Francis Chan, James White, and Controversy over the Eucharist
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- Last week Protestant pastor Francis Chan made headlines when he expressed amazement over the historic teaching of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. This prompted Reformed apologist James White to weigh in on the controversy and Trent replies to White's statements about the Eucharist.
I'm a Protestant and i just wanted to say I truly appreciate the tone of the disagreement here. It's charitable. No ad hominem attacks, etc. There is strong disagreement, but no ugliness. This is good.
Protestantism is false. Please come back to the church Jesus founded. 50,000+ denominations thanks to Protestantism and their solo scriptura nonsense. God bless you.
Brothers and sisters, please pray for Francis Chan, that He be protected by God from outside pressure in his decisions, may they be to His Father's glory. Of course, after praying for ourselves and those closest to us, for our own souls. God be with you.
❤️❤️❤️❤️
The sister of James White, Patty Bond-White, crossed the Tiber many years ago.
Haha
aad schram She sure did - 18 years ago. Hers is a great story.
chnetwork.org/journey-home/patty-bonds-baptist-became-catholic-journey-home-program/
Dang that must of left a sour taste. I actually feel bad for him now.
Random Person yes, can you imagine. She became Catholic some years back after sustaining years of sexual
abuse by her pastor father. Her brother James, instead of defending or helping her, which any loving brother would do (Christian or not), has only rubbed salt into her wounds. Says a lot about his character.
@@alidavalmorbida4368 she is a saint!
Francis Chan has discovered what we Catholics have known for almost 2,000 years.
John Florio and what exactly is that? Because what I heard him say, is nothing like what Catholics say. Please be more specific and fully explain exactly what Catholics say about transubstantiation.
Thank God, the more the merrier! Hope he brings his partitioners with him!
Yes that the Catholics literally EAT AND DRINK BLOOD?...,BLIND AND DON'T KNOW IT...SO SAD.
@Harry Waddington Jesus said,"I am the Bread of Life....does that mean He is literally a bread?
@@eagleeyes6642 You have chosen to leave Jesus as many did in John 6:66. I choose to stay with Him and His Church.
Protestants literally fail to understand that not only Catholics have this views but traditional anglicans and Lutherans , Eastern Orthodox and oriental orthodox. Protestants can be so anti catholic at times. We just have to pray for them.
Hi Dee do you mind me asking, are you a protestant?
You're so right. Not only Catholics, but the Orthodox, the Lutheran's, and the Anglican's believe in the real presence in some way.
You're right about their belief in the real presence, but not transsubstantiation, which Lutherans specifically reject as well as Eucharistic adoration. Even if they keep uneaten consecrated hosts at the altar, that's not the same as Eucharistic adoration.
Lutherans, for example, believe that the bread and wine, when consecrated, really are the body and blood of Christ, but reject the substance/accidents distinction and would also say that the bread and wine don't stop being bread and wine, as shown by Paul's statement after consecration "when you eat this bread and drink this cup."
1 Corinthians 11:25
As for anglicans, this is what article XXVIII states:
"The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another, but rather it is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death: insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ.
Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.
The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is Faith.
The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped."
As for Eastern Orthodox, they don't (to my knowledge) have any unified statement on the matter, but I would agree they teach Real Presence.
Yeah most of Christendom believes that the Eucharist is more than purely symbolic. Yet, it's all about Catholic Christians. We truly are living in their heads rent free.
@Dee Cee I am so tired of this "pray for the Catholic Priests and the altar boys they molest". Old and played out line *yawns*
How easy is it to pick on one structured, monolithic, ancient, glass skyscraper, compared to picking on 40,000 shards of scattered glass?
Protestantism is rife with scandals my dear. Rife. Every year. But nobody wants to get cut by shards of glass.
But thanks for your thoughtful intentions of prayer for Mother Church.
James White is growing on me as a recurring villain. He’s like a member of team rocket that keeps blasting off
sort of like Joker in Batman or Green Goblin in Spiderman.
He's a Kantian Modernist Biblicist, borderline heretic. And just seems to be a mean little man with pathological need to always be right.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@stevenledwith Borderline? 😂
How come it seems like that Calvinist's put much much stock in Augustine but apparently do not support his view of the Real Presence in the Eucharist?
Just how Roman Catholics claim Augustine as Doctor of the Church but don't accept everything he taught.
@@hexahexametermeter like what?
@@arthurledezma2460 "Ever since the time when by one man sin thus entered into this world and death by sin, and so it passed through to all men, up to the end of this carnal generation and perishing world, the children of which beget and are begotten, there never has existed, nor ever will exist, a human being of whom, placed in this life of ours, it could be said that he had no sin at all, with the exception of the one Mediator, who reconciles us to our Maker through the forgiveness of sins."
@@hexahexametermeter still waiting
So Jesus is the only Mediator, but as we part of Jesus body we are part of that meditation, you dont know that?
Your comprehension is poor. He is not making a point about mediation. He is using Mediator as a title. You are missing the point Augustine is actually making about sin. He is making the point about the extent to which sin has touched all of humanity. Let me help you out: "There *never* has existed, nor *ever will* exist, a human being ... *that he had no sin at all*. With the exception of whom? The Mediator. Do you agree with Augustine?
As a former devout Roman Catholic who now is in a Reformed church, this is the best, most succinct and honest discussion of the Real Presence that I have come across. I have never thought that Protestant views and practices of the Eucharist had much to recommend them, and some celebrations of "The Lord's Supper" ( a most unfortunate and inapt descriptor for the Last Passover meal ) are anodyne in the extreme. When this central defining act of communion within the church becomes mere symbol, it is utterly emptied of any meaning. What are we communing with? Symbolism? Memorialization? How is that even possible.
I have other problems with the Roman Catholic Mass, but I have always maintained that when Christ said to the apostles, "This is my body; this is my blood", he was not using a metaphor. The Real Presence is the only belief that does justice to those words of our Savior and Lord.
Good that you accept the Real Presence in the Eucharist, but what about your other issues regarding the Mass?
There is no reason for any Christian to follow an evil 16th century French lawyer.
Maybe look into the Eastern Orthodox Church my brother. God bless
Poorly catechized Catholics become Protestant. Highly educated Protestants Become Catholic.
Jeff Cavins: Former Non-denominational Minister - The Journey Home Program
ua-cam.com/video/yM2XB2EB628/v-deo.html
"I Left EVERYTHING to Follow Jesus" - Keith Nester Testimony
ua-cam.com/video/ZlD2ZbgHO2I/v-deo.html
Protestant pastor becomes Catholic: The original 1989 conversion tape of Scott Hahn
ua-cam.com/video/P-bz4kRtCQI/v-deo.html
Why this former protestant pastor is becoming Catholic!
ua-cam.com/video/32Xo_h8NsMo/v-deo.html
Why This Evangelical Professor Became Catholic
ua-cam.com/video/MhMlMdhDqTQ/v-deo.html
A Protestant Bible Scholar Discovers Catholicism
ua-cam.com/video/AbM1PaSiXUg/v-deo.html
Dr. John Bergsma: A Reformed Minister Who Became A Catholic - The Journey Home
ua-cam.com/video/C9PRDbT-8bY/v-deo.html
Protestant Pastor Becomes On-Fire Catholic | Chris Stefanick Show
ua-cam.com/video/MsA-XVi0BZg/v-deo.html
How a Protestant apologist returned to Catholicism
ua-cam.com/video/R_wd1tbjQPQ/v-deo.html
An Evangelical Seminary Professor Becomes Catholic - Dr. Jason Reed
ua-cam.com/video/afgl7_LZ-Ks/v-deo.html
How a Seventh-day Adventist Minister Became Catholic - Norman bin Yazid
ua-cam.com/video/Le5BQJ7skgo/v-deo.html
From Mormon Missionary to Catholic w/ Isaac Hess
ua-cam.com/video/sAdsnUjObsI/v-deo.html
I had the opposite experience. I came out of the reformed church into the Catholic Church. I’d never look back. Reformed theology is incredibly flawed.
James White is really disturbed. He mumbles Church history.
Probably because Dr White still pissed his sister converted to Catholicism
It's because he's knowingly lying now.
Rich Lo I would be too
He's forgotten more about church history than you'll ever know
Rich Lo haha 😄really ?
Great work as usual, Trent! God bless you.
Sage of Synergism your exactly like St Philip in John 6.
God Bless!
Trent, you’re good, man. I truly appreciate your work.
The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist (Communion) was confessed and taught throughout the early church, the early church fathers, and throughout diverse faith traditions: Roman Catholic church, Eastern Orthodox church, Oriental Orthodoxy (Armenia, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan) church, the Church of the East, the Lutheran church, the Anglican church, the Methodist church, and The Moravian Church (formed in 1457). These Christian Traditions have a Sacramental Theology. I am a baptized christian within the Confessional Lutheran Tradition, so therefore, I am a "protestant". @prmentor (1/18/20 Saturday)
HOWEVER, as one studies Church History, it very soon becomes very evident that “mainstream Christianity” was often the seat of the HERESY and the “heretics” were the ones with whom we would agree. As a matter of fact, as Church History progresses through the centuries, it becomes more and more true that the “mainstream Christianity” is the seat of more and more “heresy” in doctrine and praxis. It is the “remnant” that is often 5the “keeper of truth” and oftentimes the ones who pay very dearly for their adherence to what we would today consider to be “Orthodoxy.” Not only is that true, but as you study Church History you begin to realize that there were individuals - sometimes part of “mainstream Christianity” and sometimes not so much - who contributed some “good doctrine and praxis” to the Church while at the same time contributing some “bad doctrine and praxis” to the Church. Origen of Alexandria is one those key individuals. Even more so is Augustine of Hippo. Also, Pelagius may well be placed on that list - even though Augustine considered him a ‘rank heretic’ (the Augustine/Pelagius Controversy is one of the more ‘famous’ theological/doctrinal controversies of Church History). The point of this “hiatus” is to emphasize that the “orthodoxy” and the “heresy” in Church History - outside of the NT - is often very difficult to discern. Oftentimes, the books on Church History are written from a certain ‘doctrinal/theological’ perspective. There are many that are excellent and very ‘sound’ theologically. But, it is important that every student of Church History be “ALERT” to theological/doctrinal biases of the person they are ‘reading’ or under whom they are studying. Sometimes it is necessary to go back to the original source material - as much as it is possible - in order to derive your own convictions about what an individual was saying. But again, even when reading “original documents” one must realize that they too are at best ‘copies and translations of copies’ and oftentimes far less attested and reliable than the many copies and translations that we have of the NT. This is not to discourage the study of Church History - quite the opposite. But it is a caveat that we all need to bear in mind.
Thank you for commenting on this! I was listening to his podcast and was hoping someone would respond to him. I find him quite off putting, but I am not very articulate in Catholic theology YET. So thank you!
Most Calvinists are off-putting.
Jennifer Villasenor you can get better at that through practice! May I suggest a few things for you? I’m a “cradle Catholic” who “slipped away” from practice, but came back more passionate for my faith through the following resources. It takes time and you will sometimes get frustrated, but it’s worth it! Always ask the Holy Spirit to guide you and don’t get discouraged! We need more strong Catholics to teach the weaker ones and the Protestants. My purpose for my commenting is twofold... to help others like myself and to counter/correct the misinformation and untruths propagated by many Protestants. God bless you on your journey!
You might want to check out all these UA-cam channels: How To Be Christian; Ascension Presents; EWTN Journey Home (they have others of interest, too); Bishop Robert Barron; Breaking In The Habit; Brian Holdsworth; Busted Halo; Catholic Answers; Catholic Truth; Catholic4rednecks; Creed 101; Fr. Mark Goring; Fr. William Nicholas; Keith Nester; Steven Ray (he’s really good, too); Matt Fradd; Practical Theism; The Coming Home Network; The Counsel of Trent; The Joy Of The Faith; Catholic Productions;
If you want details about the Catholic Faith, I recommend you download the Laudate app. It’s free and contains a searchable Catechism and all the documents, including two versions of the Catholic Bible, referenced in the footnotes. It has prayers, daily Mass readings with reflexions and interactive rosary with bible verses that go with the mysteries, etc. Check it out! I would also recommend Catholic.com website. You can type in a question or subject, search and get lots of articles on those subjects!
Also, I’d recommend you get these Bible “cheat sheets” from Amazon. They are very helpful in learning Biblical references for what we believe when you are faced with Protestant “objections” to the Catholic Faith.
The Bible Thumper
www.amazon.com/gp/product/1932927972/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1
The Catholic Verse Finder
www.amazon.com/Catholic-Verse-Finder-Large-Jim-Burnham/dp/1930084277/ref=pd_sbs_14_2/136-8846097-8853735?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1930084277&pd_rd_r=8c2f3377-d8e5-426a-b7e4-0e73dc646993&pd_rd_w=u5D3z&pd_rd_wg=vef7h&pf_rd_p=bdd201df-734f-454e-883c-73b0d8ccd4c3&pf_rd_r=4MFGZDCMR9CMMQG6PK3W&psc=1&refRID=4MFGZDCMR9CMMQG6PK3W
The truth can be off putting!
@@wesleysimelane3423 Lol... There is no truth in what he said, Trent has educated him and set things straight, you can either remain unteachable, distort truth or ignorant.
I people would like other very fair and expert coverage of the historical views on the Eucharist, I'd recommend Gavin Ortlund on his Truth Unites channel: Response to Francis Chan on the Eucharist. He also has discussions w/ Trent Horn and they do friendly replies to each others videos. He's very echumenical, from the protestant tradition and Catholics seem to appreciate his fair spirit.
It seems that when you read the church fathers its impossible to remain protestant. This is exactly what happened to me
When I read the Bible it’s absolutely impossible to be Catholic. I certainly wouldn’t use any early church dogma as my source of truth. The early churches were commuting heresies within weeks of receiving the Gospel. All we have to do to know that is to read Paul’s epistles..Then we can read Christs personal letters to the church’s in revelation. 5 of those church’s had problems. Some very severe. If you’re going to base your beliefs off of what the Catholic Church believe then you have some of the most evil beliefs and acts in human history to consider. Even still in modern times they pray to Saints and worship Mary, Treat a man as an infallible representative of God. I wouldn’t want to be within 1,000 miles of the Vatican when Jesus returns. Of your beliefs aren’t supported by scripture then you’ve got a man made religion. Catholicism certainly isn’t biblical. Were some early churches doing some of the heresies that the early Catholic Church still clings to? I’m sure they were. Thankfully, we have scripture to judge what is right. The very early church did not have the New Testament in full.
@@shawnglass108 you've literally argues a case against yourself. There was no new testament at the start. So what did the early church rely on? Tradition. And catholics don't worship saints or Mary, I was stupid enough to believe this myself for so long. But when I actually looked into it I found out that's not the case. They honor Mary as the mother of Jesus, that's it. And they don't pray to saints like they pray to God, they ask the saints to pray for them just like you would ask people in your life to pray for you, on your behalf to God. The catholic faith is the one true faith, and I have to say protestantism is not the complete picture, it's missing big pieces which the catholic church has. The protestant church is all over the place, one denomination supports gay marriage, another doesn't, one denomination allows women to become pastors, another doesn't. One denomination is OK with divorce and remarriage, another isn't. There's no unity, the goalposts are constantly moving.
@@eoinMB3949 , That’s my point. They did not have the New Testament scriptures. That’s why heresy crept in so quickly. We do have the scriptures now and do not and should not rely on any doctrine or belief that is not backed by scripture. You’re talking Catholic Church history but claiming the Catholics do not worship Mary? I have read the writings from Catholic Church history. They absolutely worship Mary and ascribe to her ridiculous untruths. Claiming she was a perpetual virgin, that she was sinless, that her sinless body was taken into heaven. Completely absurdities to lift a mortal sinner to the level of worship. Why would any Bible believing person actually believe not only that you can pray to dead mortal men but that you should? That is not only not supported by scripture but the Bible clearly tells us that there is ONE mediator between man and God. Christ Jesus! To pray to anyone or anything else is idolatry! How incredibly insulting it is to the Heavenly Father for him to send his son to die so that men can come directly to him, he even tore the veil in the temple from top to bottom as the ultimate symbol that we can come to him, but to instead pray to mortal men and women? None of those men or women, including Mary, has ever heard a prayer and they certainly can’t and don’t answer prayers. That’s a man created lie! Jesus also absolutely never gave his infallible authority to a man to decide what was true and Holy and allows him to be worshipped. It’s complete idolatry! Even Peter, who the Catholics try to say was the first Pope, when men tried to worship him, told them to stop. Because he told them he was just a man..There are so many blasphemous and idolatrous doctrines and dogmas in the Catholic Church that it barely resembles Christianity. That’s without going into the history of the Catholic Church and its leaders. Who were some of the most evil, murderous, greedy people who ever lived. Slaughtering thousands for land and money in the name of Christ..I have learned a tremendous amount about the Catholic Church and its history from those who have left it. Including Bishops. I truly want God loving men and women to be saved from it. May God guide you and bless you.
@@shawnglass108 I'm sorry but the exodus is in the other direction. There was literally a book written about it: "The evangelical exodus". I used to be protestant, so I lived that life. You say you "know" about Catholicism but you were never catholic. I've lived both and I can say with 100% certainty that Catholicism is the one true faith
@@eoinMB3949 watch Dr Gavin ortlund
It wasn't defined as a Dogma for so long, because it was so unified, so universally understood, that it didn't need to be so defined.
The Eucharistic texts in the Bible is enough to prove the Eucharistic presence of Jesus. For me I Cor. 10:16 says it all.
The protesters really need to read their Bible from the perspective of the teachings of the church fathers.
Watch Francis Chan speak and tell me that he doesn’t know his Bible.
@@mfc1190 It seams to me Francis Chan is rediscovering the bible.
Mung Zou Except that the Bible teaches us that we are to test everything and everyone who claims to speak for God by the OT and NT. So the church fathers have to be tested by the Scriptures also. 2 Timothy 2:16-17 “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
This is something I keep hearing Catholics say: “We own the Bible”. I am sorry, but the RCC has taught you incorrectly. The OT was complete 400 years before Christ. They 400 yrs of prophetic silence. The Jews held the OT. The NT writings were completed and in circulation with the churches in the 1st century. It was in the hands of Messianic Jews and Messianic Gentiles. The combining of the OT and NT scrolls and letters into one book-The Bible-came a couple hundred years later though.
And frankly RCC has changed the commandments of God. Repeating if you missed it in earlier messages.
She removed #2 on no graven images or bowing down to them. That moved #4 to #3 which she also changed-The 7th Day Sabbath (God’s Holy Day) to SUNday (a pagan holiday) the 1st day of the week. Then since she had only 9 commandments after removing #2, she chose to split #10 into 2-don’t covet neighbors wife, don’t covet neighbors stuff.
She also added the apocrypha. And a host of other non-biblical doctrines. But I will just focus on the commandment changes at the moment and the RCC boasts in changing the teachings of God.
From the Catholic Catechism:
The Catholic 3rd Commandment
Q: What is the Third Commandment?
A: The Third Commandment is: Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy…
Q: Which day is the Sabbath day?
A: Saturday is the Sabbath day
Q: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
A: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.
“Sunday is a catholic institution, and its claims to observance can be defended only on catholic principles…From beginning to end of scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.” The Catholic press, Sydney, Australia, August 1900.
“It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic church, and those who observe the day, observe a commandment of the Catholic church.” Priest Brady, in an address reported in the Elizabeth, NJ “News”, March 18, 1903.
“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” Pope Leo XIII, in an Encyclical Letter June 20, 1894.
“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” The Catholic National, July 1895
“The pope has power to changes times, to abrogate laws, and to dispsense with all things even the precepts of Christ.”
“I am all in all and above all, so that God Himself, and I, the Vicar of God, hath both one consistory, and I am able to do that almost that God can do.” Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Annus Sanctum 1302.
I commend to you a personal reading of the whole Bible.
Mung Zou Also Eating blood was prohibited in both the OT and NT. A few verses on not eating blood. 🤔
“You must not, however, eat flesh with its life-BLOOD in it. But for your own life-BLOOD I will require a reckoning: I will require it of every beast; of man, too, will I require a reckoning for human life, of every man for that of his fellow man! Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his BLOOD be shed; for in His image did God make man” (Gen. 9:4-6).
And if any Israelite or any stranger who resides among them hunts down an animal or a bird that may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. For the life of all flesh - its BLOOD is its life. Therefore I say to the Israelite people: You shall not partake of the BLOOD of any flesh, for the life of all flesh is its BLOOD. Anyone who partakes of it shall be cut off.” Leviticus 17:13-14
“And if anyone of the house of Israel partakes of any BLOOD, I will set My face against the person who partakes of the BLOOD, and I will cut him off from among his kin” Lev. 17:10
Only be sure that thou eat not the BLOOD: for the BLOOD is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh."Deuteronomy 12:23, KJV
"And the people flew upon the spoil, and took sheep, and oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground: and the people did eat them with the BLOOD. Then they told Saul, saying, Behold, the people sin against the LORD, in that they eat with the BLOOD. And he said, Ye have transgressed: roll a great stone unto me this day."
1 Samuel 14:32-33, KJV
"Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from BLOOD . . . For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from BLOOD, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well." Acts 15:19-20, 28-29, KJV
"As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from BLOOD, and from strangled, and from fornication."
Acts 21:25, KJV
On a different note-FYI The Bible also says that any consumption of pig product, lobster, shellfish, shrimp-is unclean. It’s an abomination. God created it for a function, but commands it not to be eaten for food. Leviticus 11+ other OT/NT verses.
Jesus used a lot of symbolism when He talked. To understand the apostolic Eucharist, you would need to read about Passover (Exodus 12+13). The symbolism in that feast that was pointing to Christ the Passover Lamb about to be killed for our sins. The wine and the unleavened bread were already traditions going back to Egypt. When He spoke of His body and blood in John 6-you have to read the whole chapter. Why is he talking about bread to begin with? Because he had just done a miracle of the feeding the 5000 and people hunted Him down the next day. He told them they were searching for Him because He made bread-but then He turned it into a spiritual application. That they needed Him for their Savior. At the last supper, he holds the cup and says it represents His blood of the new covenant. Without the shedding of His blood there was no forgiveness. Hebrews 9 tells us how His death-body and blood poured out ended the Old Covenant and then revealed about the New Covenant. He died ONCE for sin. He didn’t need to suffer often. (Says Hebrews 9). So we all know when communion happens-we are remembering the blood and body of Jesus that He died for us. Were are told to remember His death for us. His blood and body were given for us. He said He would not drink again of the fruit of the vine until we enter into His fathers Kingdom (at the last day/judgement day/resurrection day for the saints). Brother, it’s still a waifer and wine through your whole GI tract.
There is so much symbolism in the Bible referring to Jesus-The Lion, the Lamb, The Bread of Life, The Living Word, The Rock which Israel drank in the wilderness, The Chief Cornerstone, The Alpha and Omega (alphabet letters), Etc.
I can’t stand it when somebody speaks in a way that is clearly understandable (I.e., you know what they mean), and then somebody else has to tear out their jugular because they didn’t use precise, lawyer-like language.
I think that's the mark of someone who uses scholarly language to, well, basically lie. Some are confused by it. Some see through it, whether or not they know how to state the objection they sense.
Dee Cee 🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️
Thank-you Trent. We have been waiting a long time for this.
Trent Horn Vs Dr. James White On Eucharist
I think after their last debate Mr White still sees Trent Horn as his sleep paralysis shadow
Loved your channel Trent. I feel like I have people defending our Catholic faith.
James White has been spouting heresies for a long minute now
Like??
@@dylanwagoner9768 did you watch the video?
Renjith Joseph yes
His sister is probably praying for his "eyes" of his heart to be opened.
I Saw Trent, and I Clicked it. Subscribed it. 😉
Thank you so much your work is greatly appreciated.
Correction: the book of common prayer never considers the Lord's supper in the memorialist view alone. It believes in real presence but not in transubstantiation.
James White thinks he has all of Christianity and the gospel cornered. Wrong!!
Francis Chan is a great preacher he is strong with the Force(God)! God is pleased with this one. Don’t mess with him. Religion or no religion he is with God n for God😊🙏✝️
Doesn't Rome claim the same thing, with anathemas on those who disagree?
@@gregb6469 There are over 40 different protestant sects and lots of Catholics don't agree either.
The difference between Catholics disagreeing and Protestants disagreeing is the Catholics are going against official Church teaching. The Protestants who all disagree are rebelling against each other, not an authority.
@@saraircrew8517 The mother of all harlots gave birth to them
This is such a popcorn moment for Catholics, watching the Protestants frantically try to grasp what to do next.
Anna while I don’t think a secondary issue as this is a big deal , but to be honest Chan has been called out numerous times recently for seemingly hanging out with horrible prosperity teachers left and right and his reputation as it stands was sliding pretty badly then , so I don’t think many are surprised to hear Chan go down any differing theological path in a sense , as he has shown poor discernment and confusion to many the past year .
No Protestants are not frantically trying to figure out what to do. They will continue to reject Catholicism and worship Jesus.
Girl you drunk on wine I guess...Be born again and get out of religion altogether John 3:3...Hell awaits all who do not get saved...in love I tell you this,...
@@PreachingJesus yeah not religion but relationship with Jesus.. but when you google religion it just self-destruct.. Religion - a belief of a sumpreme being, god/s.. so how can you have a relationship Jesus if you never first believed in him?
@@PreachingJesus Protestant exist by mere protest and not by means of affirmation.
You have done a commendable job. God bless you..
Jesus said, "Take and eat." It's one of the few commandments of His that I can actually keep on a regular basis. Ima leave it at that, and just walk away while the theologians (real and wannabe) clobber each other.
That's a problem.
@@ASmith-jn7kf That's funny. I didn't realize that taking Jesus at His Word was a "problem."
"The body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, but not locally and carnally present and given in the Supper."
Martin Bucer
Eucharistic miracles. Enough said.
James White is an authority in Roman Catholic Theology. He has debated many Catholic Priest and apologist. I have not heardany more authoritative apologist than JAmes White. He has detailed knowledge history. You have to demonstrate you can debate with him on the history part of the Eucharist. The fact that Francis Chan does not know, its obvious he lacks the entire history of the thing. Mr. Host, it would be approrpiate for you to enter into a discussion with James White to be fair, than quoting him in part. But thanks for sharing
Can you please put english subtitles so I can translate this? I have already translated this pastor Chan video and I would like to do this with this. Thank you.
I have to agree with Francis Chan even though I 'm protestant. Appreciate how they can talk about these things civily and disagree.
Thank You Trent. I love this series of you reviewing videos. I think it will bring a lot of people home. You have helped bring me home. Glory to God!
@Sage of Synergism the same reason he was baptized, to fulfill all righteousness.
@LouisT are you claiming confusion in Judaism does not exist? Are you referring to Talmudic Judaism or Messianic Judaism? If your referring to Talmudic Judaism- which branch are you referring to? Reform Judaism, conservative Judaism, Orthodox Judaism, modern orthodox, the Haredim (ultra orthodox), Hasidic Judaism, Yeshivish Judaism, Open Orthodox Judaism, Reconstructionist Judaism, Jewish Renewel, or Humanistic Judaism.
If your referring to Messianic Judaism which sect are you referring to- Jews for Jesus, Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, unification Church, Chosen People Ministries, Eastern Lightning, Hebrew Roots, or HaYesod.
@LouisT okay so you were not referring to messianic Judaism your referring to Talmudic Judaism. But you still didn’t answer which branch of Judaism has the fullness of truth because they disagree with each other on theology. So which sect out of Reform Judaism, conservative Judaism, Orthodox Judaism, modern orthodox, the Haredim (ultra orthodox), Hasidic Judaism, Yeshivish Judaism, Open Orthodox Judaism, Reconstructionist Judaism, Jewish Renewel, or Humanistic Judaism has the fullness of truth?
“Your messianic stuff is the same pagan trinity and all the rest” please can you provide source when Pagans introduced trinitarian theology? What makes it Pagan? “Moses Israel etc there is no fight because there is no systematic theology made by men” actually during the time or Christ they even disagreed. They had the sadducees who only accepted the first 5 books of scripture then you have the Pharisees who accepted the Torah and Tanakh, then the Essenes who disagreed with both and believed you should live a Ascetic lifestyle. So which branch of Judaism has the truth?
I agree we need to talk more about these doctrines as you are doing here; to come to agreement. Francis makes a good, strong challenge for us to be more accepting of each other at the Table in effort to truly be One Church.
Does White even know that humility is the true recipient of grace? No one wins a debate just by being condescending. It's no wonder Orthodoxy view scholasticism with suspicion, it cuts both ways. Human reason confounds faith when human pride takes over.
White is full of himself because when he debated a Muslim he was all respectful and quiet.
Saint Thomas Aquinas reminds us that our striving for holiness culminates here on earth in our receiving the Eucharist.
.
Why? Because the Eucharist is when we are in union with God.
.
When we are filled with His love, and by being filled with Him, we find that His presence produces love in us which overflows to others. Never forget that holiness is "transforming union with God."
.
In the Eucharist, when we are fully disposed to receiving the fullness of the graces present, we are in union with God and are transformed into God who is love.
.
This week, spend time preparing your heart, mind and soul to be fully open to the graces of the sacrament of the Eucharist so you can be filled with His love.
I'm surprised there has been no mention of Lutherans who have always believed in The Real Presence, "in, with, and under the bread and wine."
Because it was the Lutheran movement that caused the Revolt..
Roger Kuhn there are others who also believe in The Real Presence, but like Rich Lo said, they are Protestants... descendants of the Revolt and are “outside” unity with the Catholic Church... the ONE CHURCH that Jesus established.
@@queenofhearts7726 It's crucial to note the importance of Apostolic succession as it pertains to the Eucharist. Christ gave His apostles the authority to do these things and to decide who else can. We see this in the Book of Acts. Lutheran ministers are leading their flocks astray by masquerading as those with priestly authority, and we find that incredibly sad. It's also important to note that Lutherans are defined as well by other gave theological errors that prevent them from reconciling with Christ's Church here on earth: Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura. It's not like we Catholics are happy they're gone. To the contrary, the doors are wide open. Heck, even then, it took several years for the Pope to excommunicate Martin Luther, didn't it? They may believe in the true presence of Christ, but it's no more valid than the Palmarian sedevacantists. It's tragic, really. We can only pray that God's grace extends to them via reduced culpability, i.e. through learned ignorance. Thank God, for them, that Purgatory exists whether or not they believe in it.
The Eucharist is the most beautiful thing at the Church, Its amazing, what Jesus Christ said in the gospel of John is quite clear, scripture is correct is funny sola scriptura protestants dont accept and keep dancing around it. Many disciples left after hearing this, but the 12 stayed, as St Peter said, where would we go you have Eternal life.. Very true.. Catholic church is the one true church Jesus founded on earth. God bless!
Thanks, Trent.
Amen! Thank you, Trent~
When Jesus says" This my body" when breaking bread and giving it to the Apostles and telling them to eat. Then when He blessed the cup and gives it to the Apostles to drink , telling them this is My blood. Was He only kidding? He told His followers even before that unless you eat His flesh and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Was he just joking? Even after many people walked away He never said " Hey folks, I didn't mean it literally ! Come on back." No He wasn't kidding or joking. Either He meant what He said, or whoever wrote the scriptures lied to us, and I don't think it was the latter.
But that teaches that not everyone is willing to believe....they can believe God made the Universe out of nothing but not that he would stay in the bread to keep us fed spiritually throughout history and until his return. Jesus is Catholic !
@Felipe The Mouse OK...this is why there so many different protestant secs, they all claim truth based based on their own interpretations...........but i will let Jesus himself answer you on who is his brothers and sisters...........Matthew 12:48-50 But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
Francis is awesome. He left his position as pastor because Jesus told him he needed to be an evangelist. He admits the Protestant churches are too pastor focused.
I have listened to dr white tons of times on UA-cam. Dr white has a goal of rewriting christian history.
I watched the conversation with Francis Chan on Relevant and was quite fascinated by his excitement upon this discovery.
So.... In James White's world, fire didnt officially didnt burn until it was described as such: "Fire is the rapid oxidation of a material in the exothermic chemical process of combustion, releasing heat, light, and various reaction products." even though everyone knew what fire was at the time it was discovered. I know this is a simplified version, but that is what it sounds like he is basically saying to me. 🙄
John 6:66 explains that people would not believe and turn away from the teachings of JESUS.
Hector Ibanez try reading in context brother it means the opposite of what you say!
55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. ....66 From that time many of His disciples went [p]back and walked with Him no more. 67 Then Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also want to go away?”
68 But Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.
Hector Ibanez do you not see what errors and lies you just committed in your demonstration? You isolated the verses that fit your interpretation then you leave out the rest.. why do you lie to me in your illustration.. shall we go verse by verse to see what your saying is what John is saying? Or do you want to just shoot bullets of isolated text to prove a point that what your saying is not in the original content?
Lets see how Paul understood it compared to you:
1 corinthians 11-
For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me." In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes. Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly......
@@pimpsarefilthy the bible supports Catholics but not protestants.....Francis seeking truth saw it and believes.......
1 Corinthians 10:16-17
Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ? Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread.
Thank You Trent ..... Great Work !!!
Ignatius of Antioch Epistle to the Smyraeans ch 6-8 [50-117 AD]********
"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes" See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.
Justin Martyr First Apology ch 66 [100-165 AD]
"We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as
common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.
{these few quotes, settle the matter of how these disciples of the Apostles understood, the eucharist, & so I will follow the teaching of the Holy Spirit revealed to me, & confirmed by the Early Church Fathers). Let the James white wait for their Jesus who is absent in the eucharist)
As somebody who was raised by a catholic father, who turned so far from the church that he raised me agnostic, with a mother who converted to Catholicism when i was in college. The ambiguity is what keeps the analytical part of me from fully embracing Christianity (protestant or cath/orthodox). I find myself questing for knowledge, I attend a gospel based nondenominational church (no prosperity, bethel nonsense). I value tradition and reverence but also ascribe to the bible, but then wonder what was done before the bible? Since after Christ there was no bible can it really be the end all be all inspired book? Whos to say all the books chosen tell the entire complete story. I believe Jesus existed and rose from the dead, its everything else! I still struggle with the trinity. I cant wrap my mind around what three persons in one really means. I hear it but dont understand it. Then add in transublation.....and i dont know which way is up. Part of me wonders if we are just splitting hairs as nobody has perfect theology? I just get frustrated..... perhaps there are other seekers looking for clarity.
@Shameless Papist THank you for reaching out. Not sure where to start so lets stick with some of the ramblings above. The eucharist being the literal body of christ or symbolic, or remaining bread/wine but his spirit enters you. How can any of us possibly know. Millions of folks practice communion differently and each says they can justify their position and are guided by the holey spirit? Which is correct? Does Correct even matter here?
@@wattsobx With the allegorization of the Scriptures came doctrinal heresies that became central to ‘standardized doctrinal beliefs’ for thousands of years - to this very day. Some of those heresies were related to “Ecclesiology” (The Doctrine of the Church) not the RCC but "An Assembly of Believers". It is important to summarize the heretical departures that came relatively early in Church History (by ‘relatively early’ we are talking in the range of 150-200 years). Early Church Fathers began to think of themselves in terms of Israel’s Priesthood. The NEW TESTAMENT gave the proper names and roles of Church leaders (Elders, Pastors, Deacons, etc.) but the Early Church Fathers began to adopt for themselves the terms of the OT Israelite Priesthood - Thus their “Leaders were ‘Levitical’ Priests (RCC to this day does not have “Pastors” but “Priests”) and the church hierarchy goes all the way to the Jewish “HIGH PRIEST” (which is the RCC POPE). And it didn’t end there. The Jewish OT Law system involved “blood sacrifices” and the Early Church Fathers didn’t take very long before they had progressively transformed the BIBLICAL COMMANDS TO REMEMBER CHRIST’S SACRIFICIAL DEATH in the COMMUNION SERVICE/CELEBRATION OF THE LORD’S SUPPER into a CONTINUATION OF THE SACRIFICIAL SYSTEM - where the PRIEST transformed the Bread and the Cup of the Memorial Service into a heretical TRANSUBSTANTIATION of these two memorial elements into the actual body and blood of Christ - whom they continue to SACRIFICE on a weekly basis to this very day!!! HORRIBLE HERESY!! This is not only unbiblical but completely ANTI-BIBLICAL. Jesus Cried from the CROSS - “IT IS FINISHED”. The writer to the HEBREWS said that JESUS’ sacrificial death was “ONCE FOR ALL”.
I can see a debate with him over this. Get to it!
Boy, James White is full of himself. Most arrogant and assured of his superiority. I tackled this question Biblically a few years back and found, definitely and without a doubt the Transubstantiation standard. Likewise, many Apostolic Fathers and early saints wrote on this miraculous reality. The early church believed Christ present in the bread and wine - a miraculous change. Not just a symbolic remembrance. I wrote about this is my book, Tossing Mountains, by David Stoeckl, looking at modern day miracles, including Holy communion. I applaud Pastor Chan for his latest Revelation/ insights.
The Eastern Christians, (Eastern Catholics as well as Eastern Orthodox) have different liturgical tradition and do not have Eucharistic adoration, but they preserved the understanding of real presence throughout centuries. Protestants left with the crowd in Jon 6: 25-70
your view of john 6: 25-70 is warped. In John 13:2 is clear that the Lords supper activities were not detailed...the blood and the wine to be clear. So how does ch 6 proceed such event as the Lord supper? It doesn't, He was speaking of His death in John ch 6.
@@againstthepope2362 John 6:55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever." . . .61 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, "Does this offend you? 62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!
Also I don't know why you are only using John 13 as the Lord's supper as Matthew and Luke has also written about it. I think with are modern understand we will miss out on crucial and important information as history can change with current thought. And today we are misunderstanding what has be truly said.
@@abandonrz so Jesus' followers are cannibals?
@@againstthepope2362 keep pick and choosing what you believe is parable and not instead of finding what is actually the truth
Keep up the great work Trent! Really looking forward to your upcoming work on hosting dialogue with non roman catholics. Vatican II was a movement of the Spirit that has made room at Our Table for our seperated brothers to come home. In the same way that Our Lady of Guadalupe saved 9 million mexicans as a near equivalent number were falling away in Europe to protestantism, so now we will see great numbers from amongst the seperated come back and those who claim to be living according to tradition become new protestants. May God Be Praised in His Wisdom, the Church neither suffers loss or diminishment but goes from grace to Grace and glory to Glory. Amen. Learn our Faith as it was handed on by Our Fathers on my youtube channel and may we all come to a fuller unity through Love than ever before seen, that the world may come to Believe Jesus is The Son of God.
I am not Catholic and I am not Protestant. Scripture says that Jesus was gathered for supper with His 12 disciples during Passover. Jesus handed them bread and said this is my body, eat. Then gave them wine and said this is my blood, drink. If you were personally there with Jesus as one of His disciples and Jesus said this personally to you, how would you take it meaning?
Furthermore, I would think that the disciples might have remembered Jesus previously saying that unless you eat of my flesh and drink of my blood that you have no part with me. With the disciples reflecting back on this previous statement how would they take this new statement of this is my body, eat and this is my blood, drink?
Paul, said anyone who eats and drinks without discerning or distinguishing the body eat and drinks judgement on himself. How should one take that scripture?
I also find it impactful that Jesus said how He has earnestly longed to eat this Passover with the disciples, and saying for them to continue to partake of the bread and wine in remembrance of Him. He says that He want us to continue this observance, but then of Himself, He says that He will NOT eat it until it is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God and that He will NOT drink of the fruit of the vine until He drinks it anew with us in the Kingdom. This is so impactful to me! He wants us to continue, BUT on His side of things He is waiting for us, He isn't going to partake until He can partake with us. We are longing for Him and communing with Him by partaking, and He is longing for us by waiting for us to join Him in the Kingdom before He partakes. That's awesome to me!
Melanie Anderson So what do you make of the fact that the Real Presence has been believed by Christians from the beginning?
Miqueas Bello
Seems like a valid interpretation!
You are a faithful servant of the Church Trent. If I may offer a small critique; although I know you concentrate your time and effort on defense of the faith, and on the conversion of non Catholics, I feel it is imperative that you continue your dialogue with Timothy Gorden. With the amount of confusion and ambiguity in today's Church, the question of changing doctrine is essential.
Again, your work with those outside the Church, and the roll you play in the defense of her teachings is irreplaceable. However, perhaps the current state of the faith requires a concentrated effort on practicing Catholics, and a focus on the questions that divide us.
I agree to an extent, but him and his brother were being idiots about the discussion over on Twitter. They say that they do not frag other Catholics and that's exactly what they were doing. Sure, continue the discussion but not with that camp.
credit to James White for pursuing a (legit) PhD in a biblical field in the past few years. good luck to him!
Poorly catechized Catholics become Protestant. Highly educated Protestants Become Catholic.
Jeff Cavins: Former Non-denominational Minister - The Journey Home Program
ua-cam.com/video/yM2XB2EB628/v-deo.html
"I Left EVERYTHING to Follow Jesus" - Keith Nester Testimony
ua-cam.com/video/ZlD2ZbgHO2I/v-deo.html
Protestant pastor becomes Catholic: The original 1989 conversion tape of Scott Hahn
ua-cam.com/video/P-bz4kRtCQI/v-deo.html
Why this former protestant pastor is becoming Catholic!
ua-cam.com/video/32Xo_h8NsMo/v-deo.html
Why This Evangelical Professor Became Catholic
ua-cam.com/video/MhMlMdhDqTQ/v-deo.html
A Protestant Bible Scholar Discovers Catholicism
ua-cam.com/video/AbM1PaSiXUg/v-deo.html
Dr. John Bergsma: A Reformed Minister Who Became A Catholic - The Journey Home
ua-cam.com/video/C9PRDbT-8bY/v-deo.html
Protestant Pastor Becomes On-Fire Catholic | Chris Stefanick Show
ua-cam.com/video/MsA-XVi0BZg/v-deo.html
How a Protestant apologist returned to Catholicism
ua-cam.com/video/R_wd1tbjQPQ/v-deo.html
An Evangelical Seminary Professor Becomes Catholic - Dr. Jason Reed
ua-cam.com/video/afgl7_LZ-Ks/v-deo.html
How a Seventh-day Adventist Minister Became Catholic - Norman bin Yazid
ua-cam.com/video/Le5BQJ7skgo/v-deo.html
From Mormon Missionary to Catholic w/ Isaac Hess
ua-cam.com/video/sAdsnUjObsI/v-deo.html
Just an FYI. The article is wrong regarding Anglicans. The BCP holds to real presence, not literal, as well as baptismal regeneration. Yes we also say it is an outward sign of inward and spiritual grace but not to the exclusion of real presence however not literal. I say this as an Anglican (ACNA).
The Didache proof about the st Century belief of the Holy Eucharist along with many many First Church Fathers quotes
The problem with that claim is that even though we can account for the existence of a Didache from the patristic period (and, for that matter, many of the writings of the early church fathers), we don’t have ancient (let alone original) manuscripts that allow us to test the veracity of the words. It’s fair to assume that some or even a lot of the texts we have reflect the original writings, but it would be naive to assume these texts - which largely where under the administration of the Catholic church - remained unchanged as they were copied (and earlier versions were apparently lost) over the centuries. Indeed, I think it’s fairly well acknowledged that at least some of the text of these documents were edited or changed over time, probably to reflect changing/developing doctrinal stances.
Adding an additional quote that shows the high view of the Eucharistic elements within the early church:
"In approaching therefore, come not with your wrists extended, or your fingers spread; but make your left hand a throne for the right, as for that which is to receive a King. And having hollowed your palm, receive the Body of Christ, saying over it, Amen. So then after having carefully hallowed your eyes by the touch of the Holy Body, partake of it; giving heed lest you lose any portion thereof ; for whatever you lose, is evidently a loss to you as it were from one of your own members. For tell me, if any one gave you grains of gold, would you not hold them with all carefulness, being on your guard against losing any of them, and suffering loss? Will you not then much more carefully keep watch, that not a crumb fall from you of what is more precious than gold and precious stones?" Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture #23:
I loved James white in REM, talented guy
Jarrod Seaton 🤣
James is the straight side and Stipe from rem is the gay side ! :)
Losing his religion 🙊
White seems unaware that even St. Paul, as early as that was in Church history, asks: "And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?" This seems to be an early expression of the belief in the Real Presence. It took later Church Fathers and saints to "flesh out" (no pun intended) this doctrine, but these --- Iranaeus, Justin Martyr, Ambrose, Augustine --- were very early. It wasn't til much later that the word "transubstantiation" came along, but the concept was there from the beginning, when Jesus said, "This is my body." And from the beginning, he was taken literally.
The early church followers would rather die than to go without the Holy Mass and the Holy Eucharist. The Holy Eucharist gives divine life back to the soul, which without; we have no divine life in us. It is the partaking of the Most Holy Eucharist that transforms and restores our fallen nature, back to it original design which was divine. Without a transformation of the soul we will not be able to live or exist in the Supernatural realm of Heaven. Heaven is not natural, it’s supernatural. Unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of Mann and drink His Blood , you shall have no Eternal life within you. God Bless!
With the allegorization of the Scriptures came doctrinal heresies that became central to ‘standardized doctrinal beliefs’ for thousands of years - to this very day. Some of those heresies were related to “Ecclesiology” (The Doctrine of the Church). Again, this is another CLASS, but it is important to summarize the heretical departures that came relatively early in Church History (by ‘relatively early’ we are talking in the range of 150-200 years). Early Church Fathers began to think of themselves in terms of Israel’s Priesthood. The NEW TESTAMENT gave the proper names and roles of Church leaders (Elders, Pastors, Deacons, etc.) but the Early Church Fathers began to adopt for themselves the terms of the OT Israelite Priesthood - Thus their “Leaders were ‘Levitical’ Priests (RCC to this day does not have “Pastors” but “Priests”) and the church hierarchy goes all the way to the Jewish “HIGH PRIEST” (which is the RCC POPE). And it didn’t end there. The Jewish OT Law system involved “blood sacrifices” and the Early Church Fathers didn’t take very long before they had progressively transformed the BIBLICAL COMMANDS TO REMEMBER CHRIST’S SACRIFICIAL DEATH in the COMMUNION SERVICE/CELEBRATION OF THE LORD’S SUPPER into a CONTINUATION OF THE SACRIFICIAL SYSTEM - where the PRIEST transformed the Bread and the Cup of the Memorial Service into a heretical TRANSUBSTANTIATION of these two memorial elements into the actual body and blood of Christ - whom they continue to SACRIFICE on a weekly basis to this very day!!! HORRIBLE HERESY!! This is not only unbiblical but completely ANTI-BIBLICAL. Jesus Cried from the CROSS - “IT IS FINISHED”. The writer to the HEBREWS said that JESUS’ sacrificial death was “ONCE FOR ALL”.
@@ronaller5209 Wow, everything you wrote is wrong, including the notion that we have Communion weekly. Mass occurs every day except Good Friday.
The problem with this clip from White is that he is asking a series of "questions' with no real argumentation backing them up, which is really just a way of him trying to claim philosophical/theological/historical superiority without addressing the issues past these small blurbs that assert his position. It makes it easy for someone like Trent to take each thing and put it up against the actual evidence to show he is easily refuted. Let us pray that more people, especially Christian scholars, will truly search for the truth in the Spirit instead of for ANY other reason.
Ironic that White speaks about "Doesn't he understand...?" when it's quite the opposite. White lost in all his "knowledge" makes false distinctions between things like Transubstantiation and Real Presence. It's Chan that's actually starting to understand the Truth, and hopefully he makes it to the Church soon.
Ah, James White the anti-Catholic bulldog ! He will never stop snarling and barking at you guys !
I would support him but he is a Calvinist.
I like Francis Chan also. In the old days the Catholic Church preached about poverty and austerity nowdays it preaches that its ok to be rich. This has had me thinking for a couple of weeks now. I am not rich but I do have more money than what I need.
As an Evangelical who is attempting to look humbly and seriously at the life and history and claims of the Catholic Church, it seems in many conversations like limitations of language are not being effectively overcome and I wonder if you might address this. Since especially latter protestants lack a history that goes back to times and contexts that are both accustomed to and comfortable with the mysterious and instead lean on more geographically local scientific bias in thinking, it seems like the issue has a framework like the following. I think we may say - the wafer isn't meat and connective tissue and other flesh if it were to be analyzed; the wine isn't hemoglobin and oxygenating blood cells etc. under a microscope. So how can it be "literally" the body and blood as the term transubstantiation explicitly claims (knowing that consubstantiation isn't an option in Catholic understanding either)? I feel like I'm close to understanding, thinking in terms of faith, the authority of the priest and gathered body at mass (sorry if my language isn't accurate here), and especially allowing for the same sort of "we-can't-fully-grasp-it" mystery as the reality of the trinity.
Hi Andrew,
I converted to the Catholic Church 3.31.2018 at the age of 51 after spending the first part of my life from early childhood as Pentecostal, Southern Baptist and some Church of Christ ( wife's upbringing ).
The Eurcharist is a big part of why I'm Catholic but not the sole reason. The MASS is fascinating when you understand the TRUTH of it and not the anti-Catholic confusing view of it.
This video ua-cam.com/video/P45BHDRA7pU/v-deo.html ( Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist ) may not directly answer your questions, but it may help in your journey.
Here's an article "Transubstantiation for Beginners" that may help: www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/transubstantiation-for-beginners - CATHOLIC.com is a great resource.
If you want to connect with me online, you can search CATHOLIC TRANSFORMATION in Google and find my website.
Blessings,
David
@@catholictransformation696 Excellent to be able to dig in another way. Thanks so much for these directions.
Where can we find writings of the early church defining this practice below or 1367 dogma , it’s one thing to believe true presence , that’s not the problem this is below , any help with this appreciated .
When the priest pronounces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of monarchs and emperors: it is greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim. Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man-not once but a thousand times! The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows His head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.
Quote from John O’Brien faith of millions
This is what 1367 states , this is the problem !!! , I do not see this as possible , how can we get all this from “. “this is my body take eat “
This is the crux of the situation , this was not practised, and my consideration personally ends at Nicene council 350 AD , although open to liturgy practised anytime before 1560 .please don’t come with Ignatius , I want to see 1367 dogma not cut and paste of John 6 .
Andrew Drew they can’t show you this period.. they claim doctrine of development but that defeats the point of first two centuries not having priest, also worshipping bread and wine is no where found in scripture or tradition... John 6 proves Rome’s idea of eating false ... any logical person reading sees that. Plus they will admit the Eucharist falls short because it only forgives venial sins not mortal sins.. different Jesus ... eating and drinking doesn’t save anyone!!! Does anyone understand eating and drinking doesn’t save anyone but living a godly life in Christ Jesus ... common sense but they put a stumbling block in people’s mind to make them think eating and drinking by the hands of pedophile priests gets you forgiven! Please don’t treat your soul that way to think eating and drinking can make you right with god
Struggle In The Bubble
Here’s a link where I’ve put this question forward and received absolute ugliness from supposed believers in Christ have a look at the comments most interesting
ua-cam.com/video/unMPDaQI-bw/v-deo.html
You welcome to express anything thanks
We believed in the many miracles our Lord Jesus Christ has done during his lifetime on earth. But why is it that we cannot believe that the bread and wine can truly become His Body and Blood, His real presence? He converted water into wine during the wedding in Cana; on His command He brought back Lazarus from the dead; When Jesus went to the sea with His disciples He commanded the storm to calm down; He commanded the devil to get out of a possessed woman. Everytime Jesus commands and wills it, a miracle or healing happens, He is the Son of God. And He said " take this all of you and eat of it, for this is my body which will be given up for you, do this in memory of me." When Jesus commands He does not speak in metaphors or parables. Jesus literaly meant what He says. That is why from the apostles down to the early Christians and the early church fathers they all do this because Jesus commanded it. And for 2000 years this breaking of the bread through the Eucharist still propagates at every Mass because it was handed down to the apostles by no less than Christ Himself and He commanded to do this in memory of Him. It is not the priest who commands Jesus to come down everytime the priest does the consecration, the highest form of prayer in the Catholic church. It is Jesus who commands this and wills it to be His body and blood in the form of bread and wine up to this day. Who are we to to refute Him?
Wolfson AMDG ur ready for the truth? When he converted the water into wine did the water stay water or did the elements changed? I’m tired of being lied to and your part of the lie.. you quote what u been taught but listen to what emotional response u have as opposed to the actual point ur trying to make.. all miracles by definition changed in substance hence the proof of a miracle .. the Eucharist doesn’t change in substance physically so for you to take this leap of comparing Jesus proven miracles to something you have to say just accept by faith.. history doesn’t prove Roman Catholic doctrine every time u see real presence u assume it’s Eucharist adoration or worship under the elements of bread and wine... no where in history does the elements get worshipped we are told to eat the elements but not worship.. please understand u have to prove what’s defined by Rome not come up with some comparisons of miracles as if it’sThe same thing and it’s not.. all of Jesus miracles changed in substance... prove to me in history a miracle can be a miracle without a physical change by definition it’s not a miracle ! Show me where the apostles taught to worship Jesus under the appearance of bread???Water ceased to exist and wine existed literally in cana! The priest commands Jesus to come down its in Rome’s teachings!!! Stop justifying the teaching of the church!
@@pimpsarefilthy Sorry to burst your bubble LOL, but I am on the side of the truth. You mean to say that the bread and wine has to be physically converted into to the physical body and blood of Christ for you to believe? Well no Mister doubting Thomas, Christ definitely woud not want us to look like cannibals and vampires in the process. Didnt Jesus said that "this is my body" and "eat of it"? You make Jesus a Liar just because the bread and wine did not turn physically into his body and blood. You just didnt get it Mr. doubting Bubble, that is the miracle of it, the divinity of the Body and Blood of Christ contained in the bread and wine through the Holy Eucharist. And Jesus commanded us to eat His body in the form of bread which is the Holy Eucharist. The Holy Catholic Church have maintained that way for 2,000 years and you did not. Are you ready for the truth? I pray to God that you will.
It would be important to recognize that when someone say “everyone believed”, especially speaking for centuries of believers, the person saying it has already laid a foundation with a lie. A person further complicates the lie by portraying the Eucharist as simply the wine and wafer.
Francis Chan is taught by the Holy Spirit not by the history class James white was taught in. James white is good in some sense but he doesn’t hav all the answers to God n how to worship Him n love Him
as a protestant (Assembly of God) james white has driven me more and more to learn about catholic beliefs. Absolutely cant stand White as an apologist. this is probably my 50th Trent Horn and although i dont believe in everything that trent says i appreciate how he communicates and teaches. And he killed james White on the debate about Calvinism
There's a lot protestants don't know example 1. Infant baptism. The early church always performed infant baptism, there are writings from early Christians that predate Constantine even becoming in the the picture that clearly show infant baptism has always been performed in the early church. It was not just merely an outward sign of an inward confession. 2. Faith alone, faith alone was never taught in the early church as well. Grace alone yes we can't earn your way. But there is a working through repentance that is needed for the grace of God to renew and change your person. If asceticism was not important Jesus would have never fasted and taught to fast. It's not protestants fault and the Roman church should be responsible for educating protestants because let's be honest there would have not been a reformation if the Roman church had not been so corrupt. I'm eastern orthodox where we have never expirenced a reformation. I am not Roman catholic anymore for several reasons but that's another discussion. Very happy protestants are inquiring.
Protestant "grape juice" is a joke.
Anthony Louis If it’s symbolic, does it really matter?
@Anthony Louis it does not mean grape juice. Though wine is grape juice literally, fermented grape juice.
"in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts. But ye have profaned it, in that ye say, The table of the LORD is polluted; and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible" (Malachi 1)
"For my flesh is meat indeed" (John 6)
In the early Church and still in the Eastern Orthodox Churches, the Eucharist was simply considered to be a mystery, beyond human comprehension. In some ways, by defining the Eucharist by means of the doctrine of “transubstantiation” the Church imposed limits on the nature of the mystery. For example, by teaching that the “accidents” of the bread and wine remain unchanged following consecration, Trent denied the possibility of “Eucharistic Miracles” since, theses miracles are founded upon the assumption that it is, in fact, possible for the “accidents” to change, contradicting Trent, which asserts that the “accidents” remain unchanged. Then, since most people today do not have a thorough knowledge of Greek Scholastic Philosophy, assertions are made which contradict the teaching of Trent. For example, I have seen suggestions that the bread has been examined after consecration and found to have undergone a change at a sub molecular level. Any such suggestion is negated by the teaching of the Council of Trent.
The doctrine of transubstantiation clarifies that during consecration, the substance of bread and wine becomes Christ's Body and Blood, with the appearances unchanged. This doesn’t limit the mystery but affirms it. Eucharistic miracles, where appearances change, are exceptional signs from God and don’t contradict this teaching.
Why does the Orthodox Church nitpick Catholic doctrine with such superiority? Unlike Catholics, they didn’t face the Protestant Reformation and weren’t pressed to define doctrine as precisely as the Catholic Church had to.
@@panda87365 Eucharist Miracles do, clearly contradict the definitions of Trent. The accidents do change and Trent defines, as a dogma, that they do not change, adding that it would be abhorrent to any human being to eat human flesh or to drink human blood, the Council defining as a dogma that no scientific analysis could ever discern anything other than ordinary bread and wine following consecration.
The Council of Trent’s teaching on transubstantiation is often misunderstood. It asserts that the ‘accidents’ (appearances) of bread and wine remain unchanged in normal circumstances, but Eucharistic miracles, where these ‘accidents’ do change, are extraordinary and serve to deepen our understanding of the mystery of Christ’s presence. These miracles don’t contradict Trent; rather, they highlight the power of God to work beyond our usual experience. The Church recognizes these as rare signs that strengthen faith, not as a contradiction to established doctrine.
The problem with pinning down the Anglican position is there is no consensus, from one Anglican Parish to the next you may find one which upholds seven sacraments and the real presence, to the next that accepts two sacraments which are just symbolic. It was under Elizabeth I that the "Elizabethan Settlement" dictated that the different opinions could all be tolerated. At the time Cardinal Newman was still an avowed Evangelical, and still anti-Catholic, in the Early Oxford Movement days, Parliament, and the Anglican Church jailed Anglican clergy who re-adopted altars, vestments, and the use of candles in Communion services.
"They [Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not believe the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ... Those, therefore who speak against this gift of God incur death." - Ignatius of Antioch, 105 AD.
New covenant Christians already have the Spirit of Jesus dwelling in them. Communion, is to remember that fact to seek strength from God’s Spirit building up our spirit.
For decades I tried to overcome sin with my own willpower, I had no lasting victory until I tapped into the power of God’s Spirit within.
TreKater joh 17 17 Jesus changed a major Jewish holiday, instead of celebrating Passover, He explained the symbolism of His body and blood that was to replace eating a lamb and smearing its blood on the doorpost. Not everything in the Bible is literal, many things speak of the spiritual aspect. Especially when Jesus says ”do this in remembrance of me”.
Luke 22.19, 1Cor. 11.24
He was referring to the remembrance of His death on the Passover celebration. Jesus died once for sins past, present, and future, this is realized by faith, not conjuring a fresh sacrifice everytime you meet.
Jesus’s sacrifice enabled God’s Spirit to dwell in every believer, giving the desire and power to live a victorious life! If the Spirit of Jesus dwells in your heart you don't need chew Him up and swallow also.
TreKater joh 17 17 lol, you think God’s holy people, filled with the love of Christ, would kill millions for not accepting Christ? Would sell indulgences to their people? Would worship and pray to everybody in heaven, instead of the one true God? Luther was able to read the Bible and exposed the errors of the Catholic Church. He also translated it in the common language. For that the Catholic Church wanted to kill him. The Catholic Church is the farthest thing from the first church, Jesus told His disciples to love others as He loved them. To love God with all their heart, mind, and strength. To love their neighbors as themselves, and to even love their enemies. Yet you defend the Catholic Church that murdered millions of unbelievers and Christians. Unbelievable
TreKater joh 17 17 thanks for pointing out my mistake, I changed Calvin to Luther. Thanks for the info on Calvin, another religion that deviated from the way of Jesus.
Luther was a Catholic that converted to Jesus. Try reading
”Fox’s Book of Martyrs ” a non Catholic book.
TreKater joh 17 17 without faith it is impossible to please God.
For by grace are you saved through faith, not of yourselves it is the gift of God not of works, lest any should boast.
The old covenant was between the nation of Israel and God. The new covenant is between God and whosoever trusts in Jesus. Jesus said that the world would know His disciples by their love for others. The true church is comprised of everyone that places their faith in Jesus, there is no covenant between God and the Catholic Church, Luthern Church, Calvinists, or the 50,000 other churches. It is between God and individuals. God is no respector of persons.
Remember that Christ is the head of the church, and the chief cornerstone. Those stones are those that believe and trust in Jesus, nothing to do with Rome or the Catholic Church.
1 Pet.2.4As you come to him, the living Stone-rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him- 5you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house a to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6For in Scripture it says:
“See, I lay a stone in ZION,
a chosen and precious cornerstone,
and the one who trusts in him
will never be put to shame.” b
7Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe,
“The stone the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,” c
8and,
“A stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall.” d
They stumble because they disobey the message-which is also what they were destined for.
9But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.
God has saved me and delivered me from depression, perversion, materialism, by giving me His Holy Spirit, that gave me the desire and power to live victoriously! As I said the true church is built up with those that place their trust in Jesus. Peter, trusting in Jesus is part of that living building, the question you need to ask yourself is, are you, do you trust Jesus? or your church?
Everyone must stand before God and give an account for their deeds and actions, it won't due, for you to say that your Catholic.
Jesus didn't just talk the talk but walked the walk. With that said we have no proof that He ever cut His flesh and fed it to the Apostles to fulfill His statement of unless you eat My flesh and drink My blood you have no part in me. From when He said that until the Last Supper He had opportunity after opportunity to do it, He just never did, until... Until He created a substitute, a representation of His flesh and blood! He is the bread of life, His blood was spilled for us!
I'm Protestant. I know it's amazing but, what part of "this is my body" do we not get?
Protestants are surprisingly unbiblical when it suits them.
I feel like this eucharistic perspective is so obviously and utterly false, it must have been the result of the obvious issue that the eucharist is given out by apostolic bishops so they had to deny the eucharist if they wanted to deny the church.
Luther certainly didnt deny the eucharist
It is easy to disagree with James White because he ain't no scholar, that's for sure.
That initial article is pretty off. The BCP has always held to knowledge that it "is means is", as per the Lutheran influence. Anglicans focused on the spiritual reality (real presence). The difference is yes, do the elements and accidents change, or stay the same.
You may say most Christians believed it but remember that in AD 70 the Jerusalem Church went down and later on a Gentile church developed. Polycarp in the Quartrodeciman controversy said he will follow the tradition of the Apostles and observe the day they threw out the leaven, and keep the Passover. Polycrates said the same thing...I wonder how they missed this great teaching.
Chan does not hold to transubstantiation.
He said so himself. He holds to literal presence without holding to a specific way of how it is literally there. You can believe in literal presence and not hold to the false view of transubstantiation.
i know i am four years late on this but if anyone sees this comment and can point me to the saint basil quote Trent mentioned about Eucharistic adoration in the 3rd century pls show me where i can find that writing
When I read the verses on the last supper, I was always under the impression that Jesus wanted us to think of Him every time we eat and drink. That His sacrifice should always be on our minds, and gratefulness and understanding of the Grace that’s been extended to us should be a constant.
I was never under any impression that we should treat it as a symbolism we do weekly or a ritual where we think we’re literally eating the corpse of a Christ.
I just thought we are supposed to remember Him, like He said. And I thought that this was tied into us being saved because how can you be saved if you don’t remember our Lord and Savior?
I appreciate the humility of your approach, and it's true that Christ should always be on your mind, but literally none of the Apostolic Fathers understood it in such mundane terms. Transubstantiation has always been taken for granted, precisely because it's Biblical and true. Christ told us to eat His Body and drink His Blood, not merely to remember Him while eating bread and wine. That's a good practice, too, of course, but the language He used made it explicitly clear to the Apostles (as well as to the pharisees) that He was commanding far more of them.
I notice that most angry Calvinists disagree with Calvin’s views on Baptism, the Eucharist, etc.
The angry aggressive Calvinist seems to consistently believe God’s Love is a lower tier motive for God’s involvement with the world, and believes in double predestinarianism. That’s it.
Maybe Trent Horn and James White can meet up again and debate this topic?
As a Catholic I don't believe we will ever reach agreement on the real presence of Jesus body, blood soul and Divinity in the Holy Eucharist by science, discussion, knowledge or Theology. It has to be an encounter and experience of the closeness of Jesus in my soul. It is about experiencing the light of God's presence. Take the incarnation for example, the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary and Jesus, the word made Flesh was concieved by the Holy Spirit. Mary was chosen to be the tabernacle of Jesus for Nine months as Jesus lived in her womb. God the Father chose Mary, so that Jesus became human in his real presence on earth. This is in Lukes Gospel, it is a mystery of faith that we will never fully understand, it can only be viewed with the eyes of faith outside of time and space as we know it. Jesus real presence has to be in my Soul, in my willingness to walk with Jesus in my lifes journey. Jesus has made himself available to come into my body and Soul in the form of little piece of white bread yet in a mysterious way it is the same Jesus that broke bread after the redirection with the apostles on the road to Emmaus, he comes into my inner room, where he gives me the Grace of Knowing and recognising him in the breaking of bread. Jesus is truly present, nothing has to be said, it is about being present, just as Mary was present to recieve Jesus. In John's Gospel we hear "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him" (Jn 6:56). I give praise and thanks for his many graces and blessings. 🙏
Throughout the history of the Catholic Church, there has been many Eucharistic miricles, where the bread and wine has changed into the body and blood of Christ on the Alter. One example is Lanciano in Italy when a monk was celebrating Mass in the 8th Century, it is worth looking up. It is said that the Roman soldier who pierced the side of Christ on the Cross with a lance and blood and water flowed out, came from Lancanio (hence the name)
Francis Chan is a good preacher
James White is not answering the actual questions that were asked .
great video Trent
First direct followers of the Apostles believed in Eucharists ...period.
The crowd Jesus taught also believed it was the literal body and blood which is why they left. It would've been heresy as consuming blood was forbidden by God in the scriptures. They failed to realize Jesus was teaching them something greater in that moment which was not literal. It was spiritual and foreshadowed what was to come. Same as the last supper.
....Additionally, it should be mentioned that in his more recent research A. McGrath has substantively revised his review of the Greek fathers' view of justification. He clarifies in his 4th edition that they did believe justification to be transformative, rather than simply a proclamation that did not effect any change in the one justified. ...Upshot? It largely confirms the traditional teaching on justification held by the Greek fathers, as well as Augustine, et al (contrary to Reformed theology).
Bonjour du Québec.
Fun fact, Quebec's taboo words are tabernacle, calice, ciborum, host...and so on. Likely due to the the repression of the expression of reformed ideas in New-France.
Francis might as well go with it and be Catholic its where youre going to wind up anyway,but take your time,it took me a couple of years before I took the plunge,over the past 5
years Im still learning.
The whole premise of this video is exactly what so many people find wrong with the Catholic church... Just because it is "historically" what the "church" has done does NOT make it correct!!! This video gave ZERO references to scripture and ZERO proof from Jesus' life or any of the ORIGINAL apostles lives that this concept of literal transformation is based on anything other than church tradition.. JUST BECAUSE A CHRISTIAN 200-400 YEARS AFTER JESUS DIED SAYS SOMETHING DOES NOT MAKE IT SCRIPTURE!
Just think if Paul never got knocked off his hi horse, Paul never new that he was being deceived, until Father knocked him down and made him blind....
Just another example to not get too endeared with a pastor or worship leader. You have people stressing out over whether or not a guy doing missions in Hong Kong is going to become a Roman Catholic. I utterly reject Roman Catholicism but I need to focus on finding sound doctrine in the word and pursuing the ministry God has for me where I am at today.