🍒 Cherry picking the Church Fathers.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 พ.ค. 2023
- St. John Henry Newman, before he became Catholic, discovered the authority of the Church Fathers but realized that fellow Protestants could selectively interpret their writings, as they did with Scripture. Recognizing the need for an authoritative interpretation, he was led to the Church of the Fathers, acknowledging that Christ established an earthly authority. The Catholic Church exercises its authority when controversies arise, making rulings and maintaining its historical tradition.
Clip from: What Did the Early Church Believe About Mary? (w/ Mike Aquilina)
• What Did the Early Chu...
#catholic #history #catholicchurchhistory #churchhistory #catholic #jesus #catholicchurch #catholicism #christianity #catholicfaith #romancatholic
![เบิ้ล ปทุมราช - อ้ายกินดอง น้องลาบงัว ft. สแน็ก อัจฉรีย์ [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-OK--KaSPcI/mqdefault.jpg)
Jesus is sovereign. He is the ultimate authority. Jesus is the Word of God.
Jesus is a man, worshipping him is idolatry, only Almighty God is sovereign over the entirety of creation. Allahu Akbar
That’s true but it’s a son sequitur since it does not address the claim of authority made by the Church.
@@clintonbaird5465 jesus is god
@@Marcel---- lol nah Jesus was just a man and a great prophet may peace be upon him
@@Marcel---- how can the creator be the creation? God is Completely Transcendent of His creation
The authority is the Holy Spirit
How can the Holy Spirit have more than 1 correct answer.
@@godsstrength7129 Loaded question. The Holy Spirit doesn't have more than one correct answer for every issue.
@God's Strength no one said all the denominations are simultaneously right
If that was true how come protestants are divided to the core?
Maybe because another spirit is guiding them other than the holy spirit? 🤔
God is not divison or of many minds
Acts 5,32
32 We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.”
33 When they heard this, they were furious and wanted to put them to death.
@@r.c4914 No one denies that only one church is correct, please do not mistake any protestant for having said that all denominations are correct. I do not fully understand your reasoning behind posting the verse that you did.
That's why we don't go to denominational churches, we go to the only one Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, that Christ bought with his blood. We do not invent filioques
Amen
Yeah the catholic church "barely does thst" but when it does oh boy oh boy a 1054 happens
This argument would be a lot more compelling if the magisterium has actually been consistent throughout history. Also when you read the Reformers and how on some issues THEY are with the consensus of the father's. Everyone cherry picks in that way, Rome merely claims to have "infallible" cherry picking.
There are so many important things that the church fathers themselves disagree on with each other also
@Нaskel what did he say that you find inaccurate?
Protestantism and Catholicism are two sides of the same coin. Return to Orthodoxy
The problem with protestantism is that it willingly lops off the historical Christian narrative, along with any kind of method of discerning truth outside of ourselves, for introspective thought on the scriptures.
The scriptures are great. However, if it's all you have you are engaging in a kind of reconstructionism . Similar to modern pagans. They aren't actually the pagans of old. They're just a bunch of people who studied what religious material we have on the ancient pagans and they try to glue it together how they can.
The greater problems being you might not understand the sense of scripture, you might think a word means something it doesn't, or it's possible the exactness of a sentence is not what a writer was going for.
For the more liturgical protestants they have the same problems with reading the church fathers. It's all a sloppy effort in reconstructionism.
Unless you believe God guides your Church you must assume you'll never read the scriptures or the fathers correctly. You need a living body of Christians to carry it all. You need a temporal link to Christ.
Do you have any examples of things that have changed over time? Its my understanding that the infallibility of the ordinary magisterium, like papal infallibility, only applies in some limited cases
Next logical step: Orthodoxy☦
Orthodoxy is better than protestantism, that is clear.
Wait until they figure out which apocryphal church got corrupted, selling salvation point for church donations, adding to the nicene creed, and changing their liturgy
How sad. Your church isn’t the one Jesus found.
@@ash_11117 why isn't it?
Much more universality in the Roman Catholic Church than in Eastern Orthodoxy.
Yes, but the original church is the Orthodox Church, the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
That would be the Christian Chruch, not Catholic.
@@sammygomes7381 What does the word catholic mean?
@@pero33403 it means universal which can be used as both an adjective or a noun
@@sammygomes7381 The word catholic should be used to describe the Church of Jesus Christ, just like it was used in the Nicene Creed, one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
@@pero33403 My friend Jesus never described the church as used in the Nicene Creed. You failed to mention which one but you suggest that we take the word of man or Christ. I'll pass.
The word clearly says...
1.God treats all men alike...all will stand at judgement ..there is no purgatory.
2.Only through Christ Jesus are sins forgiven and prayers answered.
3.Every believer has the authority through the spirit of God,to the keys of heaven
4.God does not allow any deity to share his space.
5. God looks at the heart, nothing is hidden from him.
John 20:20-23 says apostles can forgive sin in his name….the word is being interpreted by you fallibly
@@johnyang1420. The meaning is if you present the gospel to someone and they accept Jesus as savior their sins are forgiven. If they don't their sins remain. Only God can forgive sin
Holy Orthodoxy has entered the chat... ☦️
☦️☦️☦️☦️
Heretics and schismatics on the road to hell.
Fake
I noticed I did this same thing when I was a Protestant. I would cherry pick opinions by the Church Fathers or reject entire Church Fathers wholesale because I felt they were mistaken. Ironically it was only when I prayed daily to God for discernment(which there is good evidence I indeed received this) and read the Bible itself that it was revealed to me that I could not possibly be Protestant anymore.
Imagine the absurdity of believing that the Holy Spirit was not able to choose the right words to communicate God’s revelation through the apostles, but that the church fathers thankfully came along later and were able to communicate it in a less ambiguous way.🤦🏻♂️
The only thing you’ve done is shifted your authority from the word of God to the words of men. The only person qualified to author and interpret Scripture is the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 2:7, 1 John 2:27, John 14:26, 2 Peter 1:20-21).
All Scripture is God-breathed revelation and fully sufficient to make a person wise for salvation through faith in Christ and to prepare them for all good works. (2 Timothy 3:14-17).
The only thing you’ve done is cut out the Holy Spirit, so when you read, you’re getting your interpretation of the church’s interpretation of the Bible. You’ve only added a fallible middle man. If God wanted the church fathers to determine what He meant, He would have chosen them and not the apostles.
Just like how Catholics cherry pick which counsels they think are authoritative 🤣
Like which ones??
The only councils that are Authoritative are the ones with Papal Approval , fool .
Catholics position on Mary and the Saints is clearly biblical blasphemy! Jesus is Risen!
😂
Explain how please
This would be compelling if this same church hadn’t needlessly murdered half of Germany because a guy had the gall to nail complaints to a door.
Apparently tradition comes before the word of God to them. Tradition matters so much they decided to change it from the original churches of Christ! Matters so much they massacred the prostestants of Nantes forcing my ancestors to leave France.
@@spliffobamayup-the Albigensians, the Waldensians, etc. Hard to justify allegiance to an organization that’s been so sullied by its grasp on political power.
The problem is the church is made of men who are being made into the image of Christ but are not yet the image of Christ and thus are fallible and make mistake, just look at the history of the church. Christ is perfect we are not. Repent and believe the gospel.
Jesus didn’t found the Catholic Church, He didn’t found the Baptist Church, He didn’t found the Orthodox Church, He didn’t found the Pentacostal Church, or any other denomination. He simply founded the Church. All who repent and believe are apart of the church.
Teaching should be Sola Scriptura. A pope, a pastor, a priest, a monk, a youth pastor, or any preacher as well as those who aren’t preachers are all potentially fallible. This is why we must let the Holy Spirit guide us to understand the scripture. The preachers are simply those who are tasked with attempting to gain a deep understanding by devoting their lives to comprehending the scriptures in order to guide the rest of the Church based off of what they learn from the Holy Spirit. But when they preach they are capable of being fallible.
Actually Jesus did found the Orthodox Church. Jesus commanded the apostles to start churches. Even in the bible which originates from the Orthodox Church, Paul writes to churches he founded on the command of Jesus. These churches still exist today and have been orthodox for 2000 years. Sola scriptura is so brain dead because the bible doesn’t say scripture alone. In fact it says the opposite and clearly says scripture plus tradition (2 Thes 2:15 and 1 Cor 11:2). Furthermore the canon of scripture wasn’t finalized until the 7th century. So the first 600 years of Christians were just left abandoned? Sola scriptura was invented by Protestant heretics 500 years ago. The same heretics that created the doctrine of scripture alone also removed books from the bible and changed scripture lol. Scripture alone implies God abandoned the church for 1500 years with errant teachings which according to scripture is false (Matt 16). Your sad attempt to resolve the thousands of denominations your Protestant heretic brothers created by appealing to scripture alone has failed.
Anglican branch theory? Check out Jay Dyer on this topic my brother in Christ
@@StevenRotelli I don't recall hearing about the Anglican Branch theory in my life. This is just my view based off of what I've seen from the teachings of different denominations. I'll look into Jay Dyer though.
Google “Which church did Jesus start?” Catholic! Mic drop
The romanist church is not very constant with its theology what so ever. This is why you came up with the term doctrinal development which makes no sense. As well as Vatican 1 contradicts Vatican 2 and there is endless of examples of the very early church resisting whatever the bishop of Rome had to say out right such as poly carp and polycrates outright rejection of pope victor trying to set a universal date for pasche and then ireaneus being the one to solve the conflict between the two. The second council of Ephesus and pope of Alexandria also didn’t accept Leo the 1st as infallible. There is like a million other examples as well. Romanist literally read there interpretation of the church into history and it’s just not there.
‘The Fathers of the Church will lead you to the Church of the Fathers’
And then Newman realized that he couldn't find a bunch of Papist doctrine in the church fathers, so he came up with "development of doctrine" theory, which spits in the face of prior Papist councils
"Papist?" You must be Scotch.
Then be orthodox
@Steven Rotelli If I ever switched denominations, I'd be more likely to go Orthodox than Roman Catholic. But Orthodoxy has its share of issues.
@@chemnitzfan654 exactly
@@chemnitzfan654 that’s where I’m going. our faith tradition barely made it 500 years, and split like crazy over that time. We also allowed many cults to form under our watch in the 19th century. My evangelical church has become a friend of the world and is no place for my infant son and pre born daughter.
I’m a lifelong Catholic and I do have problems with decisions made by popes, especially the one we have now. There is no place else to go though and I will remain with this church. No other group has the Eucharist. It’s the closest you can get to Jesus on this earth.
You’ve been brainwashed. The churches Paul wrote to in his epistles still exist today and they are orthodox not Roman Catholic. It’s been that way for 2000 years
You have no basis for judging the pope. We do. You pick men to judge scripture, we use scripture to judge men. The scriptures is its own interpreter, because it is Gods Word. Would the one who created our mouths, not have the ability to communicate clearly?
You have a place to go, it is called the Orthodox Church, the original Christian Church, the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. It has the Eucharist as well, under two kinds, both bread and wine. In the early Church, communion was ordinarily administered and received under both kinds.
Michael Gendron × Catholic U-Tube
There is a place to go. It's called the Orthodox Church, which the Roman Catholic Church broke off from, and introduced innovations. Many catholic people from seminary, once they learn history, come to Orthodoxy.
Become Orthodox
warra argument
Orthodoxy
Exactly, Orthodoxy is the only Way.
Is false.
@@BUCKINATORCHRIS only is you think Christianity is false. There is no other apostolic Church.
@@BUCKINATORCHRIS1054- Pope was excommunicated
Crusades- Thousands of dead Muslims
Protestant Reformation- Greedy Catholic Church
1054- Adding things to creed and church
What has Orthodox Church done wrong?
Yes , Orthodoxy is the way .I am Orthodox , unlike the heretical """Eastern Orthodox""" .
That is Correct!!
That’s why smart ones convert to the true Catholic Church.
I find this odd... Yeshua sent the HS to be our guide and then the Catholic Church decides that it is our authority?
I am curious though: do Catholics still teach that the Popes words are just as binding as Yeshua's words? Or do I have a misunderstanding of what a Catholic brother told me?
Papal infallibility is the term you are referring to. And it only applies to when the pope speaks on faith and morals. There are only two confirmed times that Papal Infallibility was invoked in the Church.
For instance: a pope saying it is his opinion to take a particular item of medication for the good of all is his opinion and can be disregarded because as a human he can err. But if he is speaking "ex cathedra" he is speaking as Christ's representative on earth in that authoritative capacity.
Bishop Fulton Sheen had a really good talk on it that you can look up on Google if you want to understand more.
@@jbeck1234 First off I want to thank you for your cordial reply. It's nice not being met with the derogatory title of, "Proddy." Though I am a Messianic Hebrew.
That is a much better explanation of what I was asking my other Catholic brother (I do consider all Catholics my brothers and sisters). If I am understanding you correctly, the Pope is essentially taking a stance like Paul did about marriage... "...It is good for man not to be married." It was Paul's opinion that one shouldn't get married because to him it was paramount to spread the word. Would this be more or less correct? If so... I'd definitely be fine with it.
I understand I may have talked to those who may be more fringe in their belief on this subject in the past. So I'm trying to be careful about passing a judgement here yet.
Anyways, Shalom and thank you for your answer.
@@stormblessed6277, Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church as a whole into the truth, not individual Christians. The Church was established, in part, to be our teacher. If the Holy Spirit was the direct personal Teacher of each Christian, then God would never have established the office of teacher in the Church, as Ephesians 4 tells us He did.
He gave the Holy Spirit to them for them to LEAD the church, being the first bishops.
I believe the two are about Mary from the 1800s.
The immaculate conception and her ascension into heaven.
Two rather strange doctrines in my opinion.
1 Timothy 3:15
Matthew 16:17-18
Colossians 1:24
No authority needed. Jesus said "you will know them by their fruits"
Indeed, and the fruits of the so called "catholic" church are truly rotten. If you haven't done already, please consider the Orthodox Church, the original christian Church.
@@pero33403 GLORY TO GOD
One Holy and Apostolic Church. Mother church, bride of Christ on earth.
Roman Catholic Church❤️❤️❤️
There is no V1 papacy for the first 1000 years
Yes he must be talking about the one true church, the holy Orthodox church, where the traditions actually remain unchanged.
Exactly
So true I’m Christian orthodox and I’ve never seen any of our church fathers misrepresent anything because they remain with original values
Exactly, the orthodox church which builds cathedrals in Russia glorifying communist soldiers, what sublime traditions to stick to
Heretics and schismatics on the road to hell.
@steelfalconx2000 that’s funny. You know the mother church was in rome then Constantine came he set up a new rome in Constantinople which had no apostolic succession. The east was always in heresy with the emperors. You’re in schism with peter. That’s why you can’t even called a council right now because the Russian Orthodox Church doesn’t get along with Constantinople. Funny thing about Constantinople fell to the Muslims while Rome remains the same.
The Church of believers do not interpret Scripture by itself privately. Scripture interprets Scripture by the in dwelling of the Holy Ghost in its collective born again believers in Christ and his word!😮😮
Nobody has authority over the scriptures. The scriptures are the authority, not people. Allowing the Bible to interpret itself by cross referencing passages is far safer than accepting a human being's 'authority'. It's called God's word for a reason. Listen to it carefully and you'll discover that people misuse it all the time for their own misguided intentions.
Sola scriptura. Sola Christus. Sola Gracia.
Amen. I’m not gonna become a Catholic because I actually want to read the scriptures for myself. I personally I will stay non-denominational.
You’re your own Pope then. Congrats
@@justin36004 Not sure what that means as God never gave a position of pope.
@@sammygomes7381 Sola Scriptura = I’m my own Pope
@@justin36004 Why would I want to be a pope, Christ never made such a position.
Who's actually cherry-picking here? Was it the reformers, or was it this guy who is cherry-picking from the mistakes that they made? That's one big difference: Protestants don't pretend like their leaders were perfect. We don't call them "saints" or say that they are "infallible". Protestants look at them as they're instructed to look at all: as fellow sinners who fall short of grace. Catholics have a hard time understanding this because their own arrogance makes it difficult for them to comprehend Christian humility.
Catholics like to pretend like they are following authority while ignoring the only thing that is authoritative: the Bible. In the case of the Bible, they do a lot more than cherry-pick. They overrule the Bible, and look up what they did to the second commandment for a good example, whereby they got rid of the idolatry part for the Mary worship. The church leaders practice an alternative religion in defiance of the scriptures, and even admit that they're not Christian. It's like a magic trick and the religion that's actually represented has always been that way. It's known as Mystery Babylon.
Catholics are encouraged to learn about the paganism that Constantine injected into the Church. You've been tricked into mocking God and serving the other side.
Everything you typed has been debunked by a lot of people. Do your research about the Church and her history before writing absolute nonsense
@@CathTishGo ahead and debunk me. Prove the Catholic Church isn't lying by showing me the scripture of Peter being the Pope in Rome. (Hint: Popes didn't exist until centuries later.) Where is Biblical account of him visiting the city of Rome exactly? Also, why is the Pope's title Pontificis Maximus when that was the paganistic title of the high priest of the God-cursed Babylonian religion? Just thought I'd spice things up with that too, but I could go on all day. What the heck... You deserve another Catholic history freebie. Why do the members of the Vatican wear those fish miter hats, when those also go back to the high priests of the forbidden pagan religion? The Catholic Church was Constantine's dirty trick. It is the continuation of Roman paganism. Rome wasn't made to be Christian. Instead, Catholicism was made into the new paganism, and going along with the program seemed to be preferable to being fed to the lions. For instance, the "Mary" that you worship is actually the goddess (or demon) Semiramis, and you would find in the Bible (if you ever decided to read it) that she was worshiped with beads and incense. Sound a little familiar?
Roman Catholicism cherry picks Scriptures and Church Fathers, as well. In fact, they were doing it long before Protestants.
Name of the speaker and yt channel?
I think the speaker is Mike Aquilina.
are you serious is any one who dared to called church fathers? we have only 1 Father which is from heaven. No one worth it to called Father in church.
Cherry picking the Early Church Fathers ? Ya...Gavin Ortlund does that!
Not really. I've read them. The Patristic era is the most accurate thing you can get to Christianity. Orland SLAYS at apologetics. He is on a totally different level than what you are used to and he is REALLY good at it.
@@bairfreedom That is why you are still a Protestant.
@@bairfreedomhe was demolished by trent horn. Lol.
but he is charming and articulate which disposes many to be charmed and impressed otherwise.
@@MM22272 True....as Jesus said in Matt 24:24
For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.
most what the RCC teaches, was never taught by JESUS.
Jesus started Catholic church to carry on his teaching
Just like catholics read the Bible in Latin and no one could understand it. You had good begennings but like always humans do, you turned faith into ritualistic, blind religion
Then you pick up De civitate Dei and you see Augustine say he gets his authority from Plato (yes, the Greek pagan), and you wonder why anyone would cite the church fathers at all.
Cool story bro but if you don't have the gift of the spirit, you probably shouldn't be preaching or teaching at all. Too many fake preachers nowadays who completely lack the gift of the spirit yet claim that they do, going so far as completely corrupting or distorting what it actually is to justify their positions of authority.
Who said they are authorities?
Why do I have to be anathematized for not believing Mary ascended into heaven?
Because you prove your disbelief in the body of christ if you dont believe they are infallible
@@awuriefnejqwjmnwn4960 But it's such a minor issue. Mary is not God. Mary didn't die for my sins. And yet I have to go to hell for not believing in her ascension?
I'm not against church authority, I'm just very skeptical of the infallibility of sacred tradition. Especially since Jesus was very much against the tradition of the pharisees.
In fact, He often used scripture to refute the pharisees---which makes me think that scripture trumps church authority and that the church is not infallible.
@@sonicgeeksquad4g106 he refutes the Pharisees for their wrong teachings and their hypocrisy.
Catholics however are not the pharisees, they are the church of christ. In order for it to never lead people to hell (Mat. 16:18) the church must be infallible in its teachings.
So if you now disagree with the marian dogma, youre undermining that very authority and you cant really be catholic. You are in schism, if you will
@@awuriefnejqwjmnwn4960 Well, I'm not a Catholic.
How is Mary's ascension relevant for salvation? Why couldn't the church have just left it out? It's nowhere in scripture, and there's no historical evidence for it. And furthermore, it wasn't even a dogma until 1950. So before 1950, you could not believe that Mary ascended into heaven, and not go to hell, but after 1950 if you don't believe this, you'll go to hell.
@@sonicgeeksquad4g106 no thats not how this works. Marian beliefs have been around for a long long long time and you wont go to hell over disagreeing with such an issue.
Its not like you can force yourself to believe it anyways, but there are good arguments for it which come from scripture and tradition
Romans had a multitude of gods they prayed to for help in everyday life, depending upon the situation. Catholics pray to saints specializing in a specific "job description" Anyone?
There is no parallel here
That’s ironic, because Rome absolutely cherry picks the early writers.
Such as?
@@jamesk8083 um, all of them, but let’s use a writer that the church would have to anathematize for his OTHER stated beliefs… "Outside the Catholic Church, one can have everything except salvation."
St. Augustine
@@KristiLEvans1 St. Augustine has said nothing that would incur anathema, I do not see your point
@@jamesk8083 yes he has. In fact. you have not read his writings. He did not believe Mary was free from original sin.
@@KristiLEvans1 he actually did not address the issue of Mary and original sin. He merely stated that she was free wholly from actual sin
Also Rome has a fallible list of infallible Papal pronouncements .
This is not unity of truth but unity of administration and this is picking the papacy over the apostles
Roman Catholics cherry pick from the fathers.
Church Fathers were all Catholic priests.
Although I don’t agree with the reformed tradition this is not true and very bias. The typical Roman Catholic “pop” level apologetics…
when church fathers contradict what Rome teaches today Papists then claim “doctrinal development,” which makes it almost impossible to have a dialogue. Catholics also cherry pick church fathers to fit their doctrines…
There is no teaching that is highly widespread in the church father that is incompatible with today's doctrine, while there are many that are incompatible with protestantism.
@@tafazzi-on-discord show me where in the church fathers and scripture that it was unanimously agreed upon that we should restrict the laity from the blood of Christ, the teachings of purgatory, papal infallibility, Mary’s immaculate conception, celibacy for the priesthood, etc…
@@lukasg9031 Protestant vomit in question...
Listen, first off disciplines are not doctrines, the blood and celibacy are both disciplines. Since you appear to not know this, I assume you haven't spoken to many catholics in your life, of if you did you didn't listen.
So no, I won't do any of yet until you address my original point. Read carefully:
There is no teaching that is highly widespread in the church father that is incompatible with today's doctrine, while there are many that are incompatible with protestantism.
I'll name 2 that are incompatible with protestantism: true presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and the monoepiscopacy. Go ahead.
@@tafazzi-on-discord I’ve chatted with many Catholics and have considered becoming catholic…
Anglicans and Lutherans believe in the real presence in the Eucharist… we literally agree with the Church fathers.
I don’t know what you mean by monoepiscopy? Are you saying we don’t have a bishops or a papacy?
These are disciplines that are found no where in scripture or in the early church. They are made up by Rome… give the laity the blood of Christ and let the Latin priests marry
@@lukasg9031 Except both Lutherans and Anglicans have different understandings of the Real Presence from the rest of the pre-reformation churches: Catholic, Orthodox, Oriental. You agree in name alone. If you did agree with the church fathers, there wouldn't be a dispute on this.
Admittedly I agree with you on disciplines, but I haven't done enough research to stand firm on that.
RIGHT ON!!!! HIT THE RIGHT BUTTON!!!
Orthodoxy is the way
Newman was a modernist who denied that revelation ended with the last apostle and other things if memory serves...
This guy's living in a world where Vatican II didn't happen
Thank the Lord that the church fathers aren’t the final authority in all matters of faith and practice. Too much confusion.
Isaiah 8:20, “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.”
Name one Catholic teaching that isn’t found in the full bible.
@@patrickpelletier9298 consuming fermented liquor pretending it’s blood for salvation, as such practice is condemned before the law (Genesis 9), during the law (Leviticus 17), and after the law (Acts 15 & 21).
@@patrickpelletier9298The doctrine of trans substation, the worship of Mary, the belief in Purgatory just to name the 3 big ones. Also there is child baptism, the supremacy of the papal authority and the list goes on
@@mihaiszilagyi9987 ahh, the classic Protestant misinformation.
Transubstation, or as we call it, actually listening to Jesus. He said in John 6 “truley, truley, I say to you unless you eat of the flesh of the son of man, and drink of his blood, you won’t have life within you” he goes on to tell us that our flesh will be too weak to sense this, as pointed out by Steve ray.
Do you recall all the perfect workmanship God wanted built into the ark of the old covenant, and the temple in Jerusalem? What more perfection would God want in the mother of God? In old times, you would go to the mother of the King to intercede on your behalf for a favor, and in the same way, we go to Mary for the same request. If you have an open mind, read the prayers through Mary. We aren’t asking her to lead us to eternal life with Her Son, but instead asking for her prayers.
Purgatory is found in 1st Corinthians, and in the story of the rich man and Lazarus. We don’t leave hell eventually, but instead are purified in a third place such that nothing unclean can enter heaven. Purgatory is further proof of Gods mercy.
Peter and the other apostles baptized all, not just the adults. Both the Bible, and historical documents show this
@@TheWordofTruth1611 what did Jesus say about eating His Body and Blood?
Who are you to limit the power of God?
Thank you. Fr Newman is a good example of honesty.
Good for him
cherry picking from verses and things isn't that what the catholics do to try and say papacy was always a thing cherry picking church fathers for this
Jesus gave Peter, and Peter alone, the keys (Matthew 16:18-19) as well as tasking him with feeding the sheep, which are believers, John 21:16-17. That makes Peter a Shepard. The papacy is biblical.
@@christsavesreadromans1096 what says that means everyone else is the alleged leader after
@@christsavesreadromans1096 nothing in that verse even if it was him and not his faith that builds the rock nothing preaches his apostolic successors are to rule the faith and dictate it as they please its a failed idea that many church fathers do not interpret that verse like that at all.
@@crbgo9854 If even in Acts the apostles cast lots for the successor of Judas what makes you think they didn’t for the successor of Peter and the other apostles? You have to make a lot of unhistorical assumptions for your case to be true.
@@christsavesreadromans1096 non historical assumptions Matthias did not become judas peter was also the boshop of Antioch with successors how do you explain their right to power over the religion the Roman bishop was never looked at as 1st with no equals how about look up the channel orthodox theology with Craig he's got many things talking about it its clear a single man can't rum the religion the minute the world was against Christianity your pope went with it
Not compelling considering that orthodoxy only exists as a power exchange between religious groups and nation states.
Wrong. No man has authority over another man's conscience which, ultimately, is what you are arguing for no matter how eloquent you phrase it.
Laughably dumb argument. The apostles have authority over my conscience
Totally an assumption “Christ must have” lol. When Christ said on this rock I will build my church he was talking about himself as the cornerstone not Peter who denied him 3 times
I know are christians denominations are so currupted ,they change the Old Testament so many times.
Thanks be to God I became Orthodox.
Cherry picking scripture? See, now that is projection. The Roman church decided to just dispense with Matt 1:25, and declare Mary a perpetual virgin.
who was the first trinitarian?
And then to justify his own cherry picking he gave his cherry picking a new name so it didn’t sound as bad. Welcome to “Doctrinal Development” with John Henry Newman
Okay, good argument. I have been hearing the argument hat the church was establoshed by Jesus with Peter 2000 years ago and that the only one old enough is the Catholic Church (CC); and the second Pope was mentioned by Pual i think in 2 Timothy. The Catholic church is most likely the Church Christ established in the sense that the CC's history matches up with the Bible; however it does not mean that it is the Church Christ intended.
I never see Catholics address the reason why Martin Luther (ML) started the reformation. It was because of the corrupt and unbiblical teachings. One such teaching were indulgences, where one could basically pay away their sins. It is unbiblical becuase our sins have been forgiven and if we sin we have an advocate with the father (1 John 2:1). Even Catholic Theologians are confused to what this term means but upon research, it is clear that indulgences were a way to rid one of punishment, which is unbiblical. For this and other reasons, the Reforamtion happened, which is never discussed by Catholics for some reason...
This secrecy is important because it shows two things, that both, even separate, will result in the down fall for the CC.
1. If Catholics have changed their opinions, then they would admit that they were wrong. this would prove that the one true church had faults and was corrupted and held unbiblical teachings. So could they have been trusted or can they be trusted.
2.If the CC holds to this unbiblical teaching, either by not regarding it as heretical, then it...well it's pretty straight forward, ill leave this point
The fact that the CC has previously held this belief or still holds to this belief, shows that has been, can be or is corrupted. We should not follow the CC, even if they do date back to the times of Jesus and Peter, because they can contain heresies (or more factually they do contain heresies). 2 Peter touches on this: 2:1 "They will secretly bring destructive heresies."
I don't hate Catholics. All I want is to discuss it in peace. I don't disagree with everything they teach; i studied in a catholic school when I was younger. However, I still do disagree with some things that should be called out and discussed, not out of anger, or strife or glee from winning but just show that it is wrong. If at the end of every discussion, i don't convince Catholics, then thats that. Bye
Jesus started the Catholic church. You are against it.
Papists gonna pape.
Jesus started Catholic church!
"call no man father"
Debunked centuries ago buddy
The previous verse says "call no man teacher".
The problem isn't that Catholics cherry pick the Bible as it is that they invent extra Biblical teaching like praying to Mary.
Oral tradition as outlined in 2 Thes 2:15
@@johnyang1420 The verse refers to early Church teaching. There is nothing in it that can be construed as extra-Biblical authority.
Veneration of Mary predates the New Testament.
Veneration of Mary predates the new testament
@@IN-pr3lw So what. New Testament writers mentioned various heresies that were around before it was written.
The Reformers point was that the RCC scholars of their day were doing exactly what you accuse them of doing... it's not as simple as "one side cherry picks, the other side doesn't."
You're missing the point he's making. The Church fathers did have some disagreements. The Catholic Church, founded by Christ and guided by the Holy Spirit, has the authority to settle such disagreements. The same is not true of any Protestant denomination.
🗣JESUS IS COMING SOOON!
JESUS says keep Sabbath holy.
POPE says keep Sunday holy!
“The Bible says remember that thou keep the Sabbath day. The Catholic Church says, 'NO!'. By my divine power, I abolish the Sabbath day and command you to keep holy the first day of the week. And, lo, the entire civilized world bows down in reverent obedience to the command of the holy Catholic Church."
-Father Enright,
American Sentinal, June 1893.
7th day Sabbath = (Exo.20:8-11)
1st day Sunday = (Mark 7:7)
The WORD teaches 7th day is holy!
The WORLD teaches 1st day is holy!
🤔WHO DO YOU OBEY???????
@@ProEcclesiaProductions but the church father didn’t have agreement in essential thing as baptism! In the west ancient church the conception of original sin was vital in the baptism after Agustin, but not for East fathers.
@@j.a674 you are explaining precisely the reason that Christ instituted the magisterium.
@@ProEcclesiaProductions the bishops of East too, right? They had apostolic succession too, they are warranty of the true too. Ahh noooo wait, this a Roman channel. So just the Roman magisterium, why? Because the Roman magisterium say it. Very good argument. 🏃♂️ to a Roman Church.
The Catholic Church loves to say Jesus called Peter the rock to build the church on. But they don't tell you he called Peter satan too.
They cherry pick the Bible.
Source?
@AntiFurry927 Mark 8:33 But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.
I don't believe Jesus really thinks Peter is satan, but he did call him that. You need to take everything in context.
@@tonyornelas9374 satan was speaking into his ear and making him disobey Jesus.
Mathew 16:19 is no cherry pick.
Been doing this shit since 325AD
this argument can be mocked with three words,,Second Vatican Council”
you will know them by their fruits
Yes, people who don't understand the second vatican council often throw it out there as an "argument" against anything they don't like about the Catholic Church.
schismatic repent
@@ProEcclesiaProductions look at the liturgical destruction of Western civilization and the moral decline (sorry, I forgot to answer you)
@@ProEcclesiaProductions I'm confused. Are you stating that those who find issues with the non-dogmatic, non-binding, pastrol council of Vat 2 are picking and choosing beliefs and are therefore in the wrong?
As a historic Protestant, I can say that none of this challenges Sola Scriptura.
Who told you what the bible is? Catholic church did in 4th century
Where is the canon in scripture? And dont say the table of contents
There are no historic Protestants. Their religion was invented in the 16th century.
What?
Weird that this all powerful god is so hard to understand/figure out/agree upon.
Kinda makes me doubt that there is one.
Then explain the interpretation drift through history and why the "church at Jerusalem" was normatively Jewish.
You are right ... But where you are wrong is to limit it to only the RCC. Did God say only RCC?!
What about orthodox, and what about the original churches at Antioch, Alexandria...
If they are in union with Peter, then they are included
Is this bloke talking about Nicea & Chalcedon?
Too much hate between body parts of Jesus Christ
Its all about Jesus not Peter, Paul and Mary. Its Jesus only not Jesus and. Also Jesus never founded any denomination. You'll not find the roman catholic church nor any protestant church mentioned in the bible. The first church wss in the book of acts. The church is not a building but the church are the people who believe and attend
Does that include burning people at the stake?
The office of Cephas currently held by Papam Francis is exactly what the Holy Trinity would institute to settle debates and correct the wrong teaching of clergy near and far.
The office of Cephas is in three places, Alexandria, Antioch and Rome. The debates were always settled in councils, not by one person. Even st. Peter proved to be a fallible man.
@@pero33403 the office of Cephas is most certainly in Rome through verified Apostolic succession and while councils were capable of rendering decisions; all looked to Simon Cephas, Linus Cephas, etc to approve of their decisions, when necessary the current Cephas is taken by the Holy Spirit to rule Ex Cathedra as Simon Cephas did where the ministry to gentiles & Judaizers where unsettleable debates. In short, popes can be fallinle day to day, but when needed to represent the Trinity as Vicar of Christ & THE Rock of The God founded Church any prayed upon & well researched judgement is rendered infallible.
@@orutakawatenga8820 Rome has double Apostleship, both st. Peter's and st. Paul's. The see of st. Peter resides in three places, like I said, Rome, Antioch and Alexandria. Peter himself went to Antioch around A.D. 44 and directed the life of the church in Antioch, his first see, for seven years before going to Rome (Galatians 2:11). Alexandria also belongs to the see of st. Peter via evangelization efforts of st. Mark, a disciple of st.Peter.
trust me when I say this you do not want to know what the early church was doing
Roman Catholics also cherrypicked church fathers. 😂😂😂 Some fathers who were respected at their time couldn't become saints because they spoke something different from what Catholic church believes.
Then they werent fathers to begin with
@@mx_moi1964 They were fathers to begin with. Lot of records. Giving the title of "saint" is a later creation.
Jesus Christ specifically said that you should not worry over details in the Bible but live a good life and love each other. Also there's nothing that says you have to spend all your money on a megachurch
Imputation not Infusion
It never occurs to these people that the church became their idol.
How?
Not really, its through the church we can get closer to God
Excellent and so very true!
Oh sons of the flesh, if only your own right hand could save you! Were you not indeed warned in the Word through king David? Did not Isaiah tell you your sacrifices are in vain: like breaking a dog's neck or like offering pigs blood, like filthy rags? Oh for you hold to traditions and precepts to forsake the law and spirituality as your fathers the pharisees had and offer incense as an idolator!
You call men father when Christ spoke against these things. You pray through Mary yet show me where those who are asleep come to wrestle you who are dead?! Once in glory, don't fall down to them "for behold, I too, am a man!"
Turn to Christ not to the tyrants who murdered men of the Word with fire acting as gods yet we're idolators and workers of lawlessness. Repent and turn to Him who can save you!!
Works in reverse even better. If you hear the church fathers and notice that they are most definitely NOT authoritative, it tears down the authority of the church.
What do you mean by, "that they are most definitely NOT authoritative"?
Amos 37 says Surely the Lord will do nothing but he revealed his secrets unto his servants the prophets, without prophets and apostles on the Earth there is no authority to interpret scripture because scripture as is not of any private interpretation.
Can someone tell me the book and verses where all these silly denominations are laid out? ESPECIALLY catholocism
This all assumes any historical Jesus meant to establish a “church” at all. The evidence that the Keys passage is an interpolation is quite strong and the most parsimonious picture is a historical Jesus is that of an apocalyptic prophet who thought the world was ending within years.
There is only one farther!
yeh Jesus did send an authority to judge interpretations, its called the holy spirit.... Im gonna keep letting Him be my authority... and you guys can keep praying to marry.
Nope the Scripture is the only authority
Without lies, Christianity dies. You worship idols. All these men, idols. Like Jesus.
AMEN.
The blind leading the blind.
Oh ye of little faith.
Orthodoxy ☦️
Romans 1:7 "to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."
There was a Church already in Rome but Paul wrote "Romans" to the individual believers, not the church. Christ is the "Rock" in Matthew 16:18, as Christ is the Rock in 1 Corinthians 10:4, 1 Peter 2:8, Romans 9:33, Daniel 2:45 and others. Christ is referencing Matthew 16:16 as the "this" is Matthew 16:18.
What I implore every Catholic to study are the 7 Gospels Christ wrote to His Churches through John in Revelation 2 & 3. These 7 detail perfectly the 7 Church ages. The message to Thyatira details the Church age of the Catholic church. Study it. Notice what Christ is telling those in the church to do and the warnings He provides to the believer.