitful lies by apologists and anybody from that religious organization to apply the term "catholic" to their organization when they should be fully aware it's not so.
It's a simple fact that the Roman Catholic Church as we see it today didn't exist in 1000 AD. Certainly there were strains in the West that already diverged from what was being practiced in the rest of the Christian world, but the role the Pope has assumed today developed over time and arguably wasn't formalized until Vatican 1 all the way in the 1800s! Certainly in the days of Justinian no one would have said "we can't believe that because the Pope in Rome doesn't like it."
And if the Protestant world is split into countless denominations, how does that not apply to the RCC? There's several Eastern Catholic Churches and a few in the Middle East that are in communion with the Roman Catholic Church but do not use the Western Rite and have some of their own idiosyncrasies. By the popular definition bandied about that means the supposedly united true Church is perhaps a dozen denominations or more!
There's also the Vatican 2 split of Catholicism
@@jenex5608 Vativcan II didn't cause a schism. Unless you count some angst among Catholics.
It is certainly not a "simple fact that the Roman Catholic church didn't exist in 1000 AD". Even the East admits they and Rome split around 1054 AD.
Especially because Justinian would be most in contact with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople rather than the Bishop of Rome at the time, even though he controlled both cities.
papacy debunked yt
I'm more blessed than mary
Proof= Luke 11:27-28
27 And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!”
28 But He said, “More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”
In Luke 11:27 that random woman LITERALLY said Jesus your mother is Blessed, but are Lord Jesus LITERALLY said Believers are more Blessed than mary. Amen and Amen
_
CHRIST alone
John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
ACTS 4:12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
There is only One Mediator between God and men, LORD Jesus Christ= 1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus.
Hebrew 9:15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.
Hebrew 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.
Hebrew 8:6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.
Ephesians 2:18 For through Him we both have access by One Spirit to the Father
John 15:5
5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.
Colossians 1:19-20
19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, 20 and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.
_
1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach
Paul allows bishops to get marry, but catholic church goes against paul.
Someone will go 1 Corinthians7 to say that paul gave the advice to stay unmarried. But they will not tell you that the same chapter they quote says 1 Corinthians 7:28 "even if you do marry, you have not SINNED". The passage literally says "young women, young men" and a bishop is supposed to be a Church ELDER.
All Believer of JESUS CHRIST are Royal Priest 1 Peter 2:5,9. Revelation 1:6
Work of God =
John 6:28 Then they said to Him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?”
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.”
_
Jesus said Matthew 23:9
9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
And also said Holy Father to Heavenly Father= John 17:11
11 Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are.
Jesus said call no one Father but still catholics call *pope holy father.
Sad.
A verse against the position of pope,
2 Thessalonians 2:4
4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
_
When a catholic argue about mary being the mother of God
Use this to defeat the argument.
Luke 8:21 But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”
Matthew 12:46-50
46 While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak with Him. 47 Then one said to Him, “Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You.”
48 But He answered and said to the one who told Him, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” 49 And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, “Here are My mother and My brothers! 50 For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother.”.
Mark 3:35 For whoever does the will of God is My brother and My sister and mother.”
John 19:26-27
26 When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!” 27 Then He said to the disciple, “Behold your mother!” And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home. ( Jesus basically said John is the son of mary, and mary is the mother of John from that time onwards).
By the way sarah is the mother of all Gal 4:21-26.
_
We should not pray to apostles
Romans 1:25
25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Acts 10:25-26
25 As Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying, “Stand up; I myself am also a man.”
Acts 14:15
15 and saying, “Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men with the same nature as you, and preach to you that you should turn from these useless things to the living God, who made the heaven, the earth, the sea, and all things that are in them,
Revelation 19:10
10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “See that you do not do that! I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren who have the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”
Revelation 22:8-9
8 Now I, John, saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who showed me these things.
9 Then he said to me, “See that you do not do that. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God."
Colossians 2:18
18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
You cannot go to Father through saints nor mary, you can only go to the Father through Lord Jesus Christ= John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
Ephesians 2:18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.
Holy Spirit intercedes for us=Romans 8:26
26 Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
And CHRIST as well=Romans 8:34
34 Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.
Hebrews 7:25
25 Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.
It's Christ and Holy Spirit who intercedes for us not apostles
Even old Old Testament says Christ intercedes for us Isaiah 53:12
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.
_
Apostles are allowed to marry,
1 Corinthians 9:1-5
If Peter (peter is cephas read John 1:42) the so called "first pope" was married, why does the catholic church doesn't allow "pope" to marry?
Lord did gave the keys of death and hades to Apostles. But after their death, only Lord Jesus has the keys of death and hades Revelation 1:18
_
Lord Jesus Christ died Once for all, re-sacrifice Him is putting Him to shame. Hebrews 6:4-6; 10:10,12,14; 9:26,28; 9:12; 1 Peter 3:18; Romans 6:10
_
The so called vicar of christ/ pope/holy father Peter called himself a fellow elder in 1 Peter 5:1, and as per the qualifications of elder in Titus 1:5-9 the elder is allowed to get married; then why does the "pope" is required to be celibate and catholic? ( when Peter was neither celibate nor catholic).
1)Peter was not perfect human nor was he a perfect disciple
2)He sank down while walking on water
3)Our Lord said to peter get behind me satan
4)Peter reject our Lord 3 times
5)Our Lord rebuked Peter for calling fire from heaven
6)Our Lord rebuked Peter when he cut of the soilders ear
7)Paul rebuked Peter for being hypocrite because he was acting different in front of Jews and different in front of gentiles.
8) Moses messed up, and he was a important part of Bible ( that's why he never entered the promised land),
9)David messed up ( and he has the Holy Spirit)
10)King Soloman messed up
11) Saul messed up and God regretted the decision (1 Samuel 15:10-11).
Hatrick (Saul then David then Soloman back to back messed up)
12)The apostles run away a day before Lord Jesus got locked up.
13)The early church messed up Rev 2:18-20, 1 Corinthians, Galatians.
14) Apostle John when receiving Revelation worshiped an angel and the angel said "see you do not do that. Worship GOD" Revelation 22:8-9
15) Paul and Barnabas both had a sharp disagreement on John Mark( Acts 15:36-41). And remember that both were Apostles filled with Holy Spirit.
16) Church in Revelation 2:1-6 Lord Jesus Himself said to the church of Ephesus that "I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars" but guess what that church still had problems and Lord also pointed that out "Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love......" So as you can see Churches can do Biblical and unbiblical things at the some time.
_
Breaking the 10 commandments by having statues, carved images, idols, changing the Lord's Sabbath to sunday.
To regard a sucession as a sign of true Church rather than what it teaches is simply wrong. Jesus is clearly teaching that a church can be removed based on what it teaches (Rev 2-3). And lust for power of Roman pontiffs did away with Christ long time ago keeping Him on their crucifixes and away from hearts of people. Luther wanted to reverse that and was, naturally, cursed. It was, and still is, an institution made by men, an earthly kingdom.
Your just trying to legitimise denominations. Jesus promised a church, not multiple, A church. What did St Ireanues mean when he wrote this -
Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 3)
2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority [potiorem principalitatem].
Anonymous D
Lutherans (and him) are not denying that - both your first statement and the quote from Saint Irenaeus.
The church is the church, denominations are not the church. Denominations are particular visible manifestations of the one, holy apostolic and Catholic transcendent and invisible fellowship. Think of it like Plato‘s theory of the forms: there is the form of “The Church” [Catholic] which is universal, intangible and perfect...
..and then all of the particular churches in the world are imperfect, corrupt reflections of the one form. These particular churches, either reflected in denominations or in smaller fellowships of greater and lesser size participate lesser and greater in the Catholic Church, but they all to some degree participate in it through a common faith - the credal faith.
Those with apostolic succession of both faith and order, that is apostolic teaching and the visible sign of succession [via presbyter-bishop ordination] *may* participate most fully in the universal form of Church, but even a solitary Christian who has faith in Christ who is God and man and in the holy trinity is a Christian and therefore part of the Catholic Church as much as any other.
@@aaroncarlson1162 agreed.
@@aaroncarlson1162 absolutely not if one doesn't partake in the instituted sacraments of the catholic church.
Anonymous D we do
@@aaroncarlson1162 any church or denomination outside of the catholic does not have the laying on of hands of ordanation and are not in communion with Rome.
Hi, Brethren brother here, well nondenominational to be precise. You can preach in our church, brother, unlike Roman Catholics. False gospel will not be tolerated. We are built upon the Rock that is Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour.
You are wrong or misunderstanding when you say, Catholics say that their "founder is Jesus Christ". Here's the thing, and all Catholics are aware of this. Jesus Christ died for the sins of "the world" in other words for all and "anyone" who "believes" in him. Jesus authorised the Apostle Simon (Peter) who HE set apart and signified as a leader with a higher “mission” over any of the other Apostles....to build "his" CHURHURCH. HE set aside Peter and not a man by the name of Martin Luther or anyone else to build his CHURCH.
Jesus then goes on to also say, “And I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven and whatever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven”
So whilst Jesus is the" head "of the Catholic CHURCH - Peter was authorised to build and administer it. What more endorsement does one need in order to start a CHURCH that only the Son of God himself authorised?
Concerning Martin Luther as far as I can tell, he was a simply a religious man in the CHURCH who disagreed with some of the doctrines of the Catholic CHURCH so he complained to Rome. Obviously Rome did not give in (just like they didn't with King Henry VIII) and stood by the doctrines of the CHURCH willed by Jesus, not someone called Martin Luther or a King.
Luther decided to at this point to start a Reformation.
I call it the Protestant Revolution and not a Reformation. It was no authentic reformation.
🤦🏻
"[Luther] was a simply a religious man in the CHURCH who disagreed with some of the doctrines of the Catholic CHURCH so he complained to Rome," is not an accurate summary. He did not complain to Rome; he posted matters and invited public debate on them.
Have you even bothered reading the 95 Theses? If not, you should do; and then read the 97 Theses, and ask yourself what it was the former, rather than the latter, which provoked Rome.
Thanks for admitting Jesus didn't establish your apostate denomination, but that doesn't disprove the point Cooper is making in the video. Just substitute "Jesus founded our church" with "Jesus gave Peter permission to found his church" and everything still flows the same. Regardless of either position you take, the authority ultimately goes back to Jesus.
Jesus is a Jew. Jesus is not catholic.
It was Constantine the founder of Roman Catholic he was a pagan ang convert it to Christianity that's why they make idols, image of God, Jesus, Mary etc. Pagans loves idols!
St. Augustine in one of his sermons denies the central claim of the Roman Catholic church. The RCc claims that when Jesus said “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church” (Matthew 16:18) that Jesus was meaning that Peter was the rock on which the Church is built. Augustine on the other hand rejects this and affirms that it isn't Peter who Jesus meant but Himself whom Peter had just acknowledged is the Son of God (Matthew 16:16):
“For Peter in the order of Apostles first, and in the love of Christ most forward, answers oftentimes alone for all the rest. Again, when the Lord Jesus Christ asked, whom men said that He was, and when the disciples gave the various opinions of men, and the Lord asked again and said, “But whom say ye that I am?” Peter answered, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” One for many gave the answer, Unity in many. Then said the Lord to Him, “Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonas: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven.” Then He added, “and I say unto thee.” As if He had said, “Because thou hast said unto Me, ‘Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God;’ I also say unto thee, ‘Thou art Peter.’” For before he was called Simon. Now this name of Peter was given him by the Lord, and that in a figure, that he should signify the Church. For seeing that Christ is the rock (Petra), Peter is the Christian people. For the rock (Petra) is the original name. Therefore Peter is so called from the rock; not the rock from Peter; as Christ is not called Christ from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. “Therefore,” he saith, “Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock” which thou hast confessed, upon this Rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, will I build My Church;” that is upon Myself, the Son of the living God, “will I build My Church.” I will build thee upon Myself, not Myself upon thee. For men who wished to be built upon men, said, “I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas,” who is Peter. But others who did not wish to be built upon Peter, but upon the Rock, said, “But I am of Christ.” And when the Apostle Paul ascertained that he was chosen, and Christ despised, he said, “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?” And, as not in the name of Paul, so neither in the name of Peter; but in the name of Christ: that Peter might be built upon the Rock, not the Rock upon Peter.”
(From Sermon XXVI. Again on Matt. xiv. 25: Of the Lord walking on the waves of the sea, and of Peter tottering.)
You are making something of nothing. Augustine's views are not different than the CC, he just explains it in a way that EMPHASIZES Christ as being the ultimate founder of the Church. Look at Ephesians 2:19-20;
"Therefore you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens of the saints and members of God’s household, built on the FOUNDATION of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself as the CORNERSTONE.
This passage explain it much better.
@@morelmaster If you think Augustine is reflecting Roman Catholic teaching in this quote above then you're not understanding what exactly Augustine is saying. One of the central teachings of the RCc is that Christ established the Papacy in Matthew 16:18 when He said: "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church." Peter is interpreted by RC teaching as being the rock on which the Church is built, but to the contrary Augustine states this isn't true. He interprets correctly that the rock is Christ, and that Peter is built on the rock, not the reverse that Christ's Church is built on Peter. Augustine likens those who say Peter is the rock (i.e. or head of the Church) to those who said (1 Cor 1:12,13) that they were followers of a particular Apostle instead of realising they were followers of Christ. So it follows that Augustine wouldn't be a Roman Catholic were he alive today. The teaching that the Papacy is a divine institution established by Christ was rejected by Augustine in the above quote.
@@Edward-ng8oo
YOU: So it follows that Augustine wouldn't be a Roman Catholic were he alive today.
ME: What a ludicrous statement.
Quote from Augustine;
"I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so."
Augustine, through the majority of his life as a Catholic Bishop, taught that Peter was the "rock" of Matt.16:18.
In Retractatio 1,21,1 , Augustine is clearly not sure of his interpretation of Matthew 16:19;
He concludes with 'let the reader decide', also in the same text, even if 'The Rock' is Jesus, Augustine still points out that Simon remains a "rock", although a "lesser rock" than Jesus, obviously. Do you ascribe no significance to the fact that Augustine doesn't seem to care which of those two interpretations his readers hold? Augustine, nor any ECF's writing or teaching has authority as Church doctrine, don't forget that.
The fact is, if you look at the CCC, it doesn't limit the interpretation of Matt. 16:18 to ONLY Peter being "THE ROCK" anyways.
And lastly, and most importantly, NONE of the ECF's were consistent with each other in some of their writings, Augustine included. Many changed their views back and forth on things as they reflected on Scripture throughout their lives.
@@morelmaster The popes of Rome at the time of Augustine didn’t wield the power and authority that they later came to possess in the Middle Ages so although Augustine claimed to be a Catholic then he would no longer claim the same were he alive today. Unfortunately I’m not acquainted with Augustine’s writings except for a few quotes I’ve read so can’t really comment except to say that in the quote I gave above he clearly discounts the view that Christ was referring to Peter when He said He would build His Church on “this rock”. Christ, as Augustine rightly says, was referring to Peter’s statement that He was the Son Of God as being the rock on which the Church is built. The true Church therefore is the community of all those throughout the world who follow Christ as their Lord and Saviour, not some gathering of deluded people who imagine that the popes of Rome are Christ’s spokesmen on earth.
@@Edward-ng8oo
YOU: so although Augustine claimed to be a Catholic then he would no longer claim the same were he alive today.
ME: You just don't know when to quit, do you? You just admitted you aren't familiar with Augustine's writings except for a few quotes ( those quotes which SEEM to support your erroneous views, I might add) and yet you are trying to put Augustine on your side of the fence based on pure assumptions of what he may or may not have done today. How ludicrous can you get? I would advise you to get deeper into Augustine than a few random quotes, then you will be speaking more from actual knowledge of the subject rather than ignorance of it.
So for now, I'm not wasting any more of my time with someone who draws conclusions about someone based on conjecture and lazy assumptions. God Bless You!
See below some origins regarding the office that is now termed "Pope" in english. Also please look into the Hebrew term "Asher Al Habayit" and the archeological finds in Jerusalem. I find it intriguing that non-Catholic Christians mock and can't grasp the Jewish roots of Christisnity. Please don't hesitate to ask forgiveness from Jesus Christ the king when you meet him face to face for accusing him of screwing up his church structure.
1 kings 4:6, 2 kings 18:18, 2 kings 19:2, Isaiah 22:20-25, Matt 16 when he hands the office to his "one over the house" to Peter.
None of the Church Fathers had 'lutheran ideas'.
U do know Lutheran Based his doctrine from Scripture and teachings of Augustine and other Church Fathers.
There's no such thing as Lutheran doctrine or Lutheran gospel.
What Luther preached was the real gospel found within the Bible
@@jenex5608 They based it on a faulty foundation of Sola Scriptura....not found anywhere before Luther. No Church Father believed SS, although many try to quote mine the Fathers and read SS back into them.
@@N1IA-4 where is the claim to the Magisterium in the Bible? Sola Scriptura gets criticised all the time though it is biblically defendable but the Roman Catholic paradigm of the Magisterium (a late dogma) is not in the Bible at all.
@@EmmaBerger-ov9niCatholics aren't Sola Scriptura so we don't believe it has to be explicit. The Magesterium is consistent with the OT & NT priesthood / leaders. There's nothing inconsistent going on here. Sola Scriptura is self-refuting simply because the belief isn't in the Bible (a requirement for Protestants).
Did Jesus start the Catholic Church? My opinion is NOT, because if Jesus started the Catholic Church the Catholic’s would be attending Church on The Jewish Sabbath.
Such a hornet's nest. Your answers are sound and sane. The RC church is way more factional than it pretends
I'm not Catholic so I'm new to this conversation in many ways. Explain how it is "factional", I don't quite understand what you mean but would love to know.
@@Iffmeister factions are divisions in this case differences in belief and practice. Artificial birth control is outlawed but Catholics still practice it. Even abortion. There are Catholics who believe the contemporary mass is invalid and only attend the old style mass. The list goes on. They are NOT unified just because of absolute authority
@@mysticmouse7261
What are you supposed to do, hold a gun to somebody to get them to conform to the teachings of the Church???
First of all, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it. And indeed, there must be differences among you to show which of you are approved.(1 Cor. 11:19)
@@morelmaster the gun to the head is called mortal sin. But people who claim to be Catholic who don't care about its teachings present a faction within that church. There are a lot of those. A pontiff doesn't unify squat which is my point.
Ray Lanthier. If a person doesn’t believe what the church teaches they aren’t catholic just like a Protestant isn’t a
Christian.
But as the red sea scrolls changes in history? Didache history first Christian Handbook..The centurion at the cross..powerful realization..
if you remove all hatred and evil from your heart and help other people, you automatically get a PhD in theology
There was an early church founded by Peter as Christ instructed him to do, but it was not called Roman Catholic. Peter was not called Pope. But Peter did have successors to head the church that Jesus instructed him to found. Eventually those successors as heads of the Church were called "Papa" or father by their Italian/Roman name. So what? As a Roman or Italian what YOU have called them and then, you imply demonization in the term "papacy". Eventually that church in Rome was called Roman Catholic. These guys really try to sidestep what Christ said Christ and weakly re-interpret his literal words "Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I found my Church), Peter of course being the rock.
The Church has history and its Catholic.
To argue not is gnorant and unbiblical. Now you dont have to agree with teachings and you can choose to deny it's validity and that's fine.
But you can't just make up history.
Facts don't care about your feelings.
Even if you're a "Dr"
That's the truth.
I agree "to argue not is gnorant". Down with the gnorants!
However to argue Catholic = Roman Catholic church is pure equivication. The word catholic just means universal. The first church founded was in Jerusalem and Christianity spread out from there.
If as some of us belive the RCC has expanded power beyond its original charter then a call to correct is warrented. The church prior to the reformation all the way back to Christ is my church too. I agree with the split in 1500's over the augsburg confession, response, apology.
My wife was Catholic in the Roman tradition. We went through Vatican 2 and compared it to the text of scripture. Listened to lectures pro and con. She wasn't RC before we were done. I didnt even have to start trent, or the ausberg.
@@malvokaquila6768 ,
Some people surely have many misunderstandings, misrepresentations and caricatures about Catholicism. Additionaly some one's points are simply some one's personal opinion. Not authoritative. Martin Luther ( first Protestant ) had a little knowledge of Catholicism: " It is quite possible that Martin Luther may have confused one theological opinion with the official teaching of the church and initiated his program of reform on the basis of this misunderstanding" Oxford professor Alister McGrath.
The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. A little knowledge can be more dangerous than none at all, it creates the illusion of knowledge.
@@Alfredo8059 many people have misunderstood and lied about the RCC.
Martin luther was a German professor of theology priest, author, composer, and Augustinian monk. To say that a PhD RCC monk doesn't understand the RCC Doctrine is frankly ridiculous. The RCC has corrected it's doctrine in the favor of the ausberg confession. This shows the legitimacy of the reformation. Had the RCC just confessed it's sins and corrected it's behavior then there wouldn't have been a reformation. As St Luthor goal was to keep everything in the RCC that was biblically sound.
@@malvokaquila6768 , Luther believed in justification "by faith alone", but Catholics believe in justification "by faith". Luther was not infallible, we cannot accept Luther's SOLA (private interpretation of ) Scriptura as the Sola Rule. Magisterial documents, including the canons of the Council of Trent and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, DO NOT use the phrase "justified by faith and works". Instead, Catholics distinguish between the initial moment of our justification and the process of justification that continues throughout our lives. Catholics accept Abraham faith justifies ( Abraham hoped against hope and glorified God. Abraham's faith was pushed by charity and hope) . We cannot accept Luther's faith alone ( before or apart charity) because faith before or apart charity is nothing ( 1 Cor. 13:2).
Please, compare Abraham's obedient faith, Zacchaeus' obedient faith and Luther's faith alone:
"Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, "Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount."
Jesus said to him, "Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham."
Zacchaeus and Abraham didn't hope for an imputed righteousness, they listened to God and they did not resist to the way God showed for them. Neither Abraham nor Zacchaeus believed that sin (disobedience, lack of love) would keep them united to God:
"Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly,... It is enough that by the riches of God’s glory we have come to know the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29). No sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day (cited in Hendrix, Martin Luther, 121-122).
" I consider myself convicted by the testimony of Holy Scripture..." Martin Luther's translation of the Bible was made shortly after he spoke these words. One wonders if he had them in mind while adding the word ALONE to Romans 3:28. What is to be made of sola scriptura or Luther's "captivity to the Word of God" if he adds his own theology to the scriptures? Individuals can be simply captive to their own minds. So confident was Luther in his views that he once claimed :" I for my part am certain that the words I speak are not mine, but Christ's. Then my mouth also must be his whose words it speaks... I ask that men make no reference to my name, and call themselves not Lutherans, but Christians. What is Luther? My doctrine, I am sure, is not mine ( Jn 7:16)" Martin Luther. Works 3:176 "In these matter of faith, to be sure , each Christian is for himself pope and church" Martin Luther "But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble." James 4:6. Luther did not like the book of James. Luther pretended the whole Church to believe Luther's beliefs alone , Luther's views alone, Luther's wisdom alone. That is not serious. God bless you
Jesus DID found the "Catholic Church"; that point is undeniable.
That church was the very first Christian Church founded in Jerusalem by the Apostles, just after Pentecost. And this church was "Catholic", in that it was the universal church of all true authentic Christians, started by Jesus and his Apostles in Jerusalem the Mother Church.
It was James, the bother of Jesus, that became the first lead elder over the first Christian Church that Jesus built. (note: not Peter). It is all described in the books of Acts.
The institutional Roman Catholic Church was founded a few hundred years later when the Roman Church broke out of the Patriarchies (the Major five equals - The Patriarchy of Jerusalem, The Patriarchy of Alexandria, The Patriarchy of Antioch, The Patriarchy of Rome, & The Patriarchy of Constantinople) by declaring themselves as the only primary authority of the Christian Church; an idea that the other Christian churches opposed and denied.
The Roman Church essentially is making a power play to claim to be the supreme authority over all the other Christian Churches/
The Roman Catholic Church declared a new doctrine (that they created) that all other Christian Churches must submit to the authority of the Pope in Rome. They attempted to justify this declaration by interpreting (rather misinterpreting) Matt. 16:18 as teaching that the church the Jesus will build would be base on a man - Peter, which was to become the first "Pope"
In this declaration, the Roman Church stepped out of the main stream of Christendom, splitting away from the norm of the authentic "Catholic" Christian Church, that Jesus and his Apostles first built in Jerusalem. DZ
Dr cooper, what advice would you give for someone who is considering to leave the Catholic Church?
RUN!
Why are you leaving? Just curious, the Catholic church has begun to attract me.
@@nicford1486 ua-cam.com/video/lTWFu6ByR2Q/v-deo.html
@@simuljustusetpeccator5547 ua-cam.com/video/lTWFu6ByR2Q/v-deo.html. Please get help
@@nicford1486 research who made the 2nd testament of the bible happen you’ll see it was Catholic
jesus would never start a church on a mere man. Jesus us the rock. after the encounter with Peter, moments later he calls him SATAN. if he did, he made the biggest mistake ever! the first church was called THE WAY@
These men called it the Catholic Church...
Ignatius in 103 A.D.
Martyr of Polycarp in 150 A.D.
Justin Martyr in 151 A.D.
The Muratori in 177 A.D
Irenaeus in 180 A.D.
Tertullian in 200 A.D.
Cyprian in 254 A.D.
Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.
Cyril of Jerusalem in 350 A.D.
Jerome in 375 A.D.
Ambrose in 379 A.D.
Constantinople I in 381 A.D.
Council of Rome in 382 A.D.
Council of Rome in 382 A.D.
Pope Damasus I cin 382 A.D.
Council of Hippo in 393 A.D.
Council of Carthage in 397 A.D.
Augustine in 397 A.D.
Council of Toledo in 400 A.D.
Pope Innocent I in 400 A.D.
it was catholic not Catholic....
@@angelbaby78 No, it was BOTH Catholic and catholic. Just as it still is today.
@@angelbaby78
LOL, its the same word, they didn't have capital letters when they wrote way back then in Latin and Greek.
Polycarp Bishop of Symerna and the Quartodecimans eastern orthodox church kept the Biblical 14th of Avib Nissan and Rome tried to excommunicate the eastern church's almost 700 years before the 1054 Schism, The Jerusalem Church has Primacy 1st See and Rome is the youngest See , both Church's have departed from orthodox Biblical The Way Acts 24:14 Ekklessia Kehilah Church
Not Roman
Its the same way Muslims argue that since Allah is thr creator, Jesus ans every other biblical figure is a muslim because muslim means on who submits to God.
By that definition, every christian is a muslim without knowing it
Jesus Christ founded the Roman Catholic Church.
Kepha is rock in Aramaic
Matthew 16:18-19, “And I tell you, you are Peter (Kepha) and upon this rock (Kepha) I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
Here Jesus is clearly giving establishing the Church upon Peter who is the rock (Kepha) and giving him specifically the keys of the kingdom of Heaven. Along with the keys he is giving authority to bind and loose on earth. Given that Peter is almost always mentioned first, mentioned more than any other Apostle combined and given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (no small ordeal) it is clear that Peter is the first Pope. Likewise if you go to any well respected encyclopedia like Britannica for example you will find the Popes on UNBROKEN succession from Saint Peter the Apostle and fisherman to modern day Pope Francis.
As Cardinal Newman a former Protestant said, “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”
Just one question. Where in your Bible does it say Peter was a Catholic?
@James Eadmer Dela Cruz Okay, so where does the Bible say Jesus founded the Catholic Church?
Where does it say roman Catholic? you need context with the word (Catholic/catholic)! There is no historical documents nor evidence 🧾 to prove peter was the first pope or Jesus founded the Roman Catholic church!!!
@@calebsmith3107 Where, then, did Catholics get the impression that Jesus founded the Catholic Church and that Peter was the first pope?
@@cbooth151 perhaps he could have been labeled as a pope by others and he was a church leader (don't even argue that) the word "Catholic" means universal so Jesus founded the church not the Roman Catholic church, look at the church of athioch, Ephesus,etc. No popes! Just leaders, peter is the leader of the church the bible never calls him a pope, Jesus is the head of the church catholcism teaches the pope is 😬
oh if Jesus Didn't established the Catholic Church that means All Christians are not the true Followers of Christ their Roots were Started by Another Man not Jesus
Jesus Established Another Church but Now All Protestants claim that he didn't Found the Catholic Church but they Themselves came from the Catholic Church so All Christians are false Followers of Christ
Where is the True Church Founded by Christ and were are his True Followers???
Jesus did not start the catholic church. What proof do you have. Don't say Matthew chapter 16. That says nothing about the catholic church.
I have proof that Jesus did not start the catholic church. What proof do you have?
Jesus did not start or establish any church. God's Word says that Jesus is the King of the Jews. The Jewish people are God's chosen people.
@blobmonster9494 Are you blaming Jesus?
The first churches were in peoples homes. The Bible says that they were Gentile churches, not catholic. You are the one who is mistaken, not Jesus.
@blobmonster9494 Read the Bible.
You twist scriptures, make false accusations, and spin the truth. God doesn't act like that. Satan does.
The catholic church is not my idol. Far from it. The catholic church is the highway to hell. Literally.
Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church! ❤️ That all okay!
Plenty of proof of the origin of Catholic. Just look at the letter of St Ignatius to Smyrnaeans. The doctrines are sound and very biblical. Confession, Peter as the leader (pope) of the church. If you don't want to believe it, that's respectable, but the proof is there
Look up an unbiased source. Try looking up pope in the encyclopedia. It will clearly show you that Peter is the first pope.
Which encyclopaedia do you mean and who were the writers ?
Looking up to Wikipedia and Encyclopedia explicitly they mention something like "According to the Roman Catholic".
The term pope means Father which has been used not only for the bishop of Rome, but other bishops.
Rome used to be an integral part of the Church, and is still so in some sense. The great tragedy is that Rome separated itself from the One church, and the cosequences of this idea of self-sufficiency can be seen in all the protestant churches
The Coptic Catholic Church is in full comunion with the Pope of Rome and pledged obedience to the Pope. So there you go.
The CCC is part of the CC, just as the RCC is. All xCC's together form the one CC.
Dr. Cooper, I believe your arguments are fundamentally incorrect and inconsistent. Luther was Catholic -Catholicism is the Gold Standard if for no other reason than "Protestant" is by definition a protest against Catholicism. Make your case, how was Luther true Christianity? I hear stories of 95 Thesis yet I never see a defense . If not Luther, then anyone who lays claim gets to step up to the plate and adopt your same arguments.
Hi @DrJORDANBCOOPER at 8:59 you discuss the incorrect assumption that people are dividing up churches that are in 'fellowship' with one another. So tell me please, when a person has a conflict/disagreement from one of these churches with a person from a fellowship church. To whom do you take the disagreement???
. (... BUT THE REAL NAME OF GOD OF THIS FESTIVAL OF GOD IS EASTER IN SPANISH, ALTHOUGH IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND MANY OTHERS FROM EUROPE IT CONFUSES AS "EASTER SUNDAY", IN HONOR OF A PAGAN GODDESS, OVERSING THE ORIGINAL NAME IS "PASSOVER", AND THIS HOLY DAY MAY BE THAT "FALLING" ANY DAY OF THE WEEK, BECAUSE THE HOLY CALENDAR GIVEN BY GOD IS BASED ON THE MOON COMBINED ACCORDING TO THE 4 SEASONS OF THE YEAR, BECAUSE THE MOON DOES NOT TURN EXACTLY 365.25 AROUND THE EARTH IN ONE YEAR). And what to say that the ancient birth of the sun god is taken as now the supposed birth of Jesus, because Herod the Great would never have carried out the census on dates of very cold, rain and even a lot of snow falls in Israel, revealed in many Scriptures. Long before. .. as in Ezra 10: 9 or Jeremiah 36:22, the opposite of what Luke writes that the shepherds were outside with their cattle (Luke 2: 8-12) ... that is; A GREAT SCAM PERPETRATED BY THE CURRENT REIGN OF THE ADVERSARY ... AND ALL THIS MUST BE BELIEVED BOTHLY BY THE CATHOLICS AND THEIR DAUGHTERS, WHICH ARE THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES ... SO THAT THEN AT THE END OF THESE TIMES THE INQUISITION WILL BE EVEN WORSE OF THOSE THAT EMERGED IN THE MEDIEVAL PAST, AND THOSE WHO TELL THE TRUTH WILL BE KILLED, AS REVEALED IN REVELATION 11 IN WHICH THEY WILL SACRIFY THE 2 WITNESSES IN THE SAME WAY, WASHING THE HANDS OF ALL PEOPLE, POSSESSED BY THE SPIRIT DEVIL ... (... AND SOMETHING APART; here I am in the photograph that shows the city where Simon the magician was who posed as Simon Peter to create this analogous golden calf to deceive everyone in the world, as he says Revelation: 12: 9 ...). AND IMPOSE OTHER USURPATING DOCTRINES TO PUT ON THEM A VEIL THAT COVERS ALL THE NATIONS, AND SPONSOR THE BABYLONIAN PAGAN FESTIVITIES SO THAT THEY DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE TRUE ORIGINAL HOLIDAYS GIVEN BY THE TRUE GOD, AND YOU CAN READ EVERYTHING ABOUT THESE PRIMED IN THIS THEME. LEVITICAL 23 "... AND LIKE IT, SMART PEOPLE CONTINUE TO MAKE THE SAME APPEARANCE" CUTE "CHRISTMAS TREE REFUTED IN JEREMIAH 10 ..., OR IN OTHER COUNTRIES TO PUT THE COQUET EASTER EGGS OF RESURRECTION, AND EVEN A SAFE VIEW WHAT IT SAYS IN ECCLESIASTES 9: 5-10, WHICH SAYS THAT ALL THE DEAD ARE ASLEEP AND KNOW NOTHING, AND THAT NO HUMAN BEING HAS ASCENDED TO HEAVENS, READ IN JOHN 13:33, or in other scriptures refers to this to this “very important detail; Acts 2: 34-37; “Because David did not ascend into heaven; but he himself says: The Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand… ”. WHEREBY; IT IS MANIFEST THAT THE CURRENT EMPIRE OF LIES, WARRIORS, HESITES, ETCETHERAL, HAS LITTLE TIME LEFT, AND IN ADDITION, THE ONE WHO IS ALSO THOUGHT THAT THERE ARE ALSO ORGANIC BEINGS LIKE ANCIENT PLANTS IN OTHER THE GIVER OF LIFE, AND THIS IS NOT THE FRUIT OF THE SIMPLE CHANCE OF PROBABILITIES, GOD WILL DELIVER ALL HIS DIVINE NATURE STEP BY STEP REPRESENTED IN HIS 7 HOLY FESTIVALS READ IN A PRELIMINARY FORM IN LEVITICAL 23, AND I WILL OF COURSE NOT DO YOU THIS SECRET OF THE GOSPELS, BECAUSE ONLY GOD OPENS YOUR MIND AND YOUR HUMAN SPIRIT WITH HIS HOLY WILL ... IT WILL CONTINUE IF YOU ONLY WANT IT, BECAUSE GOD DOES NOT FORCE ANYONE NOW. .
Jesus founded the Catholic Church.
The former Catholic rebels of the 16th century founded Protestantism.
Your use of “Roman” Catholic is an error because it only refers to the diocese of Rome, rather than the Universal Catholic Church which the ancient creeds call the “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.”
Jesus established the catholic (i.e. universal) Church but that isn't the same as saying that He established the Roman Catholic church. The Roman Catholic church is a particular denomination under the popes of Rome, hence the descriptor "Roman" Catholic church. However the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church properly refers to the invisible community of all those throughout the world who hold to the one true faith as taught by Christ and the Apostles.
The One True Church isn't a visible organisation under the control of the popes. To claim that is to read into Scripture the false notion that Christ made Peter the supreme leader on earth who then passed on his authority to the popes. This however was shown by Luther at the Reformation to be based on Scriptural misinterpretation and historical falsehoods. The popes of Rome occupy the office of the Papacy and the Papacy as Luther correctly stated is the Antichrist (2 Thessalonians 2:1-12). So those who claim that the Roman Catholic church (i.e. defined by adherence to the teachings of Roman Catholicism) is the One, Holy, Catholic Church are horribly deceived. The heretical teachings of Roman Catholicism on Justification show that the Roman Catholic church is an unholy sect which merely makes a pretence of being the One True Church.
Nothing you wrote is true or historically accurate but Protestants are fed with a terribly flawed version of church history that is full of distortions and lies.
@@lumenpraetorius4592 On the contrary what I've said is historically accurate. It's the Roman Catholic church which constructs a fake history of the beginnings of the Church. It lies when it says that Christ made Peter a pope and that the early bishops of Rome were popes with universal jurisdiction and control over the churches. The Papacy didn't come into existence until several centuries later. Also the teachings of the Roman Catholic church particularly on justification don't agree with what the Scriptures teach and therefore the Roman Catholic church can't be considered to be genuinely Catholic.
Because you have rejected the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church in favor of some Protestant denomination that teaches lies about Jesus Christ and his beloved Church, you cannot possibly know the truth.
You have willfully placed yourself outside of Christ and his Church, and in so doing you have risked your eternal salvation.
Come out of that Protestant error that is based on the traditions of men like Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Knox and many other heretics, and enter into the fullness of the truth of Christ in the Catholic Church.
@@lumenpraetorius4592 Rather than compose a fresh reply to you I'm just going to repeat something I posted in reply to someone else. He said "I pose this question rather. What church did Jesus found if it wasn't that which went to Rome and after much martyrdom, flourished as Catholic?":
The Church which Christ established isn't an organisation with an earthly CEO who runs things from a central location in Rome but is a community of regenerated people who have true faith in their hearts and look to Christ alone as their leader. The popes have usurped the position of Christ by saying that they have been appointed by Him to lead the Church and that they're incapable of leading it into apostasy because they're divinely mandated to carry out this leadership role. They try to substantiate this by reference to various passages in the Bible, in particular Matthew 16 which they misinterpret to falsely teach that Christ built His Church on Peter, and argue that he in turn passed his authority on to them. This is just a devilish deception by which the popes have introduced false teaching in opposition to the true Gospel, so in no way can the Roman Catholic church be considered to be the true Catholic Church which Christ established.
Christ founded a spiritual community of true believers not a sect of false teachers and their deceived followers. The one true Church isn't a visible organisation or church body but is a community of everyone in the entire world who possess true faith. Therefore the true Church is invisible because no one knows for sure who actually possesses true faith in their hearts or where they live over the whole earth.
So with regards to those who were martyred in the early centuries in Rome, we can be reasonably sure, although not absolutely sure, that they were indeed true Christians and therefore members of Christ's Church which was termed "Catholic". As for the Papacy that didn't come into being until a few centuries later (the early bishops of Rome weren't popes in the modern sense) so the local church in Rome was still authentically Catholic at that time. I mean it was Catholic in a derivative sense from the One True invisible Church. One can call the local church in Rome "Catholic" at that time because it didn't subvert the truth with false teaching.
So no, Christ didn't found the Roman Catholic church if by that is meant the organisation which is run from the Vatican under the control of the popes. Christ founded a spiritual community of people with true faith not an organisation run by the Antichrist.
Jesus didn’t found the “Roman Catholic Church” because there is no such thing as the “Roman Catholic Church.” Jesus founded the universal church which is the Catholic Church. When this guy mentions the “Roman Catholic Church” is he referring to the Roman rite of which there are 26 rites which make up the Catholic Church? I don’t think this guy has a clue and he not only doesn’t know what he’s talking about but he’s not even aware that he’s not even aware.
Faith Alone and Bible Alone and saying that you can’t pray to the Saints is heretical! What early Church Fathers EVER taught these heretical things!?
Why pray to saints if we have all access to th father through Jesus. Christ is our intercessor aswell as the holy spirit. just because you pray to the saint doesn't mean it will get more out of God. God will do whatever he wants/wills, just read John 14:6 we have the access to the father.
Also we are saved by our faith did you not ever read ephisians 2:8-9 also read what Paul said about Abraham, and his faith.James 2:24 proves my point you can't refute that, true faith produces good works, so any man with true faith will have good works, world isn't the root but the fruit In better words to put it.
I believe 100% what the Bible says…I just don’t believe in your fallible interpretation…Ephesians 2:8-9 is talking about circumcision (works of the law) the law of the Jews was circumcision and Paul said that you do not have to be circumcised…Paul doesn’t mean “good works” in general…The Bible cannot contradict itself…check out Mathew 25: 34-46
@@justindutcher1300 Ephesians 2:1-10 clearly explains the relationship between our lack of obedience, the grace of God, and our salvation. Those who are saved by Christ do not deserve this salvation. It is only by mercy, and by grace, that God chooses to forgive. In this section, Paul will repeat the claim that human effort has no impact on salvation whatsoever. No Christian can brag about their ''goodness,'' since we are saved entirely by the grace of God, not by our own good deeds.He litterally points to our "GOOD DEEDS" in a general sense;Paul repeatedly emphasizes that salvation is accomplished on the basis of grace, through faith. Good works, human effort, and our best intentions will never be enough to earn salvation. Every person is marked with sin, both deliberate and accidental, and for this reason we deserve to be separated from God. Only through His mercy and grace can we be saved, leaving no room for bragging. This also means that all who are saved, Jew and Gentile alike, are part of the same spiritual family. There is no cause for hostility between believers; we are all unworthy, and all saved by the same kindness of God.Jew or gentile salvation is a free gift!!!
Again brother righteousness comes from the true faith of a believer and ATHIEST can be righteous hence: that's why we need faith to produce good works
The hierarchy in heaven is perfectly fixed, it is not melleablable as we think, want or perceive of it on earth, the church must reflect this reality structurally or " hierarchically" in every way, there must be only one head, not many heads, only one perfect will in Jesus Christ, not many opposite "perfect wills" all coming from the Holy Spirit, in heaven every angel, choir has its perfect place and purpose, not by their own will, but only according to Father's will for the glory of Jesus Christ
Just skimming thru some of your other videos, it's interesting, because you have mentioned the "Roman" Catholic Church in at least two other of your videos (generally in a negative light). I don't know what's going on inside of you, only God does and how the Holy Spirit works is beyond anyone, but I have just noticed that you keep talking about the Catholic Church, why? Unless you seek to be persuaded to its Truth?
If the Catholic Church is wrong in it's claim to be the Church Christ founded and it is the Lutheran version to be the most accurate of them all that claim it, then what does it matter?
From my perspective, being a convert to the Catholic Church from Evangelical Protestantism,
I think a lot of us try to convince ourselves away from the truth because it doesn't fit in with our own understanding, I'm guilty of that sometimes but the truth sets us free.
Read the Early Church Fathers, let their witness to historical Christianity convince you. Because as Cardinal John Henry Newman once said, "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."
Btw, what's your thoughts on the Joint Declaration of Faith between the Catholic Church and the Lutheran which was signed in, I believe, 1997?
Pax Christi
I will have to do a little more research, but I believe the joint declaration was signed by one of the more liberal Lutheran factions and not the large international conservative fellowship
@@isaiahpoe,
So there's a Schism within Lutheranism then.
Because if one part of the body can make a significant declaration without the rest then isn't that action one of schism?
Where is the Authority?
Where's the council's in Lutheranism that's binding upon all believers?
@@ilovetheautumncolors4060 So just like how the Roman Catholics are in schism from the East? How you are anathemized from Orthodoxy?
@@isaiahpoe ,
I don't think that's the same thing because for us Catholic and Orthodox Christians we have the Ecumenical Councils before 1054 to fall back on and those are binding for the both of our communions; but I don't think that the Lutherans even have Councils to begin with.
I apologize but I didn't mean to offend you or anybody.
I love the Autumn Colors - Very good observation. The Holy Spirit always leads to the truth.
Our Lord Jesus told His followers to go and teach all nations. Look at your map, and you will see that Rome is the centre of the known world. It made sense for some of the first missionaries to head for Rome with the intention of exploiting the world’s best communications at the time. Today Rome is still the headquarters of the worldwide Christian Church.
It is the Eucharist that holds the Catholic Church together. Why do you hold that it is the papacy?
Further, only Luther and other early reformers were excommunicated. All modern day Christians are considered as part of The Church.
I would be interested in talking with you on these points! God bless.
The Easter Orthodox have the same view on the Eucharist. What broke the East from the West was the claim that the bishop of Rome has supremacy over the other bishops. As a Roman Catholic you should know that.
Pope Leo x said these words what profit have not this fable of Christ brought us _______ Jesus never existed as a human on earth at all but was a mythical fictional character in a spiritual allegory _____ Jesus was the personification of the Sun god ___ no sun no life on earth it’s all about the sun ____ ancient history people worship the sun god ( Ra, Helios,Apollo,) etc ____the original Holy trinity is ( Ausar, Aset , Heru) aka Osiris,Isis,Horus......
You claim that all churches, including Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Lutheran, etc branched out of the early church. Come on, Lutheran branched out of the Roman Catholic church and henceforth, some 10000+ branched out of it.
Indeed, Norma. Those who have branched often like to make believe we all have branched from the beginning. Not so.
@YellowBlackbird12 Lutheranism is the truth , you write? What have you been smoking, my friend? The gospel of Luther is nowhere to be found prior to the life of Luther.
Absolutely unbelievable. People just believe whatever is told to them by whoever they choose. People select their own teacher and insist that he got it right... unbelievable.
@YellowBlackbird12 I ask you again, my friend: what have you been smoking? The gospel of Luther is so far from the Gospel that has been preached by the Church through the centuries. In so many aspects we see direct contradictions: in all possible objectivity are the two so far apart and often opposite. What you write is unbelievable.
@YellowBlackbird12 Unbelievable. Let me pose you this question, my friend: do you admit to the possibility that your understanding of Scripture is FALSE? Yes or no?
@YellowBlackbird12 My question to you: do you admit to the possibility that your understanding of Scripture is FALSE? Your response: No.
My friend, you declare yourself infallible. You just made yourself God. Nobody can help you still: not me and not God either. For you CANNOT be wrong.
This - I believe - is antichrist. There is nothing I can still do for you. You declare yourself infallible. Game over. Goodbye, my friend.
Yes. Next stupid question from heretics who invented their own religions in the C16th.
The Catholic Church was built by Jesus Christ on the Apostle Peter for the salvation of souls, and because of its Divine origin, Divine because Jesus Christ is the Second Divine Person of the Holy Trinity, because of its Divine origin, it is superior to every other religious system in existence.
Which catholic church? Jesus and Paul founded the Eastern Orthodox Church. Jesus, Stephen, the eunuch, and Mark founded the Oriental Orthodox Church. Thaddeus, Bartholomew and Thomas founded the Church of the East. Each one claims to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
@@Mygoalwogel THE Catholic Church.
You know.. The one founded by Christ on saint Peter in 33 ad.
Nobody is fooled by your feigned ignorance.
@@Kitiwake *An indulgence sold by authority of the Pope by Johann Tetzel in 1517.*
The text reads:_"𝑩𝒚 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒂𝒖𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒕𝒔, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒊𝒏 𝒎𝒆𝒓𝒄𝒚 𝒕𝒐𝒘𝒂𝒓𝒅𝒔 𝒚𝒐𝒖, *𝑰 𝒂𝒃𝒔𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒇𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒅𝒆𝒆𝒅𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒓𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒕 𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒑𝒖𝒏𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒔 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒕𝒆𝒏 𝒅𝒂𝒚𝒔."*_
𝕴𝖓 𝖁𝖔𝖑𝖑𝖒𝖆𝖈𝖍𝖙 𝖆𝖑𝖑𝖊𝖗 𝕳𝖊𝖎𝖑𝖎𝖌𝖊𝖓 𝖚𝖓𝖉 𝖎𝖓 𝕰𝖗𝖇𝖆𝖗𝖒𝖚𝖓𝖌 𝖌𝖊𝖌𝖊𝖓 𝖉𝖎𝖈𝖍, *𝖆𝖇𝖘𝖔𝖑𝖛𝖎𝖊𝖗𝖊* 𝖎𝖈𝖍 𝖉𝖎𝖈𝖍 𝖛𝖔𝖓 𝖆𝖑𝖑𝖊𝖓 𝕾ü𝖓𝖉𝖊𝖓 𝖚𝖓𝖉 𝕸𝖎𝖘𝖘𝖊𝖙𝖍𝖆𝖙𝖊𝖓 𝖚𝖓𝖉 𝖊𝖗𝖑𝖆𝖘𝖘𝖊 𝖉𝖎𝖗 𝖆𝖑𝖑𝖊 𝕾𝖙𝖗𝖆𝖋𝖊𝖓 𝖆𝖚𝖋 𝖟𝖊𝖍𝖓 𝕿𝖆𝖌𝖊.
academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Indulgences
*Pope Benedict IX and simony:*
“He was a son of Alberic III, leader of the Tusculani, and he *simoniacally* succeeded his uncles, Benedict VIII and John XIX.” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. II, page 274)
“Then on May 1 Benedict *sold his papal office* to his baptismal sponsor, the reforming archpriest John Gratian, Pope Gregory VI.” ( *New Catholic Encyclopedia,* vol. II, page 275)
Quoted from: answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2009/12/apostolic-succession.html?m=1
Jesus, Paul, and Andrew founded the Eastern Orthodox Church. They say Peter's throne is Antioch, where he was Bishop. Jesus, Stephen, the eunuch, and Mark founded the Oriental Orthodox Church. They say Peter's throne is Alexandria, where his successor, Mark, was Bishop. Thaddeus, Bartholomew and Thomas founded the Church of the East. Each one claims to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. These claims are as legitimate as yours.
To say that the Catholic religion is superior is to give legitimacy to other religions. Catholicism is not just the best brand of toothpaste or breakfast cereal. Catholicism is the only game in town. Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.
Jesus and Peter are both Jews. They are not catholics. They did not start the catholic church.
Jesus was a Jewish street preacher..he did not start another religion, however followers such as Paul (lock him up) did slowly push the followers away from their Jewish background and effectively started a new organization by admitting non jews which swelled the numbers greatly...amen
Are you yet another who doesn't know the difference between Jew and Israelite?
Mathew 16:18
18And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
St. Peter (32-67)
St. Linus (67-76)
St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
St. Clement I (88-97)
St. Evaristus (97-105)
St. Alexander I (105-115)
St. Sixtus I (115-125) Also called Xystus I
St. Telesphorus (125-136)
St. Hyginus (136-140)
St. Pius I (140-155)
St. Anicetus (155-166)
St. Soter (166-175)
St. Eleutherius (175-189)
St. Victor I (189-199)
St. Zephyrinus (199-217)
St. Callistus I (217-22) Callistus and the following three popes were opposed by St. Hippolytus, antipope (217-236)
St. Urban I (222-30)
St. Pontain (230-35)
St. Anterus (235-36)
St. Fabian (236-50)
St. Cornelius (251-53) Opposed by Novatian, antipope (251)
St. Lucius I (253-54)
St. Stephen I (254-257)
St. Sixtus II (257-258)
St. Dionysius (260-268)
St. Felix I (269-274)
St. Eutychian (275-283)
St. Caius (283-296) Also called Gaius
St. Marcellinus (296-304)
St. Marcellus I (308-309)
St. Eusebius (309 or 310)
St. Miltiades (311-14)
St. Sylvester I (314-35)
St. Marcus (336)
St. Julius I (337-52)
Liberius (352-66) Opposed by Felix II, antipope (355-365)
St. Damasus I (366-84) Opposed by Ursicinus, antipope (366-367)
St. Siricius (384-99)
St. Anastasius I (399-401)
St. Innocent I (401-17)
St. Zosimus (417-18)
St. Boniface I (418-22) Opposed by Eulalius, antipope (418-419)
St. Celestine I (422-32)
St. Sixtus III (432-40)
St. Leo I (the Great) (440-61)
St. Hilarius (461-68)
St. Simplicius (468-83)
St. Felix III (II) (483-92)
St. Gelasius I (492-96)
Anastasius II (496-98)
St. Symmachus (498-514) Opposed by Laurentius, antipope (498-501)
St. Hormisdas (514-23)
St. John I (523-26)
St. Felix IV (III) (526-30)
Boniface II (530-32) Opposed by Dioscorus, antipope (530)
John II (533-35)
St. Agapetus I (535-36) Also called Agapitus I
St. Silverius (536-37)
Vigilius (537-55)
Pelagius I (556-61)
John III (561-74)
Benedict I (575-79)
Pelagius II (579-90)
St. Gregory I (the Great) (590-604)
Sabinian (604-606)
Boniface III (607)
St. Boniface IV (608-15)
St. Deusdedit (Adeodatus I) (615-18)
Boniface V (619-25)
Honorius I (625-38)
Severinus (640)
John IV (640-42)
Theodore I (642-49)
St. Martin I (649-55)
St. Eugene I (655-57)
St. Vitalian (657-72)
Adeodatus (II) (672-76)
Donus (676-78)
St. Agatho (678-81)
St. Leo II (682-83)
St. Benedict II (684-85)
John V (685-86)
Conon (686-87)
St. Sergius I (687-701) Opposed by Theodore and Paschal, antipopes (687)
John VI (701-05)
John VII (705-07)
Sisinnius (708)
Constantine (708-15)
St. Gregory II (715-31)
St. Gregory III (731-41)
St. Zachary (741-52) Stephen II followed Zachary, but because he died before being consecrated, modern lists omit him
Stephen II (III) (752-57)
St. Paul I (757-67)
Stephen III (IV) (767-72) Opposed by Constantine II (767) and Philip (768), antipopes (767)
Adrian I (772-95)
St. Leo III (795-816)
Stephen IV (V) (816-17)
St. Paschal I (817-24)
Eugene II (824-27)
Valentine (827)
Gregory IV (827-44)
Sergius II (844-47) Opposed by John, antipope
St. Leo IV (847-55)
Benedict III (855-58) Opposed by Anastasius, antipope (855)
St. Nicholas I (the Great) (858-67)
Adrian II (867-72)
John VIII (872-82)
Marinus I (882-84)
St. Adrian III (884-85)
Stephen V (VI) (885-91)
Formosus (891-96)
Boniface VI (896)
Stephen VI (VII) (896-97)
Romanus (897)
Theodore II (897)
John IX (898-900)
Benedict IV (900-03)
Leo V (903) Opposed by Christopher, antipope (903-904)
Sergius III (904-11)
Anastasius III (911-13)
Lando (913-14)
John X (914-28)
Leo VI (928)
Stephen VIII (929-31)
John XI (931-35)
Leo VII (936-39)
Stephen IX (939-42)
Marinus II (942-46)
Agapetus II (946-55)
John XII (955-63)
Leo VIII (963-64)
Benedict V (964)
John XIII (965-72)
Benedict VI (973-74)
Benedict VII (974-83) Benedict and John XIV were opposed by Boniface VII, antipope (974; 984-985)
John XIV (983-84)
John XV (985-96)
Gregory V (996-99) Opposed by John XVI, antipope (997-998)
Sylvester II (999-1003)
John XVII (1003)
John XVIII (1003-09)
Sergius IV (1009-12)
Benedict VIII (1012-24) Opposed by Gregory, antipope (1012)
John XIX (1024-32)
Benedict IX (1032-45) He appears on this list three separate times, because he was twice deposed and restored
Sylvester III (1045) Considered by some to be an antipope
Benedict IX (1045)
Gregory VI (1045-46)
Clement II (1046-47)
Benedict IX (1047-48)
Damasus II (1048)
St. Leo IX (1049-54)
Victor II (1055-57)
Stephen X (1057-58)
Nicholas II (1058-61) Opposed by Benedict X, antipope (1058)
Alexander II (1061-73) Opposed by Honorius II, antipope (1061-1072)
St. Gregory VII (1073-85) Gregory and the following three popes were opposed by Guibert ("Clement III"), antipope (1080-1100)
Blessed Victor III (1086-87)
Blessed Urban II (1088-99)
Paschal II (1099-1118) Opposed by Theodoric (1100), Aleric (1102) and Maginulf ("Sylvester IV", 1105-1111), antipopes (1100)
Gelasius II (1118-19) Opposed by Burdin ("Gregory VIII"), antipope (1118)
Callistus II (1119-24)
Honorius II (1124-30) Opposed by Celestine II, antipope (1124)
Innocent II (1130-43) Opposed by Anacletus II (1130-1138) and Gregory Conti ("Victor IV") (1138), antipopes (1138)
Celestine II (1143-44)
Lucius II (1144-45)
Blessed Eugene III (1145-53)
Anastasius IV (1153-54)
Adrian IV (1154-59)
Alexander III (1159-81) Opposed by Octavius ("Victor IV") (1159-1164), Pascal III (1165-1168), Callistus III (1168-1177) and Innocent III (1178-1180), antipopes
Lucius III (1181-85)
Urban III (1185-87)
Gregory VIII (1187)
Clement III (1187-91)
Celestine III (1191-98)
Innocent III (1198-1216)
Honorius III (1216-27)
Gregory IX (1227-41)
Celestine IV (1241)
Innocent IV (1243-54)
Alexander IV (1254-61)
Urban IV (1261-64)
Clement IV (1265-68)
Blessed Gregory X (1271-76)
Blessed Innocent V (1276)
Adrian V (1276)
John XXI (1276-77)
Nicholas III (1277-80)
Martin IV (1281-85)
Honorius IV (1285-87)
Nicholas IV (1288-92)
St. Celestine V (1294)
Boniface VIII (1294-1303)
Blessed Benedict XI (1303-04)
Clement V (1305-14)
John XXII (1316-34) Opposed by Nicholas V, antipope (1328-1330)
Benedict XII (1334-42)
Clement VI (1342-52)
Innocent VI (1352-62)
Blessed Urban V (1362-70)
Gregory XI (1370-78)
Urban VI (1378-89) Opposed by Robert of Geneva ("Clement VII"), antipope (1378-1394)
Boniface IX (1389-1404) Opposed by Robert of Geneva ("Clement VII") (1378-1394), Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), antipopes
Innocent VII (1404-06) Opposed by Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), antipopes
Gregory XII (1406-15) Opposed by Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417), Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), and Pietro Philarghi ("Alexander V") (1409-1410), antipopes
Martin V (1417-31)
Eugene IV (1431-47) Opposed by Amadeus of Savoy ("Felix V"), antipope (1439-1449)
Nicholas V (1447-55)
Callistus III (1455-58)
Pius II (1458-64)
Paul II (1464-71)
Sixtus IV (1471-84)
Innocent VIII (1484-92)
Alexander VI (1492-1503)
Pius III (1503)
Julius II (1503-13)
Leo X (1513-21)
Adrian VI (1522-23)
Clement VII (1523-34)
Paul III (1534-49)
Julius III (1550-55)
Marcellus II (1555)
Paul IV (1555-59)
Pius IV (1559-65)
St. Pius V (1566-72)
Gregory XIII (1572-85)
Sixtus V (1585-90)
Urban VII (1590)
Gregory XIV (1590-91)
Innocent IX (1591)
Clement VIII (1592-1605)
Leo XI (1605)
Paul V (1605-21)
Gregory XV (1621-23)
Urban VIII (1623-44)
Innocent X (1644-55)
Alexander VII (1655-67)
Clement IX (1667-69)
Clement X (1670-76)
Blessed Innocent XI (1676-89)
Alexander VIII (1689-91)
Innocent XII (1691-1700)
Clement XI (1700-21)
Innocent XIII (1721-24)
Benedict XIII (1724-30)
Clement XII (1730-40)
Benedict XIV (1740-58)
Clement XIII (1758-69)
Clement XIV (1769-74)
Pius VI (1775-99)
Pius VII (1800-23)
Leo XII (1823-29)
Pius VIII (1829-30)
Gregory XVI (1831-46)
Blessed Pius IX (1846-78)
Leo XIII (1878-1903)
St. Pius X (1903-14)
Benedict XV (1914-22) Biographies of Benedict XV and his successors will be added at a later date
Pius XI (1922-39)
Pius XII (1939-58)
St. John XXIII (1958-63)
Paul VI (1963-78)
John Paul I (1978)
St. John Paul II (1978-2005)
Benedict XVI (2005-2013)
Francis (2013-)
Amen brother! Right on!
The gates of hell shall not prevail against it
When you overcompensate, you are lying. You gave yourself away.
Matthew chapter 16 says nothing about the catholic church. How presumptuous. How erroneous. I believe what the Bible says. Why do you hate and lie about what the Bible says?
You didn't watch the video...
What about the churches that Paul founded at Corinth etc? Are they null and void bcz he wasn't given the keys?
These devils have been at this for 2000 years. Make sure you're right with God because it's only going to get worse from here on.
A careful and thoughtful answer!Love your videos, true blessings!
@@jeffreyalilin7314 Dr. Cooper is a theologian.
The early church started in acts chapter 2 then became the church of god but definitely not the Catholic church scripture proves it...
The Catholic church is revelation chapter 17
Jesus established the One, Holy , Catholic and Apostolic Church.
See? Easy answer!
Simply stating that Jesus established the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church doesn’t answer the question of whether the Roman Catholic church is the Church which Christ established. It obviously answers it in your mind, but that’s because you’ve plainly succumbed to the indoctrination of the Roman Catholic church, but it doesn’t answer it for anyone who isn’t a Roman Catholic. I reject Roman Catholicism and yet I also believe that Jesus established the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, but of course I don’t identify this with the Roman Catholic church. As I said in my reply to you below on Augustine: “The one true Catholic and Apostolic Church isn't the Roman Catholic church with the pope at its head but is the invisible community of all those throughout the world who share the one true faith as taught by the Apostles. And the one true faith is summarized not only by the ancient creeds but also by the teaching of justification by grace alone through faith alone”.
Not in the Bible
It’s in the name: LUTHERan
All Christians should research John Henry Newman and his writings.
❤️
"To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."
--St. John Henry Newman
False. Jesus and Paul founded the Eastern Orthodox Church. Jesus, Stephen, the eunuch, and Mark founded the Oriental Orthodox Church. Thaddeus, Bartholomew and Thomas founded the Church of the East. Each one claims to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. These claims are as legit as yours.
@Asaph Vapor Really, Asaph? When I read John 6:48-61 I see that the Holy Eucharist really is Jesus's Body and Blood. When I read Luke 1:48 I see that generations should call Mary blessed. When I read 1 Corinthians 3:13-15, 2 Maccabees 12:43-46, Matthew 5:25-26, and Luke 12:58-59 I see that there really is a Purgatory. When I read Matthew 25:31-46 and James 2:24-26 I see that good works are necessary for salvation. When I read John 20:22-23 I see that Jesus gave the apostles, the first priests of the Catholic Church, the supernatural power to forgive sins. When I read Matthew 19:14 I see that babies should be baptized. When I read Matthew 13:3-23 I see that the state of grace can be lost.
@Asaph Vapor 95% of Catholic doctrine not in the Bible? Almost all of our doctrines are in the Bible except the ones about Mary, and that is part of Tradition----see 2 Thessalonians 2:15. Actually Protestants and Catholics agree on about 75% of things, I would say. We both believe Jesus is God Incarnate. We both believe that He was born of a virgin, suffered under Pontius Pilate, crucified for our sins, died, buried, and that He rose the third day. We both believe in the Trinity (most Protestants). We both believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, although we interpret a few things differently. (Who has the authority to interpret scripture? According to 2 Peter 1:20 not private individuals, so therefore it must be the Church that is to do the interpeting.)
Mary underwent the traditional Jewish purification ritual not because she was a sinner but because it was expected of her and had she refused she would have been in violation of the Mosaic law.
The Catholic Church never said Peter was celibate. Priestly celibacy is a disciplinary rule, not a doctrine. The pope could change this rule at any time. Priests in eastern Europe and the Middle East ARE allowed to be married.
The "brothers and sisters of the Lord" were Jesus's cousins, not His literal brothers and sisters. The Aramaic word for "brother" and "cousin" are the same.
By confessing our sins to a priest we are confessing our sins to God, because the priest is the representative of God. See John 20:22-23 and James 5:16.
The prohibition against drinking blood found in Leviticus is part of the Levitical law. Jesus abrogated the entire Levitical law at Luke 16:16. The prohibition against drinking blood in Acts refers to the blood of strangled animals. Jesus was not a strangled animal.
The Bible does say we should not contact the dead. That refers to seances. It does not refer to praying to the saints. Jesus Himself, at His transfiguration, prayed to Elijah and Moses. The rich man, in the Lazarus/rich man parable, prayed to Abraham.
The Bible does not say anything about holy water one way or the other. So we don't violate the Bible if we use it and we don't violate the Bible if we don't.
Yes, Jesus did away with the Old Testament priesthood. Notice that Jews no longer have priests (a priest is someone who offers up a ritual sacrifice). But Jesus established the priesthood of the New Covenant. See 1 Peter 2:9. In the KJV New Testament the office of elder is often mentioned; these are priests. The much better translated Douay-Rheims version, which came out before the KJV, does not use the word "elder". It calls these people priests throughout. The English word "priest" comes from the Greek word "presbyteros", meaning elder or older wise man. The Presyterians get their name from this word. In official Catholic pronouncements priests are often called presbyters.
Doing penance is part of repentance. It is how we make up for the damage our sins have caused. According to Colossians 1:24 we must make up in our own bodies that which is lacking in the sufferings of Christ ("Jesus did it all on the cross" is false doctrine).
Christians, Jews, and Moslems do worship the One True God but our concepts of God are different. True, Moslems and Jews do not believe God is a Trinity but the Jews of the Old Testament did not know that God is a Trinity, and we can hardly say that they were not worshipping God. This does not mean that Jews and Moslems are saved------Jews, Moslems, Protestants and all others must convert to Catholicism to be saved (those who do not know better are excepted from this).
During my own Protestant days I found plenty of contradictions in the Bible but I have never found any contradictions in Catholic teaching.
@Asaph Vapor Thank God for Catholic Tradition. Otherwise we wouldn't have a clue as to what various Bible passages meant. We would be like Protestants, split up into thousands of denominations, each one teaching something different than the one down the street. In fact without Catholic Tradition we wouldn't have a Bible at all.
If any one got out the Catholic Church , you come from us Catholics , the Bible call you wolf Antichrist fake prophet
Acts 20
28Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 29For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
Matthew 7
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
1 John2:18-19
18Little children, it is the last hour: and as ye heard that antichrist cometh, even now have there arisen many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour. 19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest how that they all are not of us
Catholic forever the best
Agreed sir.. Very much correct..
So wise! That was sarcastic. Go and investigate the world.
If this guy wants to have a dialogue and discussion the first he can do is to start calling the church by its real name. The church is called the “Catholic Church” not the “Roman Catholic Church.” That clearly comes across as a Protestant dig.
Yes the Catholic Church came from Jesus
No, THE Church came from Jesus, the Roman church is only a part of that Church
Hahahahah
Yes.
“Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect” (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).
The Church of Christ is the Catholic Church. Roman Catholic is just the main rite of the Catholic Church. Other rites, as the Maronite, is as much Catholic. Indeed Martin Luther left the Church and started something new which was not a Church in a true sense like the Catholic and Orthodox
The easy short answer is NOPE.
The easy and true short answer is YES.
Jesus is the King of the Jews. The Jewish people are God's Chosen People. Jesus starting the cathiolic church is not in four Gospel Accounts of the life of Jesus.
That is because it never happened. Do you trust God or man?
You should do one for Eastern Orthodoxy
good point, and both of them hate each other!!!!
Matt 10:2 These are the names of the apostles, first Simon who is called Peter....
I pose this question rather. What church did Jesus found if it wasn't that which went to Rome and after much martyrdom, flourished as Catholic.
The Church which Christ established isn't an organisation with an earthly CEO who runs things from a central location in Rome but is a community of regenerated people who have true faith in their hearts and look to Christ alone as their leader. The popes have usurped the position of Christ by saying that they have been appointed by Him to lead the Church and that they're incapable of leading it into apostasy because they're divinely mandated to carry out this leadership role. They try to substantiate this by reference to various passages in the Bible, in particular Matthew 16 which they misinterpret to falsely teach that Christ built His Church on Peter, and argue that he in turn passed his authority on to them. This is just a devilish deception by which the popes have introduced false teaching in opposition to the true Gospel, so in no way can the Roman Catholic church be considered to be the true Catholic Church which Christ established.
Christ founded a spiritual community of true believers not a sect of false teachers and their deceived followers. The one true Church isn't a visible organisation or church body but is a community of everyone in the entire world who possess true faith. Therefore the true Church is invisible because no one knows for sure who actually possesses true faith in their hearts or where they live over the whole earth.
So with regards to those who were martyred in the early centuries in Rome, we can be reasonably sure, although not absolutely sure, that they were indeed true Christians and therefore members of Christ's Church which was termed "Catholic". As for the Papacy that didn't come into being until a few centuries later (the early bishops of Rome weren't popes in the modern sense) so the local church in Rome was still authentically Catholic at that time. I mean it was Catholic in a derivative sense from the One True invisible Church. One can call the local church in Rome "Catholic" at that time because it didn't subvert the truth with false teaching.
So no, Christ didn't found the Roman Catholic church if by that is meant the organisation which is run from the Vatican under the control of the popes. Christ founded a spiritual community of people with true faith not an organisation run by the Antichrist.
@@Edward-ng8oo in fact it is.. He's first among equals.
Please look up the name of the Catholic Church and you will see that it is called the "Catholic Church".
@@Kitiwake
In the early church the bishops of Rome were first among equals, but since the rise of the Papacy, when the bishops of Rome have claimed to be universal bishops over the whole church, that has ceased to be true.
So according to your logic because the Roman Catholic church is called the "Catholic Church" that's all one needs in the way of proof that Christ established the RCc? Where is the logic in that? Just because the RCc identifies itself as the "Catholic Church" and the RCc is commonly referred to as this, doesn't make it true. (in the sense that it's the one true universal Church.)
@@Kitiwake
Also in the eyes of many of those who aren't members of the RCc, when they refer to the RCc as the "Catholic Church" they're not meaning that the RCc is the church established by Christ, they're just using the term to refer to an organisation in the same way that one refers to say the Anglican Church. The term "Catholic Church" only confers the meaning of "the one true Church established by Christ" to those who are members of the RCc. To those of us who are heirs of the Protestant Reformation like myself, even if I use the term "Catholic Church" with a capital "C" for church, I mean the false papist church run from the Vatican.
@@Edward-ng8oo "the Church of Rome presides in love over all other churches". - St. Ignatius of Antioch.
Why do you object to the primacy of Peter? Christ has done this, he wills this.
Well neither is true. Christ founded the church of Christ. The church was established 50 days after Christ reserection in 33 AD. Catholic church did not exist till the 6th century. Calvinism and Lutheranism did not take place till the 16th century and was the start of the protestant movement.
The Roman Rite (RCC) is the Western rite of the Catholic Church; the Byzantine rite is the Eastern rite of the Catholic Church. Together both rites comprise the Catholic Church which Jesus established.
False. Jesus, Stephen, the eunuch, and Mark founded the Oriental Orthodox Church. Thaddeus, Bartholomew and Thomas founded the Church of the East. Each one claims to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. These claims are as legit as Rome's and Istanbul's.
The term RCC doesn't just refer to the Roman rite, it also refers to the whole umbrella of churches under the headship of Rome, including the Eastern rite. Shorting the RCC to the "Catholic Church" is misleading because it implies that Rome is indeed the universal, or catholic, church of Christ, which the other traditions obviously disagree with. It's similar to shortening the EOC "The Orthodox Church." That's misleading because it implies the other churches are unorthodox, which is incorrect.
@@BenjaminAnderson21 there is the Roman Catholic Church and the Byzantine Catholic Church. They are both the same Catholic Church expressed through differing rites and customs all in unity with the See of Peter. I think I understand what you’re trying to say but not fully. Are you saying that both the Byzantine and the Roman Church are the RCC?
Apostolic succession is an historic fact. I think those who were actually there like Ignatius ought to know.