Maybe you should leave your Catholic faith,and become a true believer

@@ralphashmore5694Catholic church is the true Christian church. God Bless you, bro.

Church Fathers said those who deny the Real Presence are not Christians.

The prayers of penance are not punishment. Although our sins are forgiven by God through the sacrament, the effects of our sin are still present in the world. The prayers are given for our penance not as punishment but as an attempt on our part to make up for the effects of our sins. Then the priest imposes an act of penance or satisfaction on the penitent; this should serve not only to make up for the past but also to help him to begin a new life and provide him with an antidote to weakness. As far as possible, the penance should correspond to the seriousness and nature of the sins. If you break a window you replace that window .This act of penance may suitably take the form of prayer, self-denial, and especially service of one’s neighbor and works of mercy. These will underline the fact that sin and its forgiveness have a social aspect (Rite of Penance, 18).

When someone shares their opinion in a respectful manner that is always good. I just wish those who explain the Catholic faith would explain accurately by simply quoting the Catechism of the Catholic Church and saying why it is false using scripture vs their personal interpretation of what the church teaches. That way at least everyone can accurately hear or read what the Catholic church stands on. It is hard as a Catholic to repetitively hear false interpretations that can misguide others.

I’m hoping to be able to keep them on…but you know how it be…

To be fair, those who agree with him need to conduct themselves in a civilized manner as well. We all do.

@@sharondavidson7412 I never said otherwise. I specifically mentioned those who are in disagreement since they are the ones who were most likely be defensive and commenting in a non-civilized manner and thus starting confrontation. Of course anyone replying to such comments should be civilized as well. I thought that would have been clearly understood without needing to state it specifically, but perhaps ‘all who comment’ would have been a clearer statement. Some times it is difficult to ‘cover all of your bases’ in a brief comment. Apologies for the lack of clarity.

@elihop9419 No, you were fine. I didn't take umbrage with what you said. I mentioned it only because there ARE other comments, made by those who do agree with Tim, that are not so civilized, and they go unchecked. I was merely calling out both sides because sometimes it's easy to get caught up in the moment. I thought I was basically agreeing with you, and I was also trying to include myself in my statement by my use of the word "we." Sometimes I have difficulties conveying things. ETA: the comment I was alluding to may have been taken down.

Well, I can’t review bibles in every video. Unless perhaps you’d like to donate a large box of them. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 My pockets aren’t deep enough.

Thank you for this thoughtful comment!

This expresses my own response very well.

Catholics respect the validity of Orthodox Eucharist.

What I expressed was based on my own experience as a Catholic, and from Catholic Answers. It seems there aren’t universal positions on some of these matters and I acknowledge that.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews one example and a simple search “Did Mary Die?” is an article on Catholic Answers, with the answer in the first word of the first line stating “Yes.” (Not that Catholic Answers is an official source of dogma, just that you mentioned it.) To make statements about what Catholicism believes and why you’re not believing it, then to follow-up with saying that Catholicism does not have universal positions on these beliefs, seems both contradictory and ill-informed. I am confident you would have a response if a Catholic channel you enjoyed happened to make a video called “Five Reasons I’m not Pentecostal” with a mixture of facts and errors. It’s fine to disagree, but I think it would make more sense to disagree over actual official points of departure.

@bradgoodnight It is widely believed by Catholics that Mary did not die.

That’s simply not true. Early iconography used throughout the Catholic Church globally shows Mary’s body dead. The Church of the Dormition in Jerusalem is dedicated to this event as well. Finally, Pius XII said in Munificentissimus Deus: “They offered more profound explanations of its meaning and nature, bringing out into sharper light the fact that this feast shows, not only that the *dead body* of the Blessed Virgin Mary remained incorrupt, but that she gained a triumph out of death, her heavenly glorification after the example of her only begotten son, Jesus Christ-truths that the liturgical books had frequently touched upon concisely and briefly.” (Emphasis mine)

I totally understand, and you have a point. But to Catholics are free to believe Mary ascended into heaven while still living. I was taught this as a Catholic by my priest. Regardless I think the larger issue here is what happens with the dead, and the saints. How do we interact with them and how do they interact and intervene for us? It’s simple, we do not, and they do not.

You can call someone blessed without praying to them.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews The holy souls in Heaven are alive, not dead, and the Bible clearly shows that holy people have intercessory power with God (e.g., Revelation 5:8). Mary, in particular, as the Ark of the New Covenant, holds a unique and powerful intercessory role given her special status as the Mother of God.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews So do you call Mary Blessed? When is the last time you positively did so? come on.

@@sebastianbaran9645have you really studied Rev 5:8, 8:3,8:4? In the Latin vulgate “orationes(prayers) Sanctorum (holy of Holies) “. Acts 9:13” sanctis( Saint)”, Hebrews 6:10 “Sanctis et ministatis” 1 Thessalonians 3:13” Sanctis eius amen”. The Latin vulgate applies in Rev 5:8,8:3,8:4 “orationes Sanctorum “, in Acts 2:42”orationibus( prayers)”, now let let the Latin vulgate interpret itself to define what a saint is, let go to Rev 11:18 “prophetis et Sanctis”, seem like Rev 5:8,8:3,8:4 is referring to something other then a SAINT =SANCTIS .

@@sebastianbaran9645 “Sanctorum” is used to denote anything but just the “holy of Holies”, or Sancta Sanctorum which is referring to all of Hebrew 9 and Rev 5:8,8:3,8:4 because “Sanctis” is not present which you want to add to them verses of the Latin vulgate itself and want to preach or add words not applied to neither of your narratives. So Rev 5:8,8:3,8:4 is “Prayers to the holy of Holies” and not saints you are adding.

That you think Tim's points are well-taken shows a mistaken grasp on the faith you were never taught. To clarify: 1. Catholics don't say we "pay" for our sins as opposed to Christ paying for them: we say Christ paid for our sins, and we cooperate with His full payment by our life of loving faith. It is the Catholic both/and as opposed to the protestant either/or. 2. Purgatory is not taught as a "time" spent after death: that's not the teaching. The teaching is that some perfecting must occur between the death of the imperfect man and his standing perfect before the face of the Living God: the unpleasant experience of being perfected, whether it has duration or not, is purgatory. Calling purgatory a place is using human language as humans must do, to approach or approximate: not meant literally. Why caricature the doctrine? 3. Communion Of Saints = Necromancy, not. Such a lazy objection. Catholics believe in the "Communion" of saints. It's in the Nicene Creed: protestantism has no way to admit this "communing" except to make it conditional: the communing is only with some, not all of the saints, a distinction not found in the bible. Those who die in Christ are alive in Christ, according to St. Paul--so they are more alive than you and I are on earth: they remain members of the Living Body of Christ. So they are together with us who are also members of the same Living Body. They can pray for us if God lets them participate in His knowledge of us. 4. Mary: when is the last time you positively complied with Luke 1:48? Mary is a special case of Saints. For she is the most perfect (holiest) saint who ever lived: given a new name by the angel, "Kecharitomene", "Having Been Completely Graced." The word is in the past perfect tense. That's her name in salvation history. 4. As to Mary's death: Why not admit the official statement in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, free and online? You are FACTUALLY incorrect in stating that it is Catholic doctrine that Mary did not die. The Church tends to hold the opinion that Mary did die, but the official teaching is only and merely this exact statement and no more(Catechism 947 ): *The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven*. This teaching is defined in a papal encyclical couched among references to many the opinions of doctors and fathers that Mary did die and *was entombed*. And THEN assumed into heaven. (See if you can find any place of pilgrimage where Mary's bones are venerated, or any relics kept of Mary's body. hmmm...) 5. You want to know where is that in the bible: I want to know where does the bible say that it has to be in the bible? Where in the bible is the canon of the bible, e.g.? The canon of the bible is part of Sacred Tradition. 6. Yes, Mary is a perpetual Virgin: "brothers" of Jesus are step- or cousins or kin in some sense. Joseph "knew her not until": How about the sentence, "He was faithful until death." Not after death? "Until" does not mean what you wish it to mean. 7. There is no way to read the Bread of Life Discourse straightforwardly and humbly without accepting the 2000-old-teaching: otherwise you are a #666, that is, you leave the Lord in disgust at the revolting thing He is saying, and you are never heard of again (see John 6:66). 8. As to Apostolic Succession, The Mandate was to go out and preach to and baptize the WHOLE WORLD: a mandate given to 11 mortal men, a mission which can only be fulfilled by them having successors. "I will be with you ALL days." "I will send my Holy Spirit to guide you into ALL truth." "Feed My lambs/sheep/lambs." "You are Kepha, and upon this kepha I will build My Church." "The Church is the bulwark and foundation of the Truth." To you Kepha I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven...what you, Kepha, loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven etc... And of course there is the unbroken historical record of the primacy and jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome (early ch. fathers). 9. I would love just one protestant ever to answer: just when in history did your cherished but baseless assumption of a general apostasy occur? Let's see the proof: a battle, a council, a declaration, a pope, an emperor saying/doing this or that, a rebel body peeling off to Where? When? Who? We know you have to have a general apostasy to make room for protestantism to be legit: so let's see the historical moment when this crucial apostasy happened, and the church Christ said He would be with ALL days split off and went underground and only surfaced with failed monk Martin Luther a millennia later. Are there archaeological remains? Grafitti scratched on stone catacomb? It has to always exist since Christ promised He would be with it ALL--not just some--days. And it has to be a visible, human-led organization to which you can literally take your arguments. In contrast, it's easy to see a priest and bishop-led Church in the earliest Christian documents, as well as the unbroken understanding of the Eucharist as Christ's Real Flesh and Blood. Not one of Tim's shop-worn shibboleths are good reasons for not being Catholic. They are answered over and over again: so it is not an intellectual objection then. Rather it is a position of the will. Tim is right in that the rise of Christianity and Western Civilization, and the spreading of the bible throughout the known world, is due to the Catholic Church. Which exists today, as we must expect Christ's church to have done from Pentecost to the end of time.

I love that prayer to pause and consider. Whenever anyone listens to another discussing the faith it is great to stop and meditate through prayer. Especially because some agree and some strongly disagree with that understanding of the Roman Catholic faith Tim has explained. There can only be one truth regarding the Holy Trinity and Jesus' church. What is that truth?

Purifying in life, not death.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Matthew 12:32: "And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come." This verse clearly implies that there is a place in the afterlife where sins are forgiven. "Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire." This verse clearly shows that there are sins which do not damn a person to hell but that still require punishment.

That idea has crossed my mind.

Any time it is dangerous.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Are you aware that if a Pope preaches doctrine that contradicts the teachings of the Faith, he automatically (ipso facto) loses his office? A Pope can't just say whatever he wants and pass it off as Catholic doctrine. It is a dogma that a heretic ceases to be a member of Christ's Church, so a Pope who teaches heresy is no longer Pope because he cannot be the head of that which he is not a part.

@@sebastianbaran9645 I am aware.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews It's no more dangerous than the Truth is dangerous.

@@sebastianbaran9645 well, Sebastian, it's not a dogma, it is a theory (which seems quite reasonable to me as it did to Robert Bellarmine.) We have no actual teaching on what happens to the office of a heretical pope, only theories so far)

I have issues with the pope especially pope Francis but I pray for him. I personally believe he's being deceived and hope he's delivered if not will hold a great responsibility for his words & actions.

dloveofGod--very nice post, welcome back home! As to your point about Jesus' "brothers," the word is used lots of ways in the New Testament, sometimes meaning just everybody somehow related even if not in blood--like how you and I are brothers or siblings in Christ. Also, the word brother and cousin turn out to be interchangeable in the language these passages were spoken in. The theory that Joseph was older and widowed with kids of his own goes back very far in the early church fathers; it's a possibility, and theorizing further, I would see how an older man would be mature in righteousness--Joseph is called "just" in the bible. Just a few thoughts. Happy Sunday to you.

@@pmlm1571 thank you. I personally don't see Joseph as soo much older was not said anywhere he was a widower. I don't know my Fr says his cousins considered brothers, I don't know. Will probably know someday meeting them all hopefully.

Indeed. The same sacrifice over and over that need not be made. Obviously it isn’t truly sacrificing him over and over any more that it is truly the physical body in communion.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews If you read what I wrote you should note that in the Mass Christ is NOT re-sacrificed over and over again. I did give explanation of what Catholics mean by His Sacrifice is made present in every Mass, including scriptural supports. You don't have to agree with what Catholics believe but I presume that (1) there is no altar in your church and no altar implies no sacrifice, then how do you explain Heb. 13:10 that mentions altar and something to be eaten from that altar?; (2) there is no priests, other than general priesthood according to 1 Pe. 2:5. Then how do you explain that everlasting priesthood of Levitical priests (Exo. 40:15) and that they will continue offering sacrifice as it is written in Jer. 33:18? How do you explain that while His sacrifice took place on the cross, Scripture also says that He has been slain (in Greek passive perfect tense) from the foundation of the world? You cannot cherry pick verses that suit your belief and turn blind eye to those who do not.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews The sacrifice is not, as you say, "made" "over and over." It is the One Sacrifice made once and for all: it is RE presented at Mass. Time touches eternity at the Consecration. If you relax your formula, you can see what we mean.

Someone told me that the Eucharist is a circle because we Catholics “worship a sungod”. Another told me that emperor Constantine started the church. Some people just love spreading misinformation

​@@NX2-30 And the saddest part is that usually, they really believe this nonsense. There are a few out there who seem to be deliberately lying about the Church, but mostly it's just GIGO.

My main contentions regard Mary, the saints, and the papacy. My dad is Orthodox; but I was raised Methodist and so remain.

Your reasons are easy to answer. 1. Tim is wrong if he thinks Catholics think we "pay" for our sins as opposed to Christ paying for them: we say Christ paid for our sins, and we cooperate with His full payment by our life of loving faith. It is the Catholic both/and as opposed to the protestant either/or. 2. Purgatory is not taught as a "time" spent after death: that's not the teaching. The teaching is that some perfecting must occur between the death of the imperfect man and his standing perfect before the face of the Living God: the unpleasant experience of being perfected, whether it has duration or not, is purgatory. Calling purgatory a place is using human language as humans must do, to approach or approximate: not meant literally. Why caricature the doctrine? 3. Communion Of Saints = Necromancy, not. This is a very shallow objection. Catholics believe in the "Communion" of saints. It's in the Nicene Creed: protestantism has no way to admit this "communing" except to make it conditional: the communing is only with some, not all of the saints, a distinction not found in the bible. Those who die in Christ are alive in Christ, according to St. Paul--so they are more alive than you and I are on earth: they remain members of the Living Body of Christ. So they are together with us who are also members of the same Living Body. They can pray for us if God lets them participate in His knowledge of us. 4. Mary: when is the last time you positively complied with Luke 1:48? Mary is a special case of Saints. For she is the most perfect (holiest) saint who ever lived: given a new name by the angel, "Kecharitomene", "Having Been Completely Graced." The word is in the past perfect tense. That's her name in salvation history. So to be in communion with Saint Mary is a good thing. 4. As to Mary's death: Why not admit the official statement in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, free and online? It is FACTUALLY incorrect to say it is Catholic doctrine that Mary did not die. The Church tends to hold the opinion that Mary did die, but the official teaching is only and merely this exact statement and no more(Catechism 947 ): *The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven*. This teaching is defined in these words in a papal encyclical couched among references to many opinions of doctors and fathers that Mary did die and *was entombed*. And THEN assumed into heaven. (See if you can find any place of pilgrimage where Mary's bones are venerated, or any relics kept of Mary's body. hmmm...) 5. You want to know where is that in the bible: I want to know where does the bible say that it has to be in the bible? Where in the bible is the canon of the bible, e.g.? (It's not: the canon of the bible comes from Sacred Tradition.) 6. Yes, Mary is a perpetual Virgin: "brothers" of Jesus are step- or cousins or kin in some sense. Joseph "knew her not until": How about the sentence, "He was faithful until death." Not after death? "Until" does not mean what you wish it to mean. 7. There is no way to read the Bread of Life Discourse straightforwardly and humbly without accepting the 2000-old-teaching: otherwise you are a #666, that is, you leave the Lord in disgust at the revolting thing He is saying, and you are never heard of again (see John 6:66). 8. As to Apostolic Succession, The Mandate was to go out and preach to and baptize the WHOLE WORLD: a mandate given to 11 mortal men, a mission which can only be fulfilled by them having successors. "I will be with you ALL days." "I will send my Holy Spirit to guide you into ALL truth." "Feed My lambs/sheep/lambs." "You are Kepha, and upon this kepha I will build My Church." "The Church is the bulwark and foundation of the Truth." To you Kepha I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven...what you, Kepha, loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven etc... And of course there is the unbroken historical record of the primacy and jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome (early ch. fathers). 9. I would love just one protestant ever to answer: just when in history did your cherished (but baseless) assumption of a general apostasy occur? Let's see the proof: a battle, a council, a declaration, a pope, an emperor saying/doing this or that, a rebel body peeling off to Where? When? Who? We know you have to have a general apostasy to make room for protestantism to be legit: so let's see the historical moment when this crucial apostasy happened, and the church Christ said He would be with ALL days split off and went underground and only surfaced with failed monk Martin Luther a millennia later. Are there archaeological remains? Grafitti scratched on stone catacombs? His Church has to always exist since Christ promised He would be with it ALL--not just some--days. And it has to be a visible, human-led organization to which you can literally take your arguments. In contrast, it's easy to see a priest and bishop-led Church in the earliest Christian documents, as well as the unbroken understanding of the Eucharist as Christ's Real Flesh and Blood. Not one of Tim's shop-worn shibboleths are good reasons for not being Catholic. They are answered over and over again: so it is not an intellectual objection. Rather it is a position of the will. Tim is right in that the rise of Christianity and Western Civilization, and the spreading of the bible throughout the known world, is due to the Catholic Church. Which exists today, as we must expect Christ's church to have done from Pentecost to the end of time.

Facts.

Appreciate the comment and recommendations!

Well, I am not Jewish because I am a gentile. Ha ha! Perhaps you mean 5 reasons I do not practice Judaism.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Hahahhaha. I hope Schuyler offsets their cross even more just to annoy you.

Well, I have a full yapp ordered. It’s possible.

That misalignment is out of control. They could just use an asymmetrical design or leave the front blank.

This is a well thought out comment. But the corruption of the Roman Church in times past shows why this error is so dangerous.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Are you saying that Christ is not able to keep His promise in what He said in Mat. 16:19 and 18:18? You refer what He said as error? The popes and bishops are (and were) sinners - some were horrible sinners. Infallibility does NOT mean that everything they said/did/wrote is always right; it is applicable only when they declare something that was already declared in heaven.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews nothing human is pure, everything human participates in humanity's woundedness. It is the perfect, immaculate Mystical Bride aspect of the Church which persists throughout all time periods: it is She Who is Our Catholic Church.

Making amends for send that’s already been amended for. Same difference.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Protestantism has no concept of man's real participation in God's nature and effects.

I was.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews I haven't either. Nor fasting, either. Always prayer. I had never even heard of that until you mentioned it in the video.

I mentioned I believe in real presence.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD): "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 the Father, in His goodness, raised up again." Justin Martyr (c. 150 AD): "For not as common bread and 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 too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus."

You are right, and the Church does tend to think Mary died--reason would be because she would wish to follow her Son in all things. The part the Church insists on is her assumption body and soul into heaven. The Eastern Churches call it Mary's Dormition, her going to sleep...

@@pmlm1571 The Church always believed Mary's body was taken to heaven.

@@RogerBesst Agreed, Christianity/the Church always believed Mary's body was taken to heaven. What preceded that assumption of her body and soul is not defined: in the encyclical defining her assumption, the pope quotes many ancient theologians who spoke of her dying, being entombed, and then taken body and soul to heaven. When the pope gets to the definition of the dogma, he does not address that aspect, saying no more than "when she came to the end of her earthly existence" she was assumed. OK?

@@pmlm1571 OK!

Right. But the statement made by the priest says “let this sacrifice be acceptable.” Of course it isn’t re-crucifying Jesus over and over, but it is a weekly sacrifice, even if it is simply re-presenting it. Thanks for the comment, and for the point of clarification.

I'm glad you are discerning, and want you to know there's a good bit of misinformation here. Thus: 1. Tim is wrong if he thinks Catholics think we "pay" for our sins as opposed to Christ paying for them: we say Christ paid for our sins and we cooperate with His full payment by our life of loving faith. It is the Catholic "both/and" as opposed to the protestant "either/or." 2. Tim is Wrong: Purgatory is not taught as a "time" spent after death--that's not the teaching. The teaching is that some perfecting must occur between the death of the imperfect man and his standing perfect before the face of the Living God: the unpleasant experience of being perfected, whether it has duration or not, is purgatory. Calling purgatory a place is using human language as humans must do, to approach or approximate: not meant literally. Why caricature the doctrine? 3. Communion Of Saints = Necromancy, not. This is a very shallow objection. Catholics believe in the "Communion" of saints. It's in the Nicene Creed: protestantism has no way to admit this "communing" except to make it conditional: the communing is only with some, not all of the saints, a distinction not found in the bible. Those who die in Christ are alive in Christ, according to St. Paul--so they are more alive than you and I are on earth: they remain members of the Living Body of Christ. So they are together with us who are also members of the same Living Body. They can pray for us if God lets them participate in His knowledge of us. 4. Mary: when is the last time a Protestant positively complied with Luke 1:48? Mary is a special case of Saints. For she is the most perfect (holiest) saint who ever lived: given a new name by the angel, "Kecharitomene", "Having Been Completely Graced." The word is in the past perfect tense. That's her name in salvation history. To to be in communion with Saint Mary is a good thing. 4. As to Mary's death: Why not admit the official statement in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, free and online? It is FACTUALLY incorrect to say it is Catholic doctrine that Mary did not die. The Church tends to hold the opinion that Mary did die, but the official teaching is only and merely this exact statement and no more (Catechism 947 ): *The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven*. This teaching is defined in these words in a papal encyclical couched among references to many opinions of doctors and fathers that Mary did die and *was entombed*. And THEN assumed into heaven. (See if you can find any place of pilgrimage where Mary's bones are venerated, or any relics kept of Mary's body...) The pope was well aware of the strong feeling in Eastern Catholicism that referred to this event as Mary's "Dormition," her "falling asleep," and the pope's phrasing does no violence to that eastern sense, whatever it clinically means. The pope's phrasing passes over just how her time was up in order to be specific about her being assumed body and soul. 5. You want to know where is that in the bible: I want to know where does the bible say that it has to be in the bible? Where in the bible is the canon of the bible, e.g.? (It's not: the canon of the bible comes from Sacred Tradition.) 6. Yes, Mary is a perpetual Virgin: "brothers" of Jesus are step- or cousins or kin in some sense. Joseph "knew her not until": How about the sentence, "He was faithful until death." Not after death? "Until" does not mean what you wish it to mean. 7. There is no way to read the Bread of Life Discourse straightforwardly and humbly without accepting the 2000-old-teaching: otherwise you are a #666, that is, you leave the Lord in disgust at the revolting thing He is saying, and you are never heard of again (see John 6:66). 8. As to Apostolic Succession, The Mandate was to go out and preach to and baptize the WHOLE WORLD: a mandate given to 11 mortal men, a mission which can only be fulfilled by them having successors. "I will be with you ALL days." "I will send my Holy Spirit to guide you into ALL truth." "Feed My lambs/sheep/lambs." "You are Kepha, and upon this kepha I will build My Church." "The Church is the bulwark and foundation of the Truth." To you Kepha I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven...what you, Kepha, loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven etc... And of course there is the unbroken historical record of the primacy and jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome (early ch. fathers). 9. I would love just one protestant ever to answer: just when in history did your cherished (but baseless) assumption of a general apostasy occur? Let's see the proof: a battle, a council, a declaration, a pope, an emperor saying/doing this or that, a rebel body peeling off to Where? When? Who? Names/Dates? We know you have to have a general apostasy to make room for protestantism to be legit: so let's see the historical moment when this crucial apostasy happened, and the church Christ said He would be with ALL days split off and go underground and only surface with failed monk Martin Luther a millennia later. Are there archaeological remains? Grafitti scratched on stone catacombs? What? His Church has to always exist since Christ promised He would be with it ALL--not just some--days. And it has to be a visible, human-led organization to which you can literally take your arguments. In contrast, it's easy to see a priest and bishop-led Church in the earliest Christian documents, as well as the unbroken understanding of the Eucharist as Christ's Real Flesh and Blood. Not one of Tim's shop-worn points are good reasons for not being Catholic. They are answered over and over again: so it is not an intellectual objection. Rather it is a position of the will. Tim is right in that the rise of Christianity and Western Civilization, and the spreading of the bible throughout the known world, is due to the Catholic Church. Which exists today, as we must expect Christ's church to have done from Pentecost until (!) the end of time. (This "until" does not mean the Church stops existing at the end of the world. We believe the Church exists Triumphant in heaven.) cheers.

I’m certain not advocating the incarnation didn’t happen or that Jesus was simply an inspired man. He was God in the flesh born of the Holy Spirit with God is his father.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsPutting a disclaimer that im just clarifying, no hate intended. But do u not affirm Mary as theotokos? Cause you also said that Mary is the mother of the godhead which while im not catholic, am pretty sure catholics do not believe that.

I said essentially. If she’s the mother of God. I do not believe she is the theokotos. She is the mother of Jesus who was 100 percent man and 100 percent God.

@@cyberxcrime8935 You are right, we do not use such a phrase, we say "God Bearer." "Mother of God." Never "mother of the godhead" who says this but perhaps protestants seeking straw men to knock down. If one can't say Mother of God about Mary, one has a problem with one's Christology. Her title is all about her Son.

One day I hope in your maturity you will look with fresh eyes at your rich heritage. Because: 1. Tim is wrong if he thinks Catholics think we "pay" for our sins as opposed to Christ paying for them: we say Christ paid for our sins and we cooperate with His full payment by our life of loving faith. It is the Catholic both/and as opposed to the protestant either/or. 2. Tim is Wrong: Purgatory is not taught as a "time" spent after death--that's not the teaching. The teaching is that some perfecting must occur between the death of the imperfect man and his standing perfect before the face of the Living God: the unpleasant experience of being perfected, whether it has duration or not, is purgatory. Calling purgatory a place is using human language as humans must do, to approach or approximate: not meant literally. Why caricature the doctrine? 3. Communion Of Saints = Necromancy, not. This is a very shallow objection. Catholics believe in the "Communion" of saints. It's in the Nicene Creed: protestantism has no way to admit this "communing" except to make it conditional: the communing is only with some, not all of the saints, a distinction not found in the bible. Those who die in Christ are alive in Christ, according to St. Paul--so they are more alive than you and I are on earth: they remain members of the Living Body of Christ. So they are together with us who are also members of the same Living Body. They can pray for us if God lets them participate in His knowledge of us. 4. Mary: when is the last time you positively complied with Luke 1:48? Mary is a special case of Saints. For she is the most perfect (holiest) saint who ever lived: given a new name by the angel, "Kecharitomene", "Having Been Completely Graced." The word is in the past perfect tense. That's her name in salvation history. So to be in communion with Saint Mary is a good thing. 4. As to Mary's death: Why not admit the official statement in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, free and online? It is FACTUALLY incorrect to say it is Catholic doctrine that Mary did not die. The Church tends to hold the opinion that Mary did die, but the official teaching is only and merely this exact statement and no more(Catechism 947 ): *The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven*. This teaching is defined in these words in a papal encyclical couched among references to many opinions of doctors and fathers that Mary did die and *was entombed*. And THEN assumed into heaven. (See if you can find any place of pilgrimage where Mary's bones are venerated, or any relics kept of Mary's body. hmmm...) 5. You want to know where is that in the bible: I want to know where does the bible say that it has to be in the bible? Where in the bible is the canon of the bible, e.g.? (It's not: the canon of the bible comes from Sacred Tradition.) 6. Yes, Mary is a perpetual Virgin: "brothers" of Jesus are step- or cousins or kin in some sense. Joseph "knew her not until": How about the sentence, "He was faithful until death." Not after death? "Until" does not mean what you wish it to mean. 7. There is no way to read the Bread of Life Discourse straightforwardly and humbly without accepting the 2000-old-teaching: otherwise you are a #666, that is, you leave the Lord in disgust at the revolting thing He is saying, and you are never heard of again (see John 6:66). 8. As to Apostolic Succession, The Mandate was to go out and preach to and baptize the WHOLE WORLD: a mandate given to 11 mortal men, a mission which can only be fulfilled by them having successors. "I will be with you ALL days." "I will send my Holy Spirit to guide you into ALL truth." "Feed My lambs/sheep/lambs." "You are Kepha, and upon this kepha I will build My Church." "The Church is the bulwark and foundation of the Truth." To you Kepha I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven...what you, Kepha, loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven etc... And of course there is the unbroken historical record of the primacy and jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome (early ch. fathers). 9. I would love just one protestant ever to answer: just when in history did your cherished (but baseless) assumption of a general apostasy occur? Let's see the proof: a battle, a council, a declaration, a pope, an emperor saying/doing this or that, a rebel body peeling off to Where? When? Who? Names/Dates? We know you have to have a general apostasy to make room for protestantism to be legit: so let's see the historical moment when this crucial apostasy happened, and the church Christ said He would be with ALL days split off and go underground and only surface with failed monk Martin Luther a millennia later. Are there archaeological remains? Grafitti scratched on stone catacombs? What? His Church has to always exist since Christ promised He would be with it ALL--not just some--days. And it has to be a visible, human-led organization to which you can literally take your arguments. In contrast, it's easy to see a priest and bishop-led Church in the earliest Christian documents, as well as the unbroken understanding of the Eucharist as Christ's Real Flesh and Blood. Not one of Tim's shop-worn shibboleths are good reasons for not being Catholic. They are answered over and over again: so it is not an intellectual objection. Rather it is a position of the will. Tim is right in that the rise of Christianity and Western Civilization, and the spreading of the bible throughout the known world, is due to the Catholic Church. Which exists today, as we must expect Christ's church to have done from Pentecost until (!) the end of time. (This "until" does not mean the Church stops existing at the end of the world. We believe the Church exists Triumphant in heaven.) It is time for you to re-investigate the rich heritage your parents gave you but which you have tossed carelessly aside.

I’ve visited a church in Louisville that has skeletons of dead saints in it. It’s wild.

John 6 is not clearly about communion. It doesn’t seem to have anything to do with it.

Are you sure you are clear on Catholic doctrine? Purgatory: The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines purgatory as a “purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven,” which is experienced by those “who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified” (CCC 1030). It notes that “this final purification of the elect . . . is entirely different from the punishment of the damned” (CCC 1031). So Purgatory IS a doctrine in which we Catholics must believe. You say, "Catholics are not required to venerate Mary," but we are indeed required to believe these four dogmas: Mary being the mother of God, ever virgin, immaculately conceived and bodily assumed into heaven.. Honoring/venerating her for these qualities comes naturally from believing them.

I would agree it is a completely different and false God.

I can help with this one. The key word in the Church’s statement about the Mohammedan is “profess”. Profess does not mean the same as know or believe. Those of us that have studied the Mohammedan religion know “Allah” is NOT the same God we believe in. A simple reading of the Quran will tell you that much. I suppose we all could come together and tell them point blank they don’t worship the one true God, but that may launch another Crusade. We have all seen what happens around the world when you deny them, are you ready for that? Though, I would argue. As followers of Christ, it’s up to us to help them come to the knowledge of the truth, just as we should help our Jewish brothers and sisters understand that all the Patriarchs and Prophets point to Jesus of Nazareth as the longed for Messiah. Hope this helps. Edit: a word

That's the "New Catechism" you need Catechism of Trent or Baltimore Catechism. Sacred Tradition & the Depositum Fidei of the CC definitely not agree with that idea. Many books after VII council contain heresy.

Mohammed didn't teach Christ, wasn't a proto-christ, wasn't a miracle baby champion, etcetera. He killed a bunch of pantheistic pagans and taught them Jesus free monotheism. Any Christian that is an apologist for Muslims and Jews that deny Christ isn't Christian. They can believe in the others and convert, they can't believe in a Christianity without Jesus supreme. Ecumenicalism somehow misses this but allows each camp to have "house rules" and thereby invalidate all positions.

Interesting. The church I grew up in was adamant that Mary never died.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews yep

The Douay Rheims has a strong bias toward replacement theology.

That’s a stretch. At least in regards to Roman variations.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews "Roman" variations? I don't know what that means.

It’s my channel. I can pretty much do what I want.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsYou have proven my point! You sound like every Pastor I have ever met or observed when it is pointed out to them that what they are saying contradicts the Bible or an obvious fact. They REACT rather than Respond with Civility. 🤨

I’m not really reacting. I am just pointing out, this is a platform I have control of. To call it controlling is a bit ridiculous when I am literally controlling the entire process. If people start fighting amongst each other in a hostile way in the comments, I can reserve the right to turn them off. It has nothing to do with sincerity. It has everything to do with assuring things stay civil. The fact that comments actually aren’t turned off should say something. You’re actually commenting now, so tell me, what’s your issue?

I mean Jesus was a man/human. So obviously your statement isn't true if you believe in the Trinity.

@@KillerofGods I can’t believe this needs saying, but Jesus was no mere mortal my dude. Jesus was born without sin, our Lord Jesus was God in the flesh. Christ the King 🐑✝🕊

@@KillerofGods Jesus Christ is fully God and fully sinless man according to the word of God. He is one divine person with two natures. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit were all present and active in creation since they are one God.- Gen. 1:1-27, Jn. 1:1-18, Col. 1:16-18.

@@stormy_waters And he was fully human and fully divine. He wasn't a normal man to be sure. But he was the new Adam and was still a man.

@@jamestrotter3162 Yep fully human and fully divine. That is how (among other reasons) we were saved

Thank you. But I’ll stick with the Bible.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Follow up question, are you a literalist to all words in the Bible? Just trying to see how far the blinders go.

Been there done that.

While I see your point, there is no other offering for our sin than the cross. Repentance is not penance.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews I did NOT write "repentance is penance". The verses I cited say when a wicked person (1) turns from sin and (2) does what is just and right he would live again - all the wicked things he did will be forgotten. No 1 is repentance and no. 2 is temporary punishment, from which we have penance. In your daily life you apply the same concept as written in Eze. 33:14-16. When a person, say, broke the windshield of your car and he apologized; you will forgive him but you still demand him to replace the broken windshield. The latter belongs to "doing what is just and right".

​@@justfromcatholic Ephesians 2:8-9 the Apostle Paul wrote clearly with Word given by the Holy Spirit : "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." The verses in Ezekial wrote of the law expanded given to the Jews. The Blood of Jesus made Grace possible because He fulfilled all the law and works by becoming our sacrifice. Therefore, not by any works (penance, sacraments, traditions, etc) can one be saved. Only by repentence of sin and accepting God's free gift of Grace by Faith in Christ alone. FYI -- I was a roman catholic for nearly 22-years and directed music for over 500 catholic masses. I was not born again until I turned 22 after hearing a local preacher and firsr reading the scripture myself. I had to believe in what God's word said...not in works or religion.

@@Daniel-yc1ff Eph. 2:8-9 is perhaps the most cited verses to support faith-alone salvation. But Scripture also says in 2 Th. 2:13 that God saves us through sanctification. The verses of Ezekiel cited are applicable to us. If you think they are meant for the Jews, then what James wrote in his epistle is also applicable only to the Jews based on James 1:1. You attempt to set aside those verses in order to justify your belief based on the teaching of the Reformers. God does not change his standard both in OT and NT. Scripture is supposed to be your final authority. If your belief contradicts what Scripture says, then it is wrong belief. FYI: I was once in the same situation. Born and raised Catholic I became evangelical after doing Bible study with an evangelical friend and read verses of Scripture he pointed out to me. After reading other verses I realize that what the Reformers taught is wrong.

​​@@justfromcatholic That's not the works referred to in Ezekiel to substanciate the 'Christ's Grace isn't enough you need works' fallicy. Christians do, however, need sanctification. But the works as James put it(which also means fruit of the born again believer) are necessary. Some simple believe they get saved but then find themselves struggling with the same. Why? They lack holiness or sanctification. When one dedicates their life daily to Christ and His Word, the work/fruit will come. Many have a problem with that. I'm a simple Bible believing Christian. I'm not a reformer. Luther believed in baptismal regeneration (works and not what water baptism represents as an ordinance). On the other hand, he contradicted himself by becoming so furious with the book of James, Jude, Hebrews and others (which he clearly didn't understand from the Textus Receptus); that he tried to remove them from the N.T. canons. I'll leave it here: Romans 11:6 “And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.”

I pastor an Assembly of God church.

Things can absolutely be just made up at some point.

Ha ha. That’s a great outlook! Thank you.

The Catholic Church explicitly states that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church ("Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus"). The biggest problem the Catholic Church faces today is not secularism but heresy in all its forms.

The Catholic Church explicitly teaches no salvation outside the Catholic Church ("Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus"). The biggest problem the Catholic Church faces today is not secularism but heresy in all its forms. But I supposed its no wonder you think that being a Pentacostal is OK considering all the inappropriate videos you have saved to your public playlist.

The Catholic Church explicitly teaches "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus". The biggest problem the Catholic Church faces today is not secularism but heresy in all its forms. But I supposed its no wonder you think that being a Pentacostal is OK considering all the inappropriate videos you have saved to your public playlist.

The Catholic Church explicitly teaches "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus". The biggest problem the Catholic Church faces today is not secularism but heresy in all its forms. But I supposed its no wonder you think that being a Pentacostal is OK considering all the inappropriate videos you have saved to your public playlist.

That is a big factor for me.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews so long as the papacy exist there can never be unity with Christians.

There wasn't even a pope for quite some time afterward - the bishop of Rome got too big for his breeches. Even the Orthodox Churches understand "Quia tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram aedificabo meam ecclesiam" ("That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I shall build my church") correctly, i.e., that the rock is the confession, not Peter himself.

​@@fnjesusfreakThere was always a bishop of rome and he had a special placement recognized by all the other patriarchs. Also, Peter means rock as you know, so how can "you're Peter and upon this rock I'll build my church" not mean Peter himself?

@@asggerpatton7169 He said "this rock", not "thee, O rock". Also the head patriarch was the Bishop of Jerusalem, James the Just, not Peter.

You can call her blessed without veneration, giving her sinlessness, and assuming her into heaven once her life was completed.

Thank you! The Reformers are not without fault, but they were critical in getting us where we are today.

I’ve always believed in God but I didn’t serve him. I did make a brief video about my testimony but it’s not exhaustive. It’s called Three Bibles That Changed Everything.

I have read Ignatius. I really don’t see anything that leads us to where the Catholic Church is today.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Me neither. But it is not Protestant for sure. “Similarly, let everyone respect the deacons as Jesus Christ, just as they should respect the bishop, who is a model of the Father, and the presbyters as God’s council and as the band of the Apostles. Without these no group can be called a church” (Trallians 3:13). "Make no mistake brethren, no one who follows another into a schism will inherit the Kingdom of God, no one who follows heretical doctrines is on the side of the passion" (Philadelphians 3:3). “Be zealous, then, in the observance of one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one chalice that brings union in His blood. There is one altar, as there is one bishop, with the priest and the deacons, who are my fellow workers” (Philadelphians 4:1). “But consider those who are of a different opinion with respect to the grace of Christ which has come unto us, how they oppose the will of God…. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against the gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again” (Smyrneaens 6:2-7:1). “Flee from divisions, as the beginning of evils. You must all follow the bishop, as Jesus Christ followed the Father, and follow the presbyters as you would the apostles; and respect the deacons as the commandment of God. Let no one do anything that has to do with the Church without the bishop. Only that Eucharist which is under the authority of the bishop (or whomever he himself designates) is to be considered valid. Wherever the bishop appears, there let the congregation be; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not permissible either to baptize or to hold a love feast without the bishop. But whatever he approves is also pleasing to God, in order that everything you may do may be trustworthy and valid” (Smyrneans 8:1-2). “Assemble yourselves together in common, every one of you severally, man by man, in grace, in one faith and one Jesus Christ, who after the flesh was of David's race, who is Son of Man and Son of God, to the end that ye may obey the bishop and presbytery without distraction of mind; breaking one bread, which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote that we should not die but live for ever in Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 20:2).

While yes, they are alive in heaven, they are dead here, they are not to be prayed to.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Why not, If you can converse with saints on earth and ask their help or assistance?

A glorified Jesus talking with a glorified Moses and Elijah isn’t comparable. Jesus is God.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Jesus, the man, communicated with two dead men. Therefore, necromancy cannot be interpreted to mean that any and all contact with the dead is intrinsically sinful

Our sins are forgiven by God through the cross alone by Jesus alone.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews that's right they are sin is forgiven by Christ But the effects of our sin are still present in the world aren't they If you break a window you replace that window .you don't just ask you neighbor to forgive you and walk away you repair that broken window that's penance

Repent it says.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews The Douay-Rheims version uses the word "penance".

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews It uses the word "penance" instead of "repent" because it follows the Latin Vulgate's translation closely. The Latin Vulgate, translated by St. Jerome in the 4th century, uses the term "paenitentia" (penance) in passages like Matthew 3:2 and Acts 2:38.

Yes. I absolutely agree on real presence.

Honor, and veneration are two different things.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews so is worship and veneration😒😒

I do not doubt we are to make restitution, but that is far different than the doctrine of penance.

And the huge caption that corrected that…😏. You didn’t see it?

Ha ha.

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR 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 that 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 too, as we have been taught, the food that has been made into the Eucharist by the eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus [First Apology 66 (c. A.D. 151)].

It is not literal presence I take issue with, I mentioned that. It is the means that I take issue with.

By your own admission it is still bread and wine.

​@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Only the elements remain that of bread and wine. Jesus teaches unequivocally and clearly that the bread and wine are truly his blood and body (John 6: 55). Hope this helps, best regards

@apracity7672 and I also believe in literal presence.

And much of this is not in the Bible.

You think you understand me better than I do because I never said it wasn’t. I just said the substance doesn’t change.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Private interpretation of the Bible is forbidden in the Bible. Jesus entrusted the truth to his Church, not individuals.

This is a bible verse. It’s God’s word.

I believe this bible verse supports the Catholic Mass...hey,i love your reviews!! Im looking at your reviews to find the cheapest rebind​@anickelsworthbiblereviews

If you are clean on the inside you will be generous.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews I think your video was fair enough, but it seems like with this verse, you invert it. Just consider that, please. No need to respond, though. Thanks.

I’m not sure what you are trying to get me to say.

People that believe in transubstantiation are missing the point, that's my statement. Not only are they missing the point, they're sensationalizing it so much that they twist it into something it's not meant to be. I have no aim to direct you to respond in a specific fashion or at all, I stated my opinion.

I do not believe apostles today have the same authority as the twelve, but I think there are modern day apostles.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews I believe they must have the same authority as the Original Apostles. Sadly however, not all will remain faithful. The same can be said for some modern liberal Biblical scholars. Who by their 'superior' education, I believe are ultimately reeking havoc on the trustworthiness of the Biblical record. I read some modern versions, but my trust is in the older translations, of which the New King James Version is!

I do believe many of the relics are fake.

It's idolatry and necromancy either way, I hope they're all fakes with no power attached to them. The truth is they all have the power to deceive, and clergy backs it up.

Generally those that claim to be Sola Scriptura, aren’t.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsHow so?

To be Sola Scriptura would mean to be a continuationist. That is just one example.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Haha, I agree!

​​​@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsI was surprised to see this acknowledgement. I think this is the primary reason Protestants disagree on many issues, including essentials. But I don't think anyone is immune. We all bring our presuppositions to the text. That's one reason we need tradition. But I don't think Catholics are immune either just because they have Scripture, Tradition, and a magisterium. We have this problem, too. Just today I heard a Catholic parish council member make a claim that is not supported by any of these 3 authorities. (But knowing him, he's probably going to verify his claim.)

The realm of the dead is a place. Purgatory is a doctrine. Not comparable.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Ever hear of Sheol or Hades that’s were the word was derived from in Latin "purgatorio" Purgatory The Greek word used for fire is "" (puroo) of which "pur" is the root word for Purgatory. a translation of Hades and Sheol. By the way The word Trinity and Easter Isn’t in the Bible either where did they come from ….. Hell" is english, "sheol" is Hebrew, "hades" is Greek. Purgatory is Latin for the same The Abode of the Just - Abraham's Bosom (Lk 16:22-26) This is where they awaited their promised deliverance. Gehenna (Greek): This is the lake of fire. Eternal damnation (Mt:18:9) The good guys went to the Abode of the Just (Abraham's Bosom), the bad guys when to gehenna. There was a great chasm between the two places and there was no way to get to one side from the other. (Mt:18:9). Christ descended into hell on Good Friday so he could rescue the righteous from the part of hell where the righteous were.(1 Pt 3:18-19) Jesus is the only way to Heaven so it was important that he descended to the dead. (Jn 14:6) Jesus didn't go to hell as a dead guy. He went there as the Saviour. Jesus blew down the doors of the Abode of the Just and grabbed out every faithful servant of God from the beginning of history. He rescued them and freed them from this prison on Holy Saturday. Praise God! That must have been a great party.😁😁

Using a glorified Jesus and his communication with glorified beings is hardly apples to apples. Also, using the act of raising someone from the dead is pretty ridiculous.

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews did Jesus talk with dead guys that died hundreds of years before Jesus at the transfiguration is he a necromancer