Yes, there's nothing more unbiblical than throwing out parts of the bible.

Lol 😂

Good one 😂😂😂

Cyrus Dabar which Jews?

@Cyrus Dabar - Most people today probably do not even know that the bible was ever different than it is. They will assume what ever is present in their bible right now is what was always there. The oldest complete bibles that we have are the four great uncials, containing the entire text of all the books of the bible: Codex Vaticanus , Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Alexandrinus, and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus. It is thought by historians that two of these were created by an order from Emperor Constantine. The books are copied from the Septuagint, the oldest known Greek language manuscript containing the set of Hebrew scriptures (the Old Testament) This book does contain the deuterocanonical books ( apocrypha) It was created by a group of seventy rabbis in Alexandria in mid third century B.C. so that there would be a Greek version of the Jewish scriptures. The Old testament quotations by Paul and the early Apostolic fathers were taken from the text of the Septuagint. The bibles in Western Europe from the time of the Romans to the Renaissance did contain the deuterocanonical (apocryphal) books. Martin Luther was the first person in the Renaissance period to claim that those books did not belong in the bible. There is debate about why he did this. But I think the most likely reason is that those books contain material that supports Catholic doctrines. Since Luther wanted his bible to be as non-Catholic as possible, he excluded them. Some bibles of the sixteenth century did contain the deuterocanonical (apocryphal) books. Some did not. Every King James bible up until the year 1666 did include them. The English puritans did not include them for unknown reasons. Some people had very bad reasons for not including them. For instance, the Scottish Bible Society did not include those parts of the bible because it saved on printing costs to make a shorter book. There has always been disagreement amongst Jews about whether these books should be considered scripture. Certain Jews like Josephus thought that there were no more divinely inspired scriptures after the fifth century B.C. But of course, no Christian could possibly believe that, because it would mean that the New Testament was not divinely inspired. It can be difficult to tell if a piece of writing is inspired or not. Language scholars can tell when a piece of writing was made, who might have written it, and what it was copied from, but a scholarly analysis of the writing cannot tell us if it is divinely inspired. My own standard is to say that if it was good enough for Paul and the Apostolic fathers, then it is good enough for me. Remember, the apostolic fathers were the Christian theologians of the first and second centuries who personally knew the apostles or were very closely influenced by them. This includes people Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement. M is inspired or not. Language scholars can tell when a piece of writing was made, who might have written it, and what it was copied from, but a scholarly analysis of the writing cannot tell us if it is divinely inspired. My own standard is to say that if it was good enough for Paul and the Apostolic fathers, then it is good enough for me. Remember, the apostolic fathers were the Christian theologians of the first and second centuries who personally knew the apostles or were very closely influenced by them. This includes people Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement.

I started attending Mass during Lent and do like that every Mass includes multiple readings and the Homily to bring it all together. I would also admit that the Protestant churches I've attended over the years were pretty good at teaching from the Bible as well.

And? Catholics speak of a different Father, Son and Holy Spirit, so that really proves your church is worse off than the Pastors church; by an infinite stretch so.

@@markmeyer4532 our Father, Son and Spirit Started one church and it has lasted 2000y. Protestants start thousands of new churches and they don’t last

@@markmeyer4532how do we speak of a different father son and spirit?

@@markmeyer4532 why should I believe that the Protestant understanding is the correct one?

Check out the channel "how to be christian" the guy on there is catholic and has addressed Durbin, winger, and white before. He does it while being kinda funny too. You might like it.

@@off-meta-michael that dude is amazing. His video about James White and the cran raspberry juice was hilarious.

@Suicidal Dice the quick answer is free will. Not to mention some of the finest Catholics I've ever seen when it comes to knowledge and fervor of the faith are converts to the church. No such fire could exist without the struggle to come to a knowledge of the truth. Paul says, "work out your salvation with fear and trembling." So we can use reason, argumentation, evidence, scripture, history, and prayer to help discern. Jesus argued with church leaders, so did Paul, Peter, and everyone since then until now. The catholic church does claim however that the holy spirit protects the church from teaching error when it comes to central dogma and morals. So there is a version of what you are saying that exists in the church, but not individual to individual.

I recommend Dr. Scott Hahn and Steve Ray, both passionate Catholics who were once protestants. When you go to Mass, don't worry. Just do what everyone else does, especially when they kneel, to show reverence. Don't expect to understand everything completely. Also, if you want to learn more about the Catholic Faith, look into taking RCIA classes. Peace be with you on your journey.

@Suicidal Dice don't be put off if people aren't very welcoming at first. Catholics tend to be quiet and more reserved in church than outside of church because the presence of christ is there in the eucharist. That's why you'll see people genuflect towards the altar. You can't receive communion until you become a catholic. It's a sign of unity and belief in what the church teaches. convert recommendations: Scott hahn (protestant) Steve ray (protestant) Roy shoeman (was Jewish/ atheist) Tim staples (protestant) There's a lot more but these guys are all very engaging in their presentations and have lots of content. If you want to get into the nitty gritty philosophy stuff then Ed Feser is another convert from atheism.

Are you implying that the Bible is not the Word of God? Is there a difference between the Bible and the Word of God?

Qwerty and I agree with that. I’m asking how to be Christian what he means by his comment.

@@MrEvoXI Jesus is the Word. The Bible is the word of God. However, it does not mean the Bible is Jesus. The Bible is not the 2nd person of trinity. The Bible did not die for us.

이씨네 미국살이 The Lee Family in the USA I agree

@@MrEvoXI why don't you go to @how to be Christian 's KZfaq channel and find out what exactly they do and do not imply? Pretty easy to do

Correction, protestants are unified on the gospel message itself. If you read the bible on your own and another catholic read the bible on their own, you would both have minor differences in your understanding. But rather you look to the authority of your church (man) to tell you what you are to understand. This is why RC's have held to different teachings throughout the centuries. God doesn't change but put man in charge and you get people burned to the stake. I don't know how one can study the history of the RCC and keep up with the things the new Pope is saying and STILL be a RC. You do not ask God to reveal himself to you through his Word but instead go elsewhere. We as humans are flawed and it is because of this that there is some "fog" in the way of understanding some of scripture. HOWEVER, the majority of protestants (there are many that have been lead astray) are in agreement on Salvation through Christ alone. I am a brother to anyone who is in relationship with Christ. There is not relationship in religion but dictatorship. If you were able to peel the scales from your eyes and read God's Word for yourself then you would never conclude that of which the RCC holds to. Only the Holy Spirit can reveal this to you but pride which comes before destruction is the biggest obstacle in front of a devoted Catholic. If you can remove this and sincerely seek God as you read His Word then His Truth will be revealed to you. Put your trust in Jesus and not man!

Holy Spirit is working overtime to produce hundreds of new interpretations. Brilliant.

@@aahlstrom93 Perhaps you didn't care to understand what I said. WE AGREE ON THE G-O-S-P-E-L M-E-S-S-A-G-E. We only differ on issues that are non-essential to ones salvation. We are not spoon fed from someone we elevate to a position of Godhood but rather seek after Christ hrough his Word. He never changes. I find it very troubling that RC's hold to the mass as what is essential to salvation when it was only adopted by the RCC 13 centuries after Christ. BUT that's what happens when you put man in place of God. Can you please give me an honest answer to this one question? How much time do you spend with God in his Word? This is very telling of where one is at in their walk of faith. People who do not spend time with God are not in the faith but rather grasping onto a false sense of Salvation (an organized religion). This represents the majority of people who claim to be Christians.

@@romans1vs6teen Hi Romans, yeah I'll answer your question: I spend maybe 45 minutes to 1 and half hours every day praying and reading Scripture. That's largely how I became a Catholic Christian. I read the Scripture and compared what various Protestants taught against what the general teachings of the Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox taught. I totally disagree with your claim that the hundreds of Protestant sects only disagree on non-essential questions unrelated to salvation. Let's take baptism for example. 1 Peter 3:21 verbatim says "baptism nows saves you". So High Anglicans will believe that baptism, quite literally, does save you. Baptists and Christians of the Evangelical movements will say "No, baptism doesn't save you, it's symbolic, it's a profession of faith" - so which one is correct? A verse that says baptism "saves you" is quite relevant to salvation, yet you can search through the Christians who accept the 5 Solas (Protestants) and come across a myriad of beliefs that are directly related to questions regarding salvation.

@@aahlstrom93 Good to hear you read the bible. There is more than one verse on baptism my friend lol. You can't make doctrine on one verse that might seem clear on a topic. You need to read the other 6 verses that challenge it then put things in context. I know for certain you would not believe things your church teaches if you had God show you through His Word. The RCC adopts different doctrine over time. They boast on the unity in the RCC but if the RCC in 800 A.D. was to be in a room with the RCC today..... yikes! Your organization teaches different works over time are what will save you. Not biblical! Keep reading the bible for yourself. This is something the RCC did not allow the people to do at one time because control of the people and money given to the church was critical. Keep seeking God and maybe He will speak to you as He did to Martin Luther.

Perhaps you would like to see Jeff Durbin respond to this? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n551pJaH253NfnU.html

Unless you have exceptional patience, skip the first six and a half minutes.

Perhaps you would like to see Jeff Durbin respond to this? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n551pJaH253NfnU.html

@Gavin Hill - Don't need too, I heard what he had to say and I know he is wrong, and I didn't need Trent to tell me so. I just like Trent's format.

@@Flagrum3 What exactly is he wrong about? When you say you know he is wrong what do you mean by that

@Gavin Hill -Where do I start? I'll make it simple; Just about every refutation he has about Catholism.

@@Flagrum3 Well that makes no sense because he was doing a church service not a refutation on catholicism ...

Perhaps you would like to see Jeff Durbin respond to this? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n551pJaH253NfnU.html

@David Ortiz Jesus Christ is the truth not the roman catholic church.

@@gavin_hill Trent Horn invited Jeff to a debate, but he didn't respond. Why's that?

@@MrMatt-kj3rr Had not heard that, source please? I don't see any reason Jeff Durbin would not debate Trent Horne. What was the topic?

@@gavin_hill Trent mentions it in his most recent video. He is aware of Jeff's "rebbutal." He said that the next step is a debate. Which I would personally love to see.

Yeah, they oppose a lot of that.

Who told you that there should be a sacraments?

@@willsavebygod7774 The Bible does Baptism in numerous places including Matthew 28:19 and Mark 16:16; Confirmation (not by name) in Acts 8:17 and 19:6; Eucharist (Communion) in several places including 1 Corinthians 10:16 and 11:23-27; Confession in James 5:16 and John 20:23; Anointing of the Sick in James 5:14-15 and Mark 6:13; Holy Matrimony (Marriage) in Matthew 19:4-6; Holy Orders (not by name) in Acts 6:6, 13:3, and 1 Timothy 4:14.

@Johannes_Dewit watch his debate with James White.

@@gavin_hill do you have a link? I'd love to watch it.

Johannes Dewit Jeff Durbin isn’t as experienced as a debater as White, but even white couldn’t handle Trent in their debate about eternal security.

@@jesuschristsaves9067 You are quite wrong about that, i watched the debate as a young christian and mostly sided with Trent because I did not have the foundation to understand what James was discussing and putting forward. When you follow each to its conclusion eternal security is biblical whilst trents position is not.

@@jesuschristsaves9067 I don't agree with that. I watched the debate last week, and I may be biased in my opinion, but I would say James White won that debate. However, I still think Trent did a good job defending his side.

Mark Hagan his speaking was sped up so as to rebut them quicker

To say you speak for so many makes the foundation of your comment a fallacy.

Welcome home😊

I used to be a catholic, then I found out the church violates Mathew 5:45-48 to the point of questioning their true motive.

@Prasanth Thomas Why is the 4th Comandment singled out and replaced with a Great Value diet soda sabbath that we call Sunday?

​@Prasanth Thomas Besides, you have to remember that many things only make sense if you want them to. I used to not observe the Sabbath until I remembered: "If you love me, keep my commands."

@@SweetTodd You might want to check the evidence that Jesus started the Catholic church. And then believe what his church teaches. You are doing the opposite. Google “Which church did Jesus start?” Catholic!

Servus Christi is close to a heretic, I encourage people to stay away from him, guillable people follow him, confessionless and creedless people.

What I don't understand about Catholics, is people who are of this religion ask for forgiveness of their sins from a man/priest in a box and call him father🤷‍♀️ There's only one father and one mediator and that ain't a priest in a box🤔

I'm shocked you refer to what the church says are 'teachings'. What a slander to the education system.

@@ttawhaki Well that is exactly contradicting the scripture too because the title "father" are not addressed only to God if you read the Bible closely

@@ttawhaki Jesus gave the apostles the authority to forgive sins (John 20:23). How are they supposed to do this, unless a person confesses their sins to them? The Apostles then gave this authority to other men (Acts 1:15-21; 2 Tim2:2; Titus 1:5). Forgiveness of sins through confession is Biblical and Apostolic. If you have a problem with Catholics calling priests "father", then you will have to take this up with St. Paul. He called Timothy his "son" which certainly implies that he would have called him his "father". See 1 Tim 1:18; 2 Tim 2:1 or Phil 2:22. More over, Paul said to the Corinthians, "I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (1 Cor 4:14-15). Referring to our spiritual leaders as "father" is something Catholics have been doing since the time of the Apostles. I know that anti-Catholic protestants have taken the Bible out of context and tried to attack Catholics on this point (See Matt 23:9), but if you read all of what Jesus says in Matthew 23 and then you look at the entire Bible as well as the tradition of that time, you will see it is perfectly fine to use the term father. Otherwise, St Paul was wrong.

absolutely

@George_Edat Only Jesus Sola Christus

Definition of Reformation. The Reformation was not really a ‘reformation’ of the RCC at all. It remained virtually the same in both theology and praxis in the years following the Reformation. The Reformation was actually a REFORM MOVEMENT, which BROKE AWAY from the RCC on issues of PRAXIS and many issues of THEOLOGY. It resulted in the formation of NEW NATIONAL PROTEST-ANT CHURCHES between 1517-1545 AD. The main reforming movement lasted only about 30 years but the entire REFORMATION ERA with the RCC Counter Reformation and the very bloody civil/religious wars would continue across Europe until 1648 AD. The REAL ISSUES of the Reformation related primarily to basic teaching of the Bible and Christianity. Eternal Salvation - RCC continued to teach it was accomplished through the sacraments as administered by the Church and its bona fide priests. Protestants declared that eternal salvation was by Faith alone in Christ alone. Authority - RCC said it was the Bible AND the CHURCH. Protestants said it was SOLELY the BIBLE . Nature of the CHURCH - RCC said it was an ECCLESSIASTICAL ORGANIZATION and PROTESTANTS said it was a SPIRITUAL ORGANISM. Christian Living - RCC continued to claim it was BY WORKS performed in human strength and Protestants taught it was by the POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT within the believer . Priesthood of the Believer - RCC continued to teach and believe that access to God was SOLELY through a certified RCC PRIEST and the Protestants taught that each believer has unhindered access to God and ought to have it to the Bible as well. Of Course, the REFORMATION IS NOT VIEWED in the SAME WAY by all people!! There are four primary views: . Roman Catholic View . It was a REVOLT against the only legitimate church by PROTESTERS such as MARTIN LUTHER who was in fact a HERETIC with ulterior motives in that he wanted to get married . Protestant View . It was a RETURN to BIBLICAL teaching of the nature of the Church and the authority of the BIBLE. Salvation by faith in Christ alone and the Bible as the authority were the two most important aspects of the Reformation . Religious View: The Reformation was CONTEST between the views and theology of Thomas Aquinas and Augustine. Thomas Aquinas taught that man is not totally bad and people were eternally saved by faith PLUS grace administered in the SACRAMENTS. Augustine taught the depravity of man (he is totally sinful) and is saved only by grace through faith alone. 2.6.9.4. Secular View 2.6.9.4.1. It was a REVOLUTION against the economic and the political powers of the CHURCH and its representative the POPE by the development of NATION-STATES of EUROPE (Teutonic Nations of the North against the Latin Nations of the South). Thus the Reformation was simply a part of the Greater RENAISSANCE movement . There is certainly a great deal of truth in views 2, 3 and 4. There is perhaps “SOME” truth in #1 - but not much. The Reformation was clearly a complex socio-political and economic movement. But most of all it was a PROTEST against the false doctrine and moral corruption of the RCC and RELIGIOUS REVOLUTION to return to the teachings of the BIBLE.

The Era of The Reformation - 1517AD to 1648AD Survey of Major Highlights of the Era. The Era ‘formally’ began when Martin Luther nailed his Ninety Five Theses to the door of the Wittenberg Church on October 31, 1517. The Era ‘formally’ ended over 100 years later with the end of the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) and the signing of the Peace of Westphalia (actually a series of “treaties” signed from May through October) in 1648. It was during this period of 130 years that “Protest-ant-ism” was born and during which “Protest-ant-ism” BROKE FREE from the Roman Catholic Church.. There was a Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation during this era and the Jesuit Society was born.. There were many political, economic, cultural, and even very personal/individual factors that contributed to the developments of this Era - beyond the immense religious turbulence and transformations that characterized this Era.. It was during this Era that the America began to play a significant role in the history of the Church . Indulgences, Inquisitions, & Independence all played key roles. The “SOLA’s” came into focus and prominence and profoundly changed the face of Christianity 6. Key people whom YHWH used to change the world (some good, some bad) emerged and whose lives and character and motivations and doctrinal beliefs are worthy of attention, study and understanding: Erasmus, John Wycliffe, John Huss, John Tauler, Savonarola, John Pupper, John Reuchlin, Philip Melancthon, Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin, Heinrich Bullinger, Conrad Grebel, Balthasar Hubmaier, John Knox, William Tyndale, Henry VIII, Thomas Cranmer, Edward VI, Jacobus Arminius, Mary Tudor (Bloody Mary), Elizabeth I, James I, Oliver Cromwell, William of Orange, and many more!. The major “Denominations” were formed during that Era: Lutherans, Reformed (Presbyterians, etc.), Anglicans (Episcopalians), & all the various kinds of “Ana”- Baptists (or Baptistic groups who rejected “infant baptism” and baptize believers only and who are generally “congregational” in governance). All the various denominational groups that exist today came out of those four Reformation traditions. The Reformation Era brought a major and ongoing SCHISM and the complete SEVERANCE of ROMAN CATHOLICISM and PROTEST-ANT-ISM (my reason for writing it that way is simply to “emphasize” that Protestantism - all of it - is simply a “PROTEST” against the Roman Catholic Church - its doctrine and it practice). Not only did the Protest-ants develop denominations, they also developed THEOLOGIES. The reason there are so many denominations is because these “Protest-ers” were not just protesting Roman Catholic practices but the theology as well. This is a major topic and consideration in Reformation Era studies. Bloody RELIGIOUS WARS occurred between Roman Catholics and Protestants. Spain, France, & England emerged from the Reformation Era as MAJOR NATIONAL POWERS 1.15. Puritans and Separatists from the CONTINENT and ENGLAND fled the religious persecution there and sought freedom to worship and believe as they understood the BIBLE to teach - IN AMERICA!. The BIBLE is now READILY AVAILABLE to the COMMON PERSON. They are able to read it and ‘EVALUATE’ the ROMAN CHURCH for themselves as to its theology, teachings, and practices!!!! That factor in and of itself was/is the greatest factor in the Reformation and in the world of Christianity since that day! Background to the Era. Political: Rising National Powers in Europe - on the continent and in England - BITTERLY OPPOSED the claims and the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church. It claims ABSOLUTE and UNIVERSAL AUTHORITY over all religious life but also over all CIVIL life as well. The REFORMATION was the “BREAKING FREE” of nations and peoples from the OPPRESSIVE CONTROL of the RCC. England and France had been locked in a Hundred Years War (1337 -1453) which was actually 116 years or so long. This created a great deal of chaos in the lives of people throughout Europe. Joan of Arc emerged as the French Heroin during this time. She was a French peasant girl who had - she said - a VISION. In 1415, King Henry V of England defeated the French forces at the Battle of Agincourt. Ten years later (1425) this little peasant girl believed that Michael the Archangel and two others (angels?) appeared to her and told her that she had been chosen of God to throw the English out of France. She convinced a French Prince that it was true and she led an attack on the English. United under Joan’s leadership and mysticism the French troops reclaimed Orleans, France from the English. The French Prince was crowned King and Joan believed her vision had been fulfilled and wanted to return home (she was just a 13-15 year old girl at the time). The French King refused to let her go home and made her continue leading the fighting forces against the English. The English could not succumb to Joan’s claims and thus legitimize the idea that God was on the side of France and not that of England. So the English redoubled their efforts to capture or kill Joan of Arc. She was wounded in battle in southern France in May of 1430 and captured by the English forces. The French King were embarrassed to allow it to be known that he was indebted to a peasant girl and her visions for his title and he refused to ransom her. An English bishop bought Joan and imprisoned her in a dank dungeon where she was brutally ravaged by male convicts. Finally, the Church convened an INQUISTION convicted Joan of heresy. In May 1431, the now 19- year-old girl claimed that she had another vision. The Soldiers immediately burned her alive at the stake. Joan died believing and declaring that Jesus had ‘affirmed’ her and her nation. This young girl’s torment and her death were sad consequences of the tragic theological misunderstandings that characterized her day and time. In 1456 (25 years after her death), Pope Calixtus III admitted that the Inquisition had unjustly condemned Joan and in 1920 the RCC “SAINTED” Joan of Arc. Economic : The RCC had massive land holdings ‘everywhere’. This became a source of great consternation to people and nation-states forming and developing. These land holdings were “appealing” to the Kings of the Nation-States as sources of wealth and ongoing power. The RCC levied burdensome and anger-generating taxes on both rulers of NationStates and on the people. These too were HIGHLY RESENTED. And, the obvious wealth and greed, and graft among the RCC clergy fueled the fires of protest. The RCC was continually developing ‘money-grabbing’ schemes. They developed the whole system of “INDULGENCES” which turned out to be the RCC’s greatest error. Kings of Nation-states had to find ways to fund their rapidly growing economies and growing middle class. Commerce was growing and this needed to be fueled with ‘money’. The RCC was too greedy and corrupt.

There are many incorrect statements in your comments, sir.

I think that's an exaggeration. Even scripture warns about putting recent converts in places of authority. Best catholic are the ones who lived in the tradition of the apostles and have been building virtue in Christ's life for a longer time. That would make more sense.

@@ronaller5209 I begin with the point that I am not Catholic, but I am a Bible believer. I would think someone with your evident knowledge and intelligence would know that the 1500s were not the first time there was the true gospel of Christ believers in existence. Albeit they were at times a small remnant, they did exist and were persecuted and snuffed out of history.

@William Cloud Patrick? That's not me - did you respond in the wrong comment thread?

Perhaps you would like to see Jeff Durbin respond to this? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n551pJaH253NfnU.html

@William Cloud the bible cannon was set in the 300s by the catholic church and books were removed by protestants in the 1500s. How do you justify your position of us adding the books?

@William Cloud These are the same tired arguments that have been lobbed against the Catholic Church and since the Reformation, and frankly it's embarassing to see them be used seriously. I suggest you do some genuine research into the beliefs if the Catholic Church.

@William Cloud Have you ever honestly looked into the claims of Catholicism? Even if you disagree with them, I don't see how you expect to change anyone elses mind if you use empty arguments that every serious Catholic has already heard.

@boogiman14 That is concerning

Gavin Hill why?

Gavin Hill ?

@@boogiman14 That you needed something like this to renew your trust and pride in your Catholic faith. What happened to it before? At any rate I was merely concerned that you now came back to faith in Roman Catholicism, that too is concerning Do you believe that the pope possesses the authority to act in the power and place of Christ himself?

Gavin Hill my story is I was baptized catholic by my father and went to catholic school until 6th grade. We learned about Jesus but we were never taught to DEFEND Catholicism I honestly never looked at christian differently until I started to attempt Protestant churches (Baptist, Pentecostal,Lutheran, Anglican, Church of Christ and non denominational) Every Protestant church believes in different interpretations of the Bible but there can only be ONE Truth right? So which denomination do I entrust in to help me Interpret the Bible correctly? Protestants believe that the ONLY thing we should do is read the Bible and understand for themselves right? Well it’s clear Jesus Christ never wrote things down himself, he never instructed us to create a New Testament and there was NONE when he died. What did Jesus leave us? 12 apostles. I want to know what they believed Jesus’s words meant. If Jesus wanted us to read and interpret the Bible individually on our own he would have left one for us, but he didn’t. I believe the pope can show that his lineage of predecessors trace all the way back to Jesus Christ with NO GAPS. If any group knows the truth it’s Catholics.

Perhaps you would like to see Jeff Durbin respond to this? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n551pJaH253NfnU.html

So you believe the Apostles were infallible? That was to recieve the Holy Spirit. But remember believing man has free will means man can thwart God's plan, not according to Holy Scripture Job 42:2.

@@reformedcatholic457 Peter denied Jesus 3x, and Jesus chose him to be the Rock to build the Church. Believing in the order of the Church that Jesus found isnt believing in man, but trusting God through His divine plan for man.

Perhaps you would like to see Jeff Durbin respond to this? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n551pJaH253NfnU.html

ONLY God can forgive sin. WOW. That was the point when Yeshua DID THE HEALING in Matthew. It was also why the establishment was offended!

@@davidturner1641 God gave that power to the Apostles in John 20:21-23. This is where your Protestant doctrine needs to be examined in light of scripture, and it will be found lacking.

Perhaps you would like to see Jeff Durbin respond to this? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n551pJaH253NfnU.html

We're agreed on most things)) The division between Catholics and Orthodox is mainly a historical one based on some disagreements and bad blood, not born out of dissension, rebellion and divisiveness that is ongoing with Protestants. Honestly I think Catholics should spend more time building bridges with Orthodox than debating protestants or dialoguing with other religions. Seems to me it would be more productive since protestants just keep dividing themselves constantly. Unite the ancient Churches!

@@zatoichi1 could you imagine the testimony to non-believers and to Protestants if we Orthodox and you Catholics reunited? Oh my, what a world that would be. Imagine the unified Orthodox and Catholic church vs Protestantism.

Not Well Planned I would love to see him tackle this stuff

Perhaps you would like to see Jeff Durbin respond to this? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n551pJaH253NfnU.html

sola scriptura contradicts protestant’s belief

@@qitzpaquitojr.reston2337 What do you believe sola scriptura is?

John Mcarthur and Rey Comfort lead me to come home to Rome.

Perhaps you would like to see Jeff Durbin respond to this? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n551pJaH253NfnU.html

I'm grateful for you and Trent doing these rebuttals. On the Journey with Ken Hensley and Matt Swaim have a podcast on the Coming Home Network has been extremely helpful to gain the protestant perspective, especially their objections.

Protestant sex?

@Zach_lee You hadn't heard of Catholicism before then? Why the change, was Jesus Christ not enough?

Gavin Hill Lol yes I had heard of it, but I hadn’t really looked into it enough. Of course Jesus Christ is enough, that’s why I wanted to be in full communion with him and his Church.

@@happy_warrior So you previously had false communion? And were not apart of his church? Do you now believe that the pope possesses the authority to act in the power and place of Christ himself?

Gavin Hill I don’t know about false but it wasn’t full. The Pope has the powers properly designated to him through Apostolic succession which began with Christ.

@@happy_warrior I dont think you answered my last question: Do you believe that the pope possesses the authority to act in the power and place of Christ himself?

What do you think solar scriptura means?

@Justin_palmer Let me ask you a question, Do you agree Trent is right in asking 'where does the bible teach sola scriptura?'

Gavin Hill I do believe so. If you are going to declare a doctrine saying that we should only obey the doctrines explicitly apparent in the scripture, then you should be able to find that specific command given by the apostles in scripture. We do not see 1. A single command from the apostles to obey only the rule of faith that they have written down 2. That the apostles ever claimed to have written down everything we need to know about the Christian faith I agree with Trent that if you’re going to teach something as binding as Sola Scriptura, then you better find it TRANSPARENTLY in the Scripture

@@justinpalmer3948 Excellent, so you agree that for a doctrine to be true (and there for authoritative) it must be found in the scripture... congratulations you just defined sola scriptura. Let me ask you this now, what do you think is meant by sola scriptura?

Gavin Hill I do not believe that. I’m showing how the claim of Sola Scriptura is self refuting. I believe we must adhere to the Scriptures, Traditions, and Magisterium. That can be shown through Scripture, History, and the early Ecumenical Councils. I do not have to prove my doctrines by showing them being explicitly mentioned in the Bible. That is because I do not view the Word of God as only parchment on paper or ceasing once it was written on paper. Sola Scriptura is the belief that the whole of Christian revelation is contained in the Scriptures, and therefore the Scriptures must be the measuring tool of all traditions, creeds, and dogmas. If said traditions, creeds, and dogmas are not found in the explicit or implicit reference of Scripture then one could very well be adding to the Word of God. In other words, the only binding measuring tool is the Scriptures when it comes to truth. That is the doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

@@justinpalmer3948 Sola scriptura is this Defined as: scripture are the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice. This means that if someone speaks and teaches contrary to scripture, regardless of their position, they do not absolve scripture. And scripture is used to refute such teaching as one is God breathed and contrary to it can not be of God. So what about sola scriptura do you have an issue with?

Who is your profile pic? Is it Pope St. Pius the tenth?

@@timothyfreeman97 Yep, that's him. 😊

What's your page or channel?

@@JulioCaesarTM I just do a few blogs now and then. Please read my blog on protestantism, thanks. whitecollarapologetics.blogspot.com/2019/07/what-scrupulosity-is.html

At least they are reading the Bible.

@@tatie7604 Of course.

@@tatie7604 So are prosperity gospel evangelicals, doesn't mean they aren't heretical

That is your excuse and misinterpreting it . What good is that and following bs teachings might as well read a dictionary. You don’t read the full Bible

matt fradd, and reason and theology KZfaq channel

how to be Christian can be annoying to those who don't like a bit of comedy with videos, I don't mind the comedy myself but I respect those who don't like it

Thanks, Pal

@@MZONE991, is it okay if I call you Pal? It is short for your handle.

@@spurcalluth6300 it's okay :)

@MiGenteVoIP or Call to Communion too. Dr Anders has some really informative answers as well.

You should just join us and make it an even 100% ;)

Alma!

Alma Gordon turn from your sins and trust in Christ

Hey Mr Gordon peace be with you I am not sure you do Do you believe Jesus Christ is God? Do you believe in a heavenly mother? (please note I am not speaking of Mary) God bless you

Internal clues within certain texts.

@Nth_degree So to sum up what you said, You decided that you couldn't trust the men that decided the canon of scripture (as you put it) so you went for some other groups decision on scripture... And you talk about consistency?

@@gavin_hill No, I am saying that if Canon giving to us which includes the deuterocanonical books, is wrong, then the Canon of the NT could be called into question, as it had its own "apocrypha". Martin Luther, wasn't okay with all the books in the NT. Personally, I believe in the Church's Magesterium to help us to know what scripture is.

@@nthdegree1269 So more should be questioned about it so you will go with the larger collection of potential suspects? That is not good risk limiting. Do you believe that the pope possesses the authority to act in the power and place of Christ himself?

@@gavin_hill Let's break it down this way. If Martin Luther was around during the council of Rome synod back in 382 a.d, there is little chance he would have agreed on the NT selection. Maybe If I was there I might have come up with 20 books? Maybe less, maybe more than the 27 books of the NT. The fact that this council pointed to all 27 books must mean they either got really lucky or they got it wrong or had the authority to discern such. But the Protestant position is that the OT Canon, the council got wrong. Which if they did, then it's an obvious problem. It could mean their NT might only have 23 books right. Maybe 29 books should have been the Canon. Maybe 26 books etc

@Joseph_jackson If you believe in papal infallibility what will you do when Jesus comes back in judgement upon the whole creation?

@Qwerty What type do you like?

Gavin Hill since papal infallibility comes from the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, there's no dilemma between the authority Jesus gave to the Church and Jesus' authority. They're still both God's authority; both it in the Holy Spirit and the authority given to the Church.

@@josephjackson1956 So you are saying that Papal Infallibility comes from the Holy Spirit. Can you provide any evidence of this?

@Prasanth Thomas Matthew 16:18 Jesus states that the gates of death "hades" will not prevail against it. What does this have to do with Rome claiming that papal infallibility exists ? You must see that no man is on the level of scripture. That which is God breathed. How can an unbeliever be saved friend?

@Not_Well_Planned have you watched James Whites rebuttal on this video?

No. Quite the reverse. Catholicism is miles from anything the apostolic fathers taught.

​@@spurcalluth6300 Regardless of whoever has been misleading you as to what the Church Fathers taught, committing oneself to interpreting scripture through tradition prevents one, in principle, from creating any new denominations. Reading Bible verses can bring up different interpretations, thus we get different denominations. (Apparently Jesus didn't want us to know whether we _need_ to be baptized to be saved). But it's impossible to have a unique interpretation of the Bible if you need to _also_ listen to thousands of pages of ancient commentary. One cannot possibly misinterpret whole bodies of literature from multiple authors, even if they can misinterpret one Bible passage. For example, Augustine tells his son that Pelagians don't believe unbaptized babies go to hell if they die. Augustine argues to his son that babies will go to hell if they die and are not baptized _as babies_ because it is the necessary process for original sin to be removed. I can find you the reference if you want, but you can easily search up the work given what I just said. I was just reading it the other day and would have to go find it. How can you possibly come to interpretations of salvation held by so many protestants that it is by faith alone, or that baptism is not necessary, or that you don't need to baptize infants, if you can't even read AUGUSTINE without being flat-out contradicted? Summary: there are two problems protestants have committing themselves to studying the fathers. 1) they cannot even in principle come to a new interpretation of the Bible, 2) the fathers often contradict their doctrines directly. God bless you in your search for truth.

@@journeyfiveonesix, well, you know, Clement of Rome, disciple of the greatest apostles, said that we are justified by faith apart from our holy works. If Augustine disagrees with that, so much the worse for Augustine. Of course, I'd have to know if Augustine said this before or after his Retractiones in order to come to the conclusion that Augustine is at odds with Clement, but I try to learn what the church fathers said from the church fathers. Thanks for your prayer, and I pray God helps you in your road to truth too. Following Christ is a life-long walking towards Him Who is Truth, so I always want to encourage everyone to follow after truth.

​@@spurcalluth6300 I take back what I originally wrote here. I think it would be most productive if you could send me the reference of St. Clement so I could read his words for myself

@@journeyfiveonesix can you quote St Clement on justification in relation to faith and works? I apologize for the confusion, but as I mentioned earlier, there are no known quotes from St. Clement of Rome specifically addressing the topic of faith and works. His epistle to the Corinthians, 1 Clement, focuses more on issues of church governance, unity, and the importance of obedience and humility rather than directly discussing the relationship between faith and works. If you have any other questions or if there's anything else I can assist you with, please let me know! This is what ChatGPT came up with and we would need to see the writing to understand Spurcalluth point. High probability he just picked a name or simply misunderstands the writing.

One time I had a guy tell me that after the council of Rome the Holy Spirit left the Church. I guess God abandoned us after we canonized the scriptures.

@@bassman_0074 So he admitted the Catholic Church was the one true church and then claimed the Holy Spirit left it...What proof could someone have?

There is no Word of God in unwritten form today.

That is a lie from Satan.

Billn Heather ok. Give me example of it and how you know it is.

@Laudetur Jesus Christus Please give me a couple of examples of a teaching of Christ not found in the NT and how you know. How do you know Jesus taught that babies were to be baptized if its not in the NT? How do you know what Jesus said about marriage ceremonies if its not in the NT? Churches sharing something does not mean it came from Christ Himself.

I disagree that there is no Unwritten form of the Word of God today. It is through Traditions passed down in the Church over the years from the end of Christ’s ministry on Earth up until today, where they keep and hold these traditional teachings that were there before there was even a written New Testament. There was a whole 60-90 years before there was any NT writings. For example: The belief of the real presence was understood through the Church from it’s initial institution. They were putting Christians to death for this misconception of cannibalism. And the Christians were willing to DIE for that belief. Because they affirmed to the bread being flesh and the wine being blood. I dare ANYONE to combat this with a hard fact. You can’t. Other than maybe that they didn’t like Christians, because they were evading taxes (which is true) but you don’t get put to death for owing money.. Even in the first century.

Friday’s are cool It’s not just that it’s sped up, his voice and mannerisms are just annoying

I think the guy speaking said he Sped it up on purpose

@Nard_Foru He started his book with: in the beginning So you are quite wrong

Jesus gave us a Church he didn’t start handing out Bibles.

@@gavin_hillJesus did not write the gospel of John

@@diegofuentes6639 Jesus book is the bible, since it is God's specific revelation to man, and Jesus is God. Quite simple friend. I was actually speaking about Genesis, but that is fine. Are you a Christian?

@@el_jefe_007 We are the church, he left us with the Holy Spirit and his Word. Are you a Christian?

The Pope's words need to be interpreted through the Deposit of Faith. Sounds like the video had more issue with Francis himself, then the actual doctrine. What part did you find interesting or though provoking? In other words, why did you post the link? Honest question, not a criticism.

@@phoult37 The Pope is not infallible, I dont think you understood what dr. James white said.

@@JesusGarcia-Digem I agree that he is not infallible. What does that have to do with the doctrine of No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church? I didn't notice him address that doctrine itself. So maybe I did miss something.

@Qwerty They refuse to engage in just about all of our doctrines in good faith. Much easier to strawman God's ordained Church than actually engage it. I've only ever talked to one protestant who actually understood Church doctrine. Most haven't even read the Church fathers to understand the development of Doctrine (though to be fair, most Catholics probably haven't either).