_"...and made me come to the foot of her Son's cross."_ Propitiatory human sacrifice is always evil and must be condemned.

@@twitherspoon8954and your comment on the actual subject of the video would be…?

I don't think you understand the passion. The Son offered himself willingly out of love to the Father in his Life, Death, and Resurrection.@@twitherspoon8954

@twitherspoon8954 Jesus isn't a human being, He's a Divine Being with a human nature, and He died for me and you. You're right though, God forbids human sacrifice. He loves us too much for that, which is why He gave us the One perfect sacrifice, once for all time and all people.

@@jd3jefferson556 _"Jesus isn't a human being, He's a Divine Being..."_ Excuse me? Provide your best evidence that Jesus even existed.

I discussed this with Trent on his channel. I believe the evidence for Fatima shows clear markers of the demonic. When people say "why would Satan do XYZ that points people to Jesus?" or some other thing I would point out that you are assuming Roman Catholicism is not a false religion. You lose that assumption and Fatima, for instance, shows the problems with Catholicism instead of a confirmation of Catholicism.

@@aGoyforJesus that’s such a circular argument. You could say the same thing about miracles in any denomination then. So if miracles happen in a oneness Pentecostal church that point Pentecostals to Jesus, you could claim it’s demonic, because those who deny the trinity are wrong. Or if you disagree with Lutherans, you could say the same exact thing. Then you could claim that Baptists only have true miracles (or whatever denomination you agree with)!

@@laurenmcnichol5311 well, I left out that Fatima was a UFO event and UFOs are in the world of the paranormal and demonic phenomena. So while Fatima was supernatural, it had all the earmarks of similar demonic phenomena in the UFO world.

@@aGoyforJesus >clear markers of the demonic A clear marker of the demonic is aversion to the holy. Did you see it here?

@@aGoyforJesus You can't discount Catholic miracles without also invalidating non Catholic ones. Fatima doesn't have demonic markers it has the markers of heat stroke and staring directly into the sun for too long. There are plenty of miraculous accounts that are fabricated in plenty of religious traditions. And others that are far more difficult to dismiss. Other's still, which bear the markers of more nefarious powers at work. I categorically reject the idea that Catholicism is entirely illegitimate, I have come across far more Calvinist pharisees then Catholic ones. And the good that the Catholic church does globally by charity and sacrifice is second to none. The authoritarian claims that their sometimes pompous, sometimes brilliant, leaders make to all Christendom are as easily ignored as saying "no I don't think so bud." In the past their organization has committed many atrocities against unbelievers, Muslims, and Reformed traditions, but you know who else committed similar if not identical atrocities to Catholics and other groups listed, every single other tradition ever Religious and political alike. Don't waste your time fighting people advancing God's kingdom and be happy they have a Christian community where they are encouraged to seek God's ends, their best good, and the good of others.

Jesus healed you from cancer , my friend, not the pope, not a priest, and not the Roman Catholic Church. I honestly think this is a very poor reason to believe in Catholicism.

@@ImJustDrew360can you show where it was claimed the pope did the healing himself? Or did you just add that?

@@user-uc1yb7hy2n it’s quite obvious that I was speaking in a general sense. If Pamela thinks a church can perform miracles then she most likely thinks that a pope can.

@@ImJustDrew360 That's a massive non-sequitur. The Church does not believe nor teach that the Pope can heal. We do believe that there are certain people that are given the gift to heal others, but they are very few and far in between.

@@ImJustDrew360I don’t understand your comment. She never said any of that. The miracles are from God but a lot of Protestants don’t believe in them, but Catholics do. So logically she would go where people still believe God can perform those miracles.

Well I’m not Catholic; I’m Lutheran but I agree with you. It seems like the idea of miracles in the West has fallen out of favor which is a real shame.

​@@Allaiya.Miracles are more than an idea. They're actions of God. Lutheran is false. Convert to Catholicism.

​@@Allaiya.I know you black women like your baptist black churches , but it's false. It's a shame my old black teacher is a mediocre Christian she is of the world sadly. Catholicism is true. Protestantism sucks and is similar to atheism.

I agree with your first 2 sentences. Not your last two. Nothing against Catholics, but there are things Catholicism teaches I do not think is very biblically is why.@@IsraelCountryCube

You are full of false doctrine.

@@eddyrobichaud5832 you are full of shaista dear protestant brother, get the out of here

Welcome Home!

@@carlospacheco7361 I'll stay so people can hear the truth

@@eddyrobichaud5832 we are already in the truth, our Church was not funded by Luther or Calvin or Smith or any other heretic, she was funded by Jesus himself, whatever lies you want to spill around against her, you will have to give account for them, every single word. Because you are not saved just because you say so, you are saved until God judges you and He says wether you are or are not saved. Do you know that Luther is in heII? Do you want to follow him? Do you know what kind of life he lived after his heretical schism? Educate yourself and then come with your protestant garbage and eat it yourself.

Facts. -Kyle

@@Ahmed_sajid778God bless you

@@Ahmed_sajid778Hallelujah 🙏✝️ Welcome home!

I like calling him Dyer Jr. Or Mini Jay

​@@TheCounselofTrentProtestants Are Skeptical Because They Actually Read The Bible And They Know The Devil Likes To Counterfeit What Is Doing And They Never Forget The Bloody History Of The Catholic Church

How do you mean that? I think it's a theological bias. Thinking to know what can and cannot be and thus disregarding any contrary evidence.

_"...opposition to Catholicism is psychological rather than logical or historical."_ Says the person who literally worships propitiatory human sacrifice and cannibalism. You also believe, without any evidence, that God walked around town for thirty years and then died and became a zombie and then the graves opened and the corpses and skeletons rose out and "appeared to many" and all of that happened without any of the locals noticing.

I tend to agree that it's more psychological.

In my experience, it's most often driven by belief in Sola Scriptura. Protestants oppose any teaching that's not explicitly found in the Bible, the Marian dogmas, purgatory, infant baptism etc.

You could also call it philosophical, because these psychological biases are based on a worldview. Joe Heschmeyer's recent video about veneration of Saints felt to me like "home", because faith is in a church, in a communion, where we need each other. But I can see that the individualistic "me and God - nobody else needed" viewpoint will see that video and say: "Nice theory, but that's not how God is". The question is: Does the wine have a huge root network and many many individual stems with one branch each, or is it an enormous stem with many branches?

Hello sir, would you like some pie?

​@@ironymattand a pie of false Protestantism?

Welcome home!

@daxypoo thank you! I’ve kinda started figuring that out after a while of getting a little frustrated by trying to cram everything out of excitement.

Look up Encounter Ministries and the Catholic Charismatic movement!

Thank you for that. I, too, had encountered similar as a former Protestant. Someone had also mocked me for believing that God can still speak to us in dreams.

If your thinking of becoming Catholic then the charismatic belief is not Catholic do your research of the origin of charasmatic and you will find that it's foundation is protestant. It is one of the many ways protestantism has invaded Catholicism it is a fact do the research and you will see it.

God bless you and your family! ❤😊❤

Right there with you just a couple months ahead. God Bless and saying a prayer for you now! 🙏🏽

Ave Maria!

Keep going man! I am currently attending RCIA right now and it's honestly the best decision I ever made! And I also grew up in Protestantism. May the Lord bless you!

Please Pray for the Restoration of Traditional Latin Mass

(this is a genuine question not an argument) Does the bible actually say that a demon is supposed to be hurt simply by someone praying? I remember reading before that the bible says that satan knows and can utter even stuff from the bible itself (I could be wrong though). I'm an atheist btw so I don't have a horse in this fight xD but I'm just curious.

@@raphael_santiago well I'm just sharing what happened here in the Philippines. It is up to you how think about it.

A good policy is never to anger a lady who prays her rosary. 😂

​@@raphael_santiagoyou might be atheist but you have a Protestant mindset I.e you assume a principle like Sola Scriptura to be true and ALL TRUTH can only be found in the Bible. The Bible barely covers exorcism. All of the Churches have developed their own methodology to deal with demons. And it appears empirically that yes they are be harmed by prayers from a person with belief. Watch some exorcist testimonies and see if these men are truthful such as Fr. Ripperger and Fr. Lampert.

@@raphael_santiago I don't believe Scripture says specifically demons "are hurt" but there are examples of them being caused pain and suffering when Jesus and the Apostles are casting them out. If you'd like more information on Catholic exorcisms and priests working to cast out demons I suggest you look up Father Chad Ripperger. He has some great writings and video talks on the subject. Take care and good will in your research.

❤🎉

Uhm, Trent talked about the fact that Protestant miracles happen as well. I am just glad to know that Trent thinks we are “in the club” too.

So, in thinking this through logically. Since Protestants have miracles too, then God is affirming the Protestant faith. I am glad to know that we get to be in the catholic (small c) church also. 🎉

He is leading you to His greatest miracle- the gift of his reincarnation on the thousands of alters around the world; where you too could partake and abide in and with the Divine Son.

​@@kilomike2781yes, but there are miracles that have happened that are specific to Catholic dogma. That should say A LOT to Protestants but .... sinful pride is hard to overcome.

God CAN do whatever he pleases, but do u think He has actually worked miracles through saints?

​​@@SkepticalMantisCHANNEL10ofcourse !. Even protestants believe God can work miracles through protestant pastors. And in bible God worked miracles through the apostles and prophets so

@@SkepticalMantisCHANNEL10 of course. If he cant how come many evangelists and protestants pastor claim they make miracles? Wait, through living peter, paul, and many other apostles! How come right? Lmaooo

@@SkepticalMantisCHANNEL10Saints working miracles is literally in the Bible

It isn't easy these days for a Protestant to enter a Catholic Church ravaged by Modernism and people who peddle it.

@@vazgl100 no force. The Tilma did it over 9 years- cortez was gone then

@@vazgl100 Why did the Bishop write home and say that they need a miracle to convert the AZTECS

@@vazgl100 Bishop Zumárraga, the first Bishop of Mexico and a very prominent player in the story of Guadalupe, wrote to the Spanish King and told him that only a miracle could save the continent and the Spaniards’ mission. This is very important to recognize if one is to understand the purpose of Our Lady’s descent into Mexico in 1531. She came to bring peace between the two nations, and she brought peace by means of gentle conversion to the Catholic faith, which ended the human sacrificial system of the Aztecs and instead offered the natives eternal life and a Savior which had already done the sacrificing for them; His own sacrifice on a cross.

How come it is always seeing Apparitions of a Mary?? You all don't believe in seeing demons masquerading as angels of saints.

@@TriciaPerry-ef7biTricia, once again you are not fully informed on the topic. It is not just apparitions of Mary. There have been apparitions of Jesus too. A very famous one is the Divine Mercy which appeared to St Faustina in 1931

Part of the reason I converted to Catholicism was because of this dividing line. Most Protestant denominations were hardline one way or another; they were either strictly cessationist or overly permissive in their continuationism; neither of these stances made sense to me.

Research the history of the Rosary (and the Hail Mary) it's actually quite interesting. More than a thousand years from start to present day. Really interesting how long it took the Church to approve it as we presently know it! My favorite explanation when trying to explain it is it is the Bible on a string.

@@christinehenley9017 It IS at that - & quite a spiritual weapon at that! The devil hates it! 🤣

@@kainosktisis777 we w0n`t ask h0w y0u kn0w this

Even if it were a supernatural event, it doesn't warrant belief in Christianity. Nice try though

@@WaterCat5the typical atheist response. If a miracle (let’s assume no scientific explanation) is LITERALLY relating to God wouldn’t you logically conclude it’s about a real God? Moreover, Eucharistic miracles-bread having cardiac tissue studied by WHO, NASA, etc. give any credence to God or do you deny the scientific analysis? Why would this scientifically unexplained phenomenon about teaching of Christ not be about Christ?!

@bguman A wizard did it to fuck with people. A ghost is playing tricks. A different universe bled into ours momentarily. A demon did it to lead people to catholicism, which is actually the incorrect christianity. Makes just as much sense. Point is, unless you can provide a real link to your religion, then it's hard to say, certainly with just one event. Your other miracles have plenty of other natural and supernatural explanations. If you guys love your miracles so much, why not try to create a test for them. It's said multiple times in the Bible God will answer the prayers of the faithful. Set up an experiment with that.

@@WaterCat5 : Logically, the only question that needs to be answered is this: "Is there a God or not?" If there are ghosts or demons, then basically you are acknowledging that the supernatural exists. So the next question is, do you want eternal life or not? If yes, then you should look around at all the religions and select the one that gives the highest return on investment of time and money. Basically Christianity says this: If you follow the teachings of Jesus, you will get eternal life. Jesus guarantees it. Cost = zero. The amount of time you invest is up to you. Jesus proved he can raise the dead by doing it several time in full view of the public. Even the Jewish Priests who hated Jesus saw what he did and did not deny it. They just blamed it on demons. So in conclusion, we have a man, Jesus, who claims to be able to give eternal life, and then proved it to skeptics. Jesus goes on to say, all you have to do to get eternal life is to follow his teachings and there is no charge for the service. That's what we call Christianity. What's not to like about a deal like that?

@bobblacka918 Well, first off, I don't believe the supernatural,but even if I did, Christianity is not cost free or even low cost. It requires me to believe unproven claims, which means I must compromise my intellectual integrity to believe it. Believing in the supernatural does in no way entail God. Next, I would argue a wannabe religious person is in a no win situation if they actually do this because many religions are exclusive. If I believe Christianity on unfounded principles, then how can I disprove Islam? Aren't I just gambling? How do I know not believing religion is what God wants? Perhaps the real God is testing to see whether we fall for false claims, and I will be rewarded for not doing so. How can you persuade me otherwise? This is just Pascal's wager, and it's been shown in many ways and places to be stupid. I suggest you read the criticisms of this "argument", though it doesn't deserve the moniker.

God bless you Josh. Keep searching and praying for enlightenment. Trent was a searcher at one time. Now he is growing in his faith which is a life long journey.

Easy: Read history.

what is tangibIe ab0ut aIIeged miracIes ? a crying statue, as miracIes g0, is useIess, whereas an image 0f christ 0n a piece 0f t0ast is at Ieast entertaining a reaIIy usefuI miracIe w0uId be an amputee regr0wing a Iimb heIpfuI, awe insipiring, and it c0uId be fiImed gr0wing back as evidence 0f a reaI miracIe aduIts exhibiting their guIIibiIity and creduIity d0es n0thing f0r the veracity 0f miracIe cIaims

@@ob2249too smart for your own good, show some humility!

@@geoffjs certainIy t00 smart f0r gr0wn ups with invisibIe, imaginary friends iike y0u ge0rgie what was it he sacrificed ? three days ? 1/3rd 0f himseIf t0 2/3rds 0f himseIf ? I0I

@geoffjs 1 day ago @ob2249 too smart for your own good, show some humility​ @geoffjs I th0ught I had resp0nded t0 y0ur request Its difficuIt t0 be humbIe in the face 0f such infantiIism jeff reaI gr0wn aduIts, apparentIy, discussing, in aII earnestness, their fav0rite invisibIe man, Iike 5 yr 0Ids then we get tits Iike y0u expecting respect simpIy because y0u beIieve in an invisibIe man??!!!! gr0w up jeff aIs0, if he r0se fr0m the dead he has n0t, by definiti0n, sacrificed his Iife y0u d0 understand the engIish Ianguage presumabIy ? "r0se fr0m the dead" means is n0 I0nger dead, erg0... try thinkin jeff, it might Iiberate y0u fr0m infancy

And you're allowed to be. Miracles are not dogma and never have been. Blessings!

Even the church is skeptical when a "miracle" occurs, they Study It, also sending scientists (including non Catholics). Some at course of history were proven fake by the same Church, but some were pointed as material of faith, not a Dogma, but you can freely believe in them or not.

If these Catholic miracles turn out to be false, would that affect your faith at all?

A non-zero number of catholic miracles are likely false. Be skeptical, but investigate or read the church's investigation. Stopping at skepticism is not healthy.

In fact the Bible records that the Pharisees were worried that the disciples would steal Jesus' body and say He had risen from the dead. Probably because that was the kind of dishonesty in religious life they were accustomed to. We should beware both of causing scandal and being scandalized. 'Oh, Lord, put a spirit of steadfastness within me!' ❤️🙏♥️

“It’s demonic” is the Christian version of “it’s aliens.” It’s a handy way to explain things that might otherwise challenge my assumptions.

@@stephenjohnson7915 yep, exactly right. It's akin to "where's that in the Bible."

Strangely enough, those from GQ dont see a miracle visibly, but they do believe the bread and the wine convert into Body and Blood? SEE some irony? Those ARE biased opinions that are unblibical

@@davidcole333 Is there something wrong w/ the bible, and seeing it as God's word and our ultimate guide? Do you respect the bible as the infallible word of God, or do you have a higher authority than scripture?

@@saintejeannedarc9460 "The **CHURCH** is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth" - 1 Timothy 3:15 It's simple, and RIGHT THERE in the bible! Of course protestants will let some itchy-eared long explanation lead them away from this simple-child-like-Truth! Of course, scripture comes forth **from** the Church, the body of Christ, but not the other way around!

What is ironclad? Since Trent admits that Protestants have miracles too, then it can’t be a determining argument. Maybe something else perhaps?

@@kilomike2781 Protestants do have miracles for sure. It comes down to the explicitly Catholic nature of the miracle of Fatima though.

What is it about the miracle of Fatima that is extraordinary to other miracles?

​@@kilomike2781Trent didn't say heretics have miracles. That would be Christ working against His own Mystical Body.

​@@SonOfThineHandmaidProts do not have miracles

Well, the second ecumenical council didn’t address Marian apparitions, but it did teach that proper respect is due Mary in order to properly understand Jesus Christ as the incarnate Word. People have been rejecting Mary as not that special or important for over 1600 years, it’s not a new thing. But much like the church fathers in the 5th century when Protestants today claim that Mary was just a normal woman and not special or unique in any way it raises serious questions from me on whether they properly understand the incarnation. There was nothing normal or everyday about God becoming man. He set a specific people apart from the rest of the world and had a specific lineage within that people group picked out that lead not only to a specific time for him to be born in flesh, but through a specific woman as well. God doesn’t act randomly or change plans on the fly. All of this was planned before the beginning of time. Including Mary herself as the proper and right vessel to bear the Son of God.

When did the apostolic age end and how?

And ironically the Scripture never teaches cessationism and implies the opposite.

@@LiliGoof-gh4ch were the saints performing healings at will?

I wouldn't think Jesus would want his Apostolic teachings to cease when the apostles died . As he told Peter you are the rock upon which I build my church . I've never read that he said but when you apostles die the church and miracles will end?

Padre pio did

We're Catholic "Roman Catholic" was started as a slur against Catholics by anti-Catholics. My Bibles and Catechism say "Catholic" not "Roman Catholic" on it

😂

,Why does the Trinity not appear in the Bible.

@@lufhopespeacefully2037 It does - implicitly - not explicitly.

Totally agree with you in the “scientist” environment we live in it becomes even more important to show the strong evidence .

Take RCIA

There is no "miracle" treated with more scepticism than the Shroud of Turin - the Church has not approved it - but it is the officially the most studied historical artifact in the world, ever! And it is a really fascinating object. Of all the many features it contains, none can be reasonably explained. It is a very mysterious piece of cloth!

I always question the faith of people claiming to follow Christ but who deny the miraculous when the Word made His entry into our humanity through a miraculous act. It simply boggles the mind.

I agree.

Thats the difference. All Catholic Miracles was not performed by man. But non- Catholic miracles were performed by man..

Being the mother of Jesus, who christians believe is God, is itself a unique role

I would really like to understand why do you think veneration of Mary is idolatry and "contradicts" the Bible. Luke 1:48 clearly states "All generations will call me blessed" referring to Mary, it seems the contradiction comes from those that do everythin they can *not* to call her blessed instead. Furthermore the Hail Mary is literally citations from the Gospel of Luke, in particular Luke 1:28 and Luke 1:42 with a final exhortation for Mary to pray for us to God. We know God is a God of the living, and people who are in Heaven are in communion with him, so the same way you can ask your friend to pray for you then you can ask those who are "highly favoured by God" (Luke 1:28) to pray for you. Tell me how all of this which is deeply rooted in scripture could be somehow demonic? And you should have pretty strong evidence to back such a claim since it's you vs the Gospel of Luke.

​@@covonedigrano7491 Well, now we are really going off topic quite a bit. I don't have any hesitation calling Mary blessed. She truly was blessed. Suffice it to say that one must look at the scripture through the very unique lens of the Catholic magisterium to come anywhere close to your view, based on a simple straight forward reading of those verses. But my point is that the presentation in this video is steeped in Catholic assumptions. Therefore no protestant would ever feel the least bit challenged by the points presented in it. Once the default assumptions are turned around, the video doesn't really do anything but become a source of encouragement to anyone who already holds those Catholic assumptions.

@@e.z.1913 it's not a radical take really. God chose someone to be called blessed from all generations that would come afterwards. If you can ask your friend who is a sinner to pray for you, then what makes you think that God would frown on people if they asked a person explicitly favoured by God to pray for them. And we know from scripture that dead people who are in Heaven aren't simply asleep but are in fact with God, see Matthew 17 where Jesus talks with Moses and Elijah. Is Jesus wrong for talking to them and not only to God directly? If he is not then why would it be wrong to ask for a blessed person to pray for you? Also christian doctrine came before scripture, early Christianity didn't have a book with Gospels, it was mainly preached orally and it took a while to actually decide what should be canon. I agree that things shouldn't contradict scripture but to say that something must be explicitly written is scripture to be taken as the word of God invalidates the entirety of the early Church that predates scripture.

@@e.z.1913 also the fact that scripture alone is all we need for guidance is wrong and self contradicting. Where in scripture is it written that only scripture is needed? If we have to think that scripture is the only authority, then this must be explicitly written in scripture otherwise it wouldn't make sense. You say we cannot venerate Mary as it's not written explicitly in scripture, although it is compatible with scripture as veneration towards holy men and women isn't something which is forbidden and intercessional prayer is also allowed. Furthermore scripture wasn't written in one day: there was a time when it was incomplete, what about people back then they didn't have scripture to rely on but they were still Christians. I agree that scripture is fundamental, it's like the trunk of the tree but nowhere in scripture it was written that that tree must be cut and cannot grow branches, quite the contrary: Jesus told the apostles to continue on earth the work he started. Of course we cannot contradict scripture, but we cannot also say that everything that grows from scripture but isn't explicitly written is wrong either as it doesn't make any sense.

@@covonedigrano7491 Hi again. I really do not mean to offend. I only meant to comment on the obvious fact that this video is not the slam dunk everyone thinks it is, because it requires a certain view of Christian doctrine. I can tell, just by reading your comments, that they come from a place of saturation with that world view, which is why everything seems obviously so to you. To me, to protestants, and to so many other non-catholic Christians, it is difficult to see how your complex views are even consistent with scripture. I mean, consider something that is so obvious to you: 1. Jesus caused Moses and Elijah to miraculously appear before the disciples physically on mount Tabor, and they all conversed with one another on the mountain, although we have no idea what they conversed about. 2. Therefore we all can converse with all the dead Christians, from our bedrooms, at any time, and and freely assume that they both hear, see, and answer our bidding, even though we cannot see or hear them, they are not in front of us, and even though we are not ourselves with the transfigured incarnate Jesus, in the process of witnessing a great miracle, like the disciples were at that time. My point is that I don't think you realize the dozens and maybe the hundreds of Catholic assumptions that are required to arrive at that conclusion? Yet, it just seems obvious to you. When I look at all the scriptures you cite, I can't see how they are even remotely related to what you are trying to covey. To me, it seems that you are not actually deducing anything from scripture, explicitly or implicitly, but rather trying to fit preconceived ideas into the text by reading between the lines of scripture, then extrapolating those ideas to ultimate conclusions that are so far removed from what scripture is actually trying to convey, that just about any idea at all could be extracted from just about any passage of scripture. The result is that you arrive at these ultra complex notions that nobody would ever arrive at by doing a simple, straight forward reading. Again, I mean no disrespect, but I get the exact same feeling I get when I talk to a Jehova's Witness, or a Mormon, in the sense that they can reject the most simple literal reading of any scripture passage that contradicts their ideas, as long as they are able to slip one of their caveats through between the cracks of scripture. Basically, they think that unless their idea is shown to be impossible, we should assume it is true. Yes, I hold a different view of scripture, but that is marginally related. Protestants do not require that scripture explicitly teach everything. That is a bit of a caricature. We are happy to accept new revelation as long as it is at least consistent with what scripture teaches and does not contradict it. Unfortunately, a simple, straight forward, reading of many passages from scripture does seem to contradict Marian devotion on many grounds. Not only that, but Paul clearly says in Galatians 1.8 "but even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!" It is obvious that he clearly thought that the gospel they had preached was complete and certainly sufficient for salvation. Requiring Marian devotion, or any of the many additional Catholic dogmas, as a requirement for salvation, centuries after Paul wrote those simple and clear words, that anyone can read and easily understand, does seem to many of us to amount to adding something to the gospel that in fact does make it "different Gospel"... but I know that I'm not going to convince you of that. Maybe it's just good enough that we understand each other's views, and politely disagree.

I would have never guessed that. Portugal seems like a pretty Catholic place. Your pope was just there for a visit.

The children were interrogated 9 times, examined by doctors (mental health status deemed normal healthy), and put into public prison. The administer even threatened to boil them together.

Why do Catholics keep taking this one minor statement massively out of context? She was trying to show off with the son who does party tricks, not lead people to a saving faith in Christ.

Everything in the Bible has deep meaning for salvation of our souls, you do not pick and choose what to believe.

@@user-wo2kr1gu1c sometimes it does. But it shouldn't be added when context gives no reason to.

,Why does the Trinity not appear in the Bible.

@@lufhopespeacefully2037 It does - implicitly - not explicitly.

@@user-wg5dm6oc3t Except when she doesn't and what should only be directed towards Christ is directed to her. Mary does want us to focus on Jesus, obviously, but a Marian apparition puts the focus on Mary. Can't have it both ways.

Cannibals eat DEAD pieces of human flesh (when you cut off a piece of flesh from a person's body, it is DEAD because it has been seperated from the rest of the body). They DO NOT --- and CANNOT -- consume an ENTIRE LIVING HUMAN BEING comprising body, blood AND Soul. Jesus doesn't give us a DEAD piece of His Body to eat in the Eucharist; He gives us His ENTIRE LIVING SELF i.e His body, blood, Soul and divinity. At the last supper, He did not say: "This is a PIECE of my body". He said: ""This is my body". Interestingly, the Greek word for "Body" in that statement "This is my body" is "Soma" which means "an ENTIRE LIVING human being". Jesus did not use the word "ptoma" which means a CORPSE or DEAD BODY. Besides, Catholics didn't just DECIDE ON THEIR OWN to start eating the Body of Christ in the Eucharist. They are simply following the command of Jesus Christ in doing so: "unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you would not have life in you". So what are supposed to tell Him ? Are we supposed to say: "Sorry Lord, but we can't do as you say because we don't want to be guilty of cannibalism ? " Jesus knows what He is doing when He tells us to eat His body and we should trust Him.

It seems a poverty that on an apologist’s channel you would disagree and not provide any type of objection or counter argument. Please read my statement in a friendly tone, I have nothing against you, but I would be curious what your main objection is?

@@MikePasqqsaPekiM Hi there. The objections that all protestants will have are basically common sense ones, once one discards the "magisterium" dogma. Trent has to know this very well. This video is really a presentation for Catholics who are already steeped in Catholic assumptions a priori. Without these assumptions, the entire argument falls apart. That's why no protestant would take this challenge seriously. Take the argument that a demonic apparition would never urge someone to be a christian. Well, let's say the apparition urged someone both to convert to Christianity AND commit a mortal sin. Would that apparition still be deemed divine, based of Trent's argument for a kingdom divided against itself? Of course not. Therefore one must look at the entire content of the apparition, and not at any single issue. Or imagine that a protestant apparition urged everyone to worship Christ AND reject Marian devotion? Surely Catholics would view that miracle as false, even though the arguments in this video would equally call that into question. Given that protestants do not accept icon veneration, for example, or Marian devotion, if an apparition told people to become a christian and urged Marian devotion, a protestant would logically deduce that the apparition contradicted the Biblical command against idolatry, and would therefore deem the apparition to be false, evil, or potentially demonic. This would be consistent with an attitude that takes only the Bible as the infallible rule of faith. Catholics on the other hand, have no such constraint. They hold the Church's magisterium as equally infallible as the Bible. Therefore, an honest debate on these issues will always boil down to the protestant rejection of the Catholic magisterium. Once this issue is considered, every argument Trent gives, just disintegrates. The video is clearly intended as a kind of "singing to the choir" for those who are already Catholic. I do not fault it for that fact, and yet for that very same reason, no protestant will feel genuinely challenged by it at all.

Your subscription was predestined.

Calvinist Doctrine #1: Disagree with Catholics Calvinist Doctrine #2: Don't tell them why 😉

@@wordforever117 Trents arguments, while heroic, they aim to present plausible answers to a Catholic audience that doesn't have the time or interest in digging these topics in detail. They just accept what he says are logical enough and move on. Now, I'm not a Calvinist. But I can see why a Calvinist might disagree with Trent. Personally I find the arguments sloppy. Every single one could be turned around and used against Catholicism. There's no real meat there. Basically we all admit that demons can produce certain supernatural effects too. Therefore any miracle must be examined on the contents of the miracle, or the message of the apparition. If it contradicts your view of what the Bible teaches, you will dismiss it as demonic. If it goes along with what you think the Bible teaches, you think it's genuine. Period. End of story. We didn't really learn anything by that did we?

,Why does the Trinity not appear in the Bible.

@@lufhopespeacefully2037The Father, Son and Holy Spirit appear *A LOT* in the bible.

@@wordforever117 ,okee dokee, ,ty for replying., as far as i know trinity is an old worshipping for some an egyptians who have worshipped ezice,authorice&hurce ,on the hill of that,the church hijacked the notion&also The concept of a trinity predates the Bible.. The much older Hindu Vedas had a holy trinity.Called the trimurti, it was Brahma the creator, Vishnu the preserver, and Shiva the destroyer, three individual deities that are also a single deity. jesus is the main central figure of bible,did not agree with me we have find a bible with his name,where does jesus talked about trinity,have a good one.

@@lufhopespeacefully2037The Ancient Egyptians and Hindus have many gods. They are pantheists. They have a lot more than three gods. However the Trinity is not a group of three gods at all. It is one God which is triune in nature - this is unique to Christianity.

​@@lufhopespeacefully2037 And although Hinduism is older than Christianity, the ​ Trimurti only dates back to 4th century AD, so is newer than the Doctrine of the Trinity. The three forms of that "trinity" were previously individual gods. The idea that they are three forms of a supreme god is post-Christianity.

Thank you so much for watching. We are glad to hear that you found this video helpful! Congratulations on coming home! We will be keeping you in our prayers, Amber. -Vanessa

Calvinists are die hard cessationists, as far as I know. They don't believe in miracles. I do know of some that left that tradition after experiencing undeniable miracles. When they tried to share their miracle w/ fellow Calvinists, they were told it was of the devil, and when you've witnessed a real miracle, you know you have.

My non-denominational church is very Reformed and very Continuationist. But you're probably right that many (most?) Calvinists are Cessationist.

@@jdoe97 Do you ever wonder how you ended up "non denominational"? You can't have any theology to speak of, nothing on which you can totally commit.

@@carolynkimberly4021 I'm committed to Christ not a church/theological system. He saved me, filled me with His Spirit, and enables me to live the life I should live to Him. Despite what Catholics believe about their Magisterium all churches have a wrong theology in some way or another. I know if you're Catholic you can't accept that but it's true (1Cor 13:12). However, the theology I hold comes from the Bible and is attested to by the Spirit (1John 2:27). If John through the Spirit says that's good enough, then it should be good enough. But even then I know when I'm finally in the presence of God I will no longer see through the dirty mirror but will know fully as I am fully known, and I'll no longer have the wrong theology.

@@jdoe97 if the theology you hold comes from the Bible them you might want to ponder this… History shows us that Jesus didn't leave us a bible, the apostles didn't tell us which books belong in the bible, the church fathers never agreed on the 27 books of the NT through the 4th century, not only did they not agree but their list of would-be NT canons were GROWING during this time. So, if it wasn't the Catholic/Orthodox church that compiled the 27 books of the NT in the 5th century, just 75 years AFTER the council of Nicaea which began the Trinitarian docrtine, and then with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and preserved these scriptures by laboriously hand copying them over and over throughout the centuries before the invention of the printing press, the “rule of faith” for many, please tell us, show us, who did? And if this church no longer exists today, what good is the text which came forth from her if she couldn't sustain herself?