WELL DONE & Explained. INITIAL JUSTIFICATION + ONGOING SANCTIFICATION = HOPE for GLORIFICATION OR We were saved yesterday (via initial justification). We are being saved daily (via ongoing sanctification) We hope to be saved tomorrow (at judgment)
@jesussaves662510 сағат бұрын
I never thought about this before, -because i was so busy in my pride, thinking that whatever made the most sense to me MUST be the truth- but it seems that the further back you go in traditions that have split from the Faith, the closer they are to the Original and True Catholic Faith. That shows me that once you deny the authority of the Church, you will only stray farther and farther from the Truth, with all kinds of wild and unbiblical traditions and doctrines.
@killianmiller6107Күн бұрын
At what point does the Protestant’s paradigm for identifying scripture fall on a Texas sharpshooter fallacy? As in, who decided that these are the criteria for determining the canon? I sometimes hear about “written by a prophet or apostle” “doesn’t contradict,” “tradition of being recognized in liturgy” etc. How can we be absolutely sure these criteria are without error (while some don’t even fit, who knows if the historical books of Kings were written by a prophet)? As was brought up, Catholics don’t have an infallible list of infallible teaching, but we have ways of identifying these teachings. Similarly, Catholics can admit that scripture had no solemnly defined canon for a long time, but the canon was present in sacred tradition the whole time, as tradition passes down the WHOLE of God’s revelation, while scripture passes down merely the written word. Perhaps it’s hard to talk about tradition because we don’t have “book 2” with traditions ABC clearly layed out, that’s not what tradition is, it’s more of a meta recognition of what has been passed down from the apostles, we can see testimony of it in the church fathers, and tradition includes the scripture (the book we call the Bible was passed down to us) but is not limited to it, it also includes interpretation, liturgy, worship, faith, preaching, example, etc. For something that involves more than the written word, should we not expect God to keep the tradition of his revelation free from all error, ie infallible?
@Pomni740Күн бұрын
jesus is not the messiah jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies the bible says the messiah will gather the exiles in deuteronomy 30:3 isaiah 11:11-12 jeremiah 30:3, 32:37 ezekiel 11:17, 36:24 the bible says the messiah will rebuild the temple in isaiah 2:2-3, 56:6-7, 60:7, 66:20 ezekiel 37:26-27 malachi 3:4 zechariah 14:20-21 the bible says when the messiah comes there will be world peace and a complete end to war in micah 4:1-4 hoseah 2:20 isaiah 2:1-4, 60:18 the bible says the messiah will bring universal knowledge of god in zechariah: 3:9 8:23, 14:9, 16 isaiah 45:23, 66:23; jeremiah 31:33 ezekiel 38:23; psalm 86:9 zephaniah 3:9. jesus didn't do any of these things, so jesus can't be the messiah.
@freedomfields55694 сағат бұрын
@most_rustic_patrick
@_ROMANS_116Күн бұрын
Lord, I tried to tell me that your word was not enough! ?????
@HAL9000-su1mzКүн бұрын
Only two in human history have had Divine DNA: Jesus and His mother. Look up "fetal microchimerism" - mothers carry the DNA, living human cells - of their children in their bodies for the remainder of their lives. God would not permit His Holy One to see decay in the grave (Psalm 16:10). How fitting it is that the "Woman" who was created by Jesus to bear the Savior and who carries His Divine DNA in her body, would also not be permitted to suffer decay in the grave. Thus, her assumption is entirely fitting and consistent with God's love and mercy. That, and there is zero physical evidence of her body.
@user-dd2qy2si5jКүн бұрын
catholic is anti christ... first and foremost it is not simon peter the apostle is their first pope... its the sorcere simon magus aka simon pater in the acts 8:14-23.... simon peter is assigned to the jews and paul is the apostle assigned to the gentiles... and one thing more simon peter never been to rome if you are reading your bible you know why becaoz peter never become an apostle to gentiles. so this first pope peter this anti christ taking is not apostle peter but the sorcerer simon magus aka simon pater. it you guys will read romans and the writing of apostle peter you know that this anti christ catholic is a lie and demonic who are cloth in white....
@BillyBob-sm3ku2 күн бұрын
Didn’t know Shane Gillis was a Baptist
@ddzl62092 күн бұрын
Very satanic cult believing idiots of sola scriptura a man made tradition invented by a devil possessed man, have been doing all sorts of nonsense in order to destroy the Church of saints that Jesus established under the stewardship of Peter but nothing happened to it for the last two thousand years and will remain till Jesus comes back because Jesus himself promised to Peter saying " gates of hell will not prevail against it"
@chriswilson2032 күн бұрын
1:10:01 James White's argumentation form of attacking the Catholic Church is weird because it doesn't prove Sola Scriptura. It's almost like he doesn't understand how debates work. When taking the affirmative position you must prove your position. His line of argumentation could work if the debate was flipped and Alex was arguing from the affirmative position.
@Jer20.92 күн бұрын
Did you believe in the perpetual virginity of Joseph? Paul says Mary would have defrauded Joseph.1 Corinthians 7:5 (KJV) Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
@roddumlauf92412 күн бұрын
If the Church is infallible, why has she changed her views on faith and morals ? I'm not talking about the "development of doctrine" . I'm talking about significant changes.
@S7ARK_2 күн бұрын
Like what?
@shelbydaniel13302 күн бұрын
The “Chuch” isn’t infallible. The pope can speak infallibly when he speaking ex cathedra ( “from the chair”) and these are very specific times not all the time
@matthewbroderick62872 күн бұрын
Rodd, please provide evidence of your accusations where the Catholic Church has changed doctrine on faith and morals? It has never done so! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink!
@jditsfights256Күн бұрын
The Church itself isn’t infallible, it’s when She teaches on a manor of faith or morals in a manor that is binding upon our faith as Catholics. But as long as the doctrine isn’t dogmatically defined (binding on our faith) it can be changed.
@CatholicWithaBiblePodcast2 күн бұрын
Council of Rome was in 385 Synod of Hippo was 405
@SAVED_GRACE3 күн бұрын
The difference is your are simping off them, not them off you.. now go pray to mary
@matthewbroderick62873 күн бұрын
Protestants must then have to admit ( but James White never will admit), that they can never know with infallible certitude what Jesus Christ meant by "this IS MY BODY ", or who the rock is in Matthew 16,,or who the Woman is in Revelation 12, since Scripture ALONE is infallible, thus making all their interpretations, FALLIBLE! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink!
@calebdyer86943 күн бұрын
I see your point, but another major tenant of Protestant hermeneutics is Scripture is the infallible interpreter of itself.
@matthewbroderick62872 күн бұрын
@calebdyer8694 So then, who is the rock in Matthew 16 and what did Jesus Christ mean by "this IS MY BODY ". Why do so many Protestants have different interpretations of these? All interpretations must be Fallible, correct? very clear, correct? Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink!
@_ROMANS_116Күн бұрын
@@matthewbroderick6287can you show me where all the interpreting is located
@matthewbroderick6287Күн бұрын
@_ROMANS_116 Again, can you tell me with infallible certitude what Jesus Christ meant by "this IS MY BODY ", and who the Woman is in Revelation 12, and who the rock is in Matthew 16? Why does the Fallible Protestant Pastor James White "claim" to know with infallible certitude what Jesus Christ meant by "this IS MY BODY " and who the Woman is in Revelation 12, and whi the rock is in Matthew 16, if Scripture ALONE is infallible?🤔Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
@calebdyer8694Күн бұрын
@@matthewbroderick6287 Knowledge is not about infallibly knowing. The things we can infallibly know are the things essential to salvation. Part of sin is that even out ability to interpret is corrupted, but that does not mean we cannot reasonably know anything. To say we need infallibility to know anything is a stretch and something no one else in the church thought (let alone anyone in general).
@claybody3 күн бұрын
"The words bind and loose mean: Whomever you exclude from your communion, will be excluded from communion with God; whomever you receive anew into your communion, God will welcome back into his. Reconciliation with the Church is inseparable from reconciliation with God. (CCC 1445)" Why can't it also mean the teaching authority? OHH, The dilemma of the Protestant either or. For the Catholic It means both.
@claybody3 күн бұрын
If you wanna try to get to heaven. other than by the Catholic Church, may God have mercy on your soul. God loves you.
@G-ew9hvКүн бұрын
@@claybodyhow do you attain salvation?
@_ROMANS_116Күн бұрын
@@claybodyhow do you attain salvation?
@claybodyКүн бұрын
Through the sacraments instituted by Christ that are carried out through the Catholic Church. Is this a Protestant question? If it is, then yes, it is all through Christ and His atoning work on the cross. And His resurrection. I don't know what you know about the Catholic Church. Maybe look into it. And yes, it is through faith.
@G-ew9hvКүн бұрын
@@claybody do you follow the 10 commandments to attain salvation?
@claybody3 күн бұрын
Pope Francis explains in The Joy of the Gospel, "In all the baptized, from first to last, the sanctifying power of the Spirit is at work, impelling us to evangelization. The people of God is holy thanks to this anointing, which makes it infallible in credendo. This means that it does not err in faith, even though it may not find words to explain that faith. The Spirit guides it in truth and leads it to salvation. As part of his mysterious love for humanity, God furnishes the totality of the faithful with an instinct of faith- sensus fidei- which helps them to discern what is truly of God (Evangelii Gaudium 119)."
@tookie363 күн бұрын
Pope Francis ❤❤❤
@G-ew9hvКүн бұрын
How do you attain salvation?
@divinemercyapologetics3 күн бұрын
Pax Christi!
@thecatechumenКүн бұрын
Hey brother! Thanks for tuning in to this video and for helping Alex prepare for the debate. Pax Tecum
@leoinsf3 күн бұрын
Catholicism: a Middle Ages form of Christianity (circa 1500) appeals not to people with intelligence, but people who think God is all about sitting in a pew once a week and watching priests do ceremony. No thinking, no doing, just a complete surrender to priests! How does charity, love, and acceptance fit into this religious consciousness??? Yes, Catholicism might have St. Vincent de Paul Society to do charity work, but unlike most Protestant sects, Catholic do not individually feel compelled to work in charity kitchens because they are saved already! Living in a Catholic cocoon: avoiding sin, letting priests have complete control of their lives is what Catholicism is all about!
@johncollorafi2573 күн бұрын
Catholics should use more precise arguments against White's definition of Sola Scriptura. Ecumenical Councils anathematized those who rejected dogmatic definitions. That's an example of an infallible rule of faith outside Scripture. Also the Fathers argued that Scripture and Tradition had equal force (St Basil, De Spiritu Sancto 27:66) or that Church Tradition is worthy of implicit faith (St John Chrysostom in 2 Thess 2: 14). Also the near universal acceptance of St Hippolytus' The Apostolic Tradition shows that Apostolic Tradition was not simply a synonym for the Gospel, as White seems to argue.
@Aussboi3 күн бұрын
From my experience protestants claim sola scriptura but they don't seem to actually practice it. 1.) if scripture is good enough on its own and no church body, leaders, or anyone else needs to interpret it properly than you wouldn't have thousands of denominations that have wildly different views and interpretations of scripture, you'd just have one protestant church that all believes the same thing hypothetically. 2.) They wouldn't go to their pastors, parents, etc for advice or questions on scripture to better understand it, they would just simply understand it on its own. 3.) Protestant pastors wouldn't bring up or rely on other Protestant leaders from the past and their interpretations or views on scripture in their sermons to better elaborate and explain scripture, they would just quote scripture that's that. Because that's the only thing you need and nothing else would be necessary
2 күн бұрын
@Aussboi protys dont even have valid ordination to be preaching the gospel. They make a shipwreck out of the scriptures. They tend to know but in reality they don’t. No context within the bible.
@comradecosmonaut563Күн бұрын
Solo Scriptura is not the same as Sola Scriptura. Your 3 points conflate the two.
Күн бұрын
@@comradecosmonaut563 sorry kid sola Scriptura is me and my bible and what i want it to say. Those are just facts . Look at the fruits of this false doctrine . Protys always say where is that in the bible? Where is that in the bible? The Bible needs an interpreter moved by the Holy Spirit and not pastor joe in the corner or his basement telling me what this means. Read Ephesians 4 11-14.
@comradecosmonaut563Күн бұрын
Solo* scriptura, you did it again. You might consider readjusting or retraining your spell checker. Thank you of course for your encouragement, brother, to read Ephesians 4, which I did.
Күн бұрын
@@comradecosmonaut563 no you did it again. Protestants don’t have apostolic succession. They don’t have valid orders. Heck I can start my church tomorrow from my basement. That’s why you have so many denominations because they’re not being guided to the truth. They have no structure dude. A magisterium.
@Deuterocomical3 күн бұрын
This will pair well with the video I’m releasing today 😂
@timboslice9802 күн бұрын
Ah the 90’s those were the days
@thecatechumenКүн бұрын
Amazing
@the3rdchief3 күн бұрын
The Protestant doesn't seem to be aware of the nuances. Why wasn't the distinction between material and formal suffiency fleshed out? Great conversation guys👍
@vinciblegaming68173 күн бұрын
My biggest question in this debate is this: WHY are inerrant and infallible treated as synonymous? It seems far more accurate that infallible means that it’s authoritative and will not fail - it won’t lead the church into error. So even if it makes a mistake, it won’t lead us to damnation or apostasy. So we can safely submit to the church’s authority and trust that authority and if we are in union with her, we do not need to fear our separation from Christ… because she IS in union with HIM.
3 күн бұрын
@vinciblegaming6817 the church doesn’t teach heresy when it comes to doctrines. The bible clearly states that the church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth. If we go by sola Scriptura then the gentiles would be circumcised lmao. The problem with protestants is that think they everything has to be in the bible and that’s not how it works. That’s a heresy.
@vinciblegaming68173 күн бұрын
My point is that looking at the catholic church’s authority and saying the pope obviously makes errors, ergo she’s fallible demonstrates an assumption that infallible = inerrant. Outside of infallible meaning “it cannot fail”, I don’t know what that word totally entails, but it isn’t synonymous with inerrant and I think the assumption that it does weakens the actual argument for the church’s authority. Like, this guy admits he thinks the church has authority and we need the church and clearly she upholds it, he just can’t sign on to the idea that the pope can’t make errors. But errors =/= binding the church to heresy.
@sleepystar16383 күн бұрын
@@vinciblegaming6817 ive found documents that say the Pope can error
3 күн бұрын
@@vinciblegaming6817 do you know what ex cathedra is? Protestants are confuse when it comes to the infallibility of the church as a whole. Keep in mind that it’s the pope gathered with all the bishops in the world.
@imjustheretogrill92603 күн бұрын
Correct, infallible means safety. That’s what is guaranteed. So, the universal and ordinary magisterium keeps you from Hell. Additionally, popes can err when previous popes have already established something that we can reference back to as definitive. 27:33 Now, dogmatic pronouncements must also be inerrant in the proposition being put forth as dogma. The Pope and magisterium are guard rails that act as bumpers in a bowling alley. The magisterium keeps the ball in the lane. However, only dogmatic propositions by consensus, ex-cathedral teaching, and councils and only the dogmatic propositions are innerant.
@loganjackson6753 күн бұрын
Great convo. Y’all should do the legendary debate between James White and the illustrious Gerry Matatics (circa 1990) 😂
@Deuterocomical3 күн бұрын
Wait, did James White debate Gerry Matatics??? 😂
@sgtadhesive90443 күн бұрын
I had no idea James white debated gerry matatics. I'll have to check it out. Now if only he debated father mitch pacwa I would be convinced protestantism is true.
@loganjackson6753 күн бұрын
@@Deuterocomical Evidently!
@loganjackson6753 күн бұрын
@@sgtadhesive9044 and how could you have known? If only it was referenced more
@t.d63792 күн бұрын
First I've heard of it
3 күн бұрын
Protestants know sola scriptura is a false doctrine but they wanna stick it knowing it’s false. When they use 2 timothy 3:16 they see what isn’t there. It says all scriptures and not only is profitable which means useful that the man of god. Timothy was a bishop in Ephesus and not a lay man. He has his hands laid on by paul. Also when they bring that up i tell them to go to Ephesians 4 11-14. This letter was send to the same place. To the church in Ephesus. This is where you see what Jesus left in place. Verse 14 is Protestantism in a nutshell. Always point to acts 15 as well the first council of Jerusalem . If the apostles used sola scriptura every gentile would have to be circumcised lol. No the apostles didn’t take out their bibles. They made an authoritative decision.
@RobertPentangelo3 күн бұрын
The easiest refutation of Sola Scriptura is simply this. There was no authoritative canon of the Bible since sometime in the 3rd century AD. So, if there is no sacred tradition and no apostolic central authority to preserve orthodoxy-then Christians are basically left on their own.
3 күн бұрын
@@RobertPentangelo true but there’s many ways to exposed this false doctrine. So many bible verses. The fruits of sola scriptura with all these denominations. I mean they can’t agree on the basics like baptism. Shows you how false it is. This was basically religious liberty with me and my bible and what i want it to say.
@fantasia553 күн бұрын
@@RobertPentangelo fourth century
@carlpeterson81822 күн бұрын
@@RobertPentangelo There was a canon. They used the Old Testament as authoritative. But this comment just shows an ignorance of the doctrine of Sola Scriptura anyways. No one is saying that there were never oral traditions. Also, much of the Canon was set in practice very early. Irenaeus in the 2nd century spoke that there were 4 gospels. The point is what becomes authoritative teaching. That is scripture. I do not have time to teach you all about what is Sola Scriptura. I suggest that you read up on it before making a comment that in no way discredits it.
2 күн бұрын
@@carlpeterson8182it’s a false doctrine!!!! Find me in the Bible where sola Scriptura is taught? You Protestants always say where is that in the bible? Where is that in the bible? Where is the trinity in the bible? It’s a false doctrine look at how many denominations you have teaching something different. There’s no division in Christ’s body. Read your bible dude with context.
@libertyforever8363 күн бұрын
You mean the same Catholic church who’s leader, and so-called Vicar of Christ, says it’s OK to bless homosexual marriage? You mean that church? That apostasy church?
@jlouis44072 күн бұрын
There was a robber baron council hoisted on the church in the 1960s that is why she’s on the decline, soon to be overturned
@freedomfields55694 сағат бұрын
@most_rustic_patrick
@Gladdig3 күн бұрын
Venial sins aren't necessarily "not grave matter". They might be of grave matter, but not done with free will or knowingly.
@johnchung67774 күн бұрын
I really can’t understand at all of why there is a Baptist church,because as I understand of what was said by John the Baptist is that he John the Baptist must decrease and Jesus must increase which was literally fulfilled when John was losing many many followers of him because Jesus gave authority and holy Impowerment to his Apostles who were doing the actual baptizing as scriptures reveal plus John spoke in all truth that he must decrease which was fulfilled when he was put in prison and then beheaded by Herod
@nancycaraballo1164 күн бұрын
Welcome home ❤
@richardbenitez12824 күн бұрын
The worst stuff is right here at my senior center. Bible devoted Protestants sneer at us Catholics because they think knowing Christ via bible reading is far superior to us deluded Catholics who they think has very limited bible reading. Naturally my degree of upsetness comes from the Holy Eucharist. When these Protestants make snide remarks to me about my faith I can feel Christ in me making a mental and spiritual agitation. In other words how dare these Protestant jerks denigrate a living Christ in me. Yes I defend the Holy Eucharist. What I’m saying is this upset posture comes from me upholding the real Body of Christ in the bread and wine. These Protestants have their nerve saying “just read the Bible” when there major sections in the gospels they trash right off like the”eat my body” stuff. I was raised with virulently anti catholic relatives. I’m sick of their ignorant take on the gospel.
@richardbenitez12824 күн бұрын
The worst part is it encourages Christians to be individualistic. Christian faith by definition can’t be individualistic. Like duh!
@richardbenitez12824 күн бұрын
If Durban is in any associated with dr James White than Durban is a jerk. Must be. Unfortunately I’ve listened to dr James White debate what I thought was earnest interest. I also listened to videos fr white has released. He spews this weird hate, hate, hate, hate on anything catholic.
@johnchristiancanda33204 күн бұрын
Our Blessed Mother's bones were never found. Therefore, She was assumed body and soul into Heaven.
@johnchung67775 күн бұрын
If scripture’s were the sole authority of Jesus Christ then people would believe that Jesus Christ gave full authority to his Apostles to FEED AND INSTRUCT THE FLOCK OF HIS ONE TRUE CHURCH STARTED UPON THE APOSTLES AND DISCIPLES ON PENTECOST
@johnchung67775 күн бұрын
I don’t know if anyone notices that in the scriptures there’s passages that speak and reveal how Protestantism started, and it’s when Jesus said to his Apostles beware that you not be led astray for I tell you that many will come teaching in my name say I am he the Christ and teach many in my name and lead them astray DO NOT FOLLOW THEM how much more clearer could Jesus Christ have’d made it of what humans would go through which has caused immense differences understanding interpretations and beliefs.WHOOO WEEE WHAT IS THE HUMAN RACE UP AGAINST WOE WOE WOE
@jvlp20465 күн бұрын
St. Paul warned us all, "DO NOT GO BEYOND/EXCEED WHAT IS WRITTEN." (ref. 1 Corin. 4:6)... if we do, God's CURSE (Anathema/Eternal Condemnation) will FALL upon us... (ref. Galatians 1:8)... Praise be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen...
@jvlp20465 күн бұрын
The PROTESTANT Reformers were Actually the PRODIGAL SONS of the Roman Catholic Church... No wonder they ALWAYS somehow came back to the R.C.C. Doctrines/Dogmas not WRITTEN in the Complete Holy Scriptures provided by God to the Faithful Saints... The Holy Scripture said, "They are like DOGS, who came back to eat from their own vomit/puke"... (ref. Proverbs 26:11 / 2 Peter 2:22)... Praise be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen.
@jvlp20465 күн бұрын
Why does St. Paul say to Hold firmly to the Spoke/Oral Tradition and Written Tradition (ref. 2 Thessa 2:15)?... because St. Paul knew that he would not be able to see the WRITTEN Tradition be completed... St. Paul was beheaded around 67 A.D.... the Final Completion of the Written Word of God (Inspire Holy Scriptures) was after the Gospel of John and Revelation that were distributed in the Early 7 Churches of God in Asia Minor at the end of the 1st Century around 110 A.D. . The Complete WRITTEN Inspired Holy Scriptures became the STANDARD of the Early 7 Churches in Asia Minor, profitable for TEACHING Doctrines, for REPROOFING, for CORRECTING, and for INSTRUCTION in Righteousness...etc." (ref. 2 Timothy 3:16)... Take Note:... the Oral/Spoken Tradition and the Completely Inspired Written Tradition must be UNITED as ONE and THE SAME... like God the Father with His Son (Word/Christ Jesus) and the Holy Spirit... So, therefore, as long as the Oral/Spoken Tradition does not contradict with the Complete Written Tradition, that is fine/ok to practice by Christians... However, if it does contradict, the Written Tradition must overrule, supersede, and stop/cease the practice of that particular Oral/Spoken Tradition... WHY?... because that is GOD'S WORDS, WILL, and TRUTH... it must be WRITTEN down in Context and in Meaning, and not by/through specific word/s only... Praise be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen.
@jvlp20465 күн бұрын
The PROTESTANT Reformers were Actually the PRODIGAL SONS of the Roman Catholic Church... No wonder they ALWAYS somehow came back to the R.C.C. Doctrines/Dogmas not WRITTEN in the Complete Holy Scriptures provided by God to the Faithful Saints... The Holy Scripture said, "They are like DOGS, who came back to eat from their own vomit/puke"... (ref. Proverbs 26:11 / 2 Peter 2:22)... Praise be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen.
@jvlp20465 күн бұрын
Why does St. Paul say to Hold firmly to the Spoke/Oral Tradition and Written Tradition (ref. 2 Thessa 2:15)?... because St. Paul knew that he would not be able to see the WRITTEN Tradition be completed... St. Paul was beheaded around 67 A.D.... the Final Completion of the Written Word of God (Inspire Holy Scriptures) was after the Gospel of John and Revelation that were distributed in the Early 7 Churches of God in Asia Minor at the end of the 1st Century around 110 A.D. . The Complete WRITTEN Inspired Holy Scriptures became the STANDARD of the Early 7 Churches in Asia Minor, profitable for TEACHING Doctrines, for REPROOFING, for CORRECTING, and for INSTRUCTION in Righteousness...etc." (ref. 2 Timothy 3:16)... Take Note:... the Oral/Spoken Tradition and the Completely Inspired Written Tradition must be UNITED as ONE and THE SAME... like God the Father with His Son (Word/Christ Jesus) and the Holy Spirit... So, therefore, as long as the Oral/Spoken Tradition does not contradict with the Complete Written Tradition, that is fine/ok to practice by Christians... However, if it does contradict, the Written Tradition must overrule, supersede, and stop/cease the practice of that particular Oral/Spoken Tradition... WHY?... because that is GOD'S WORDS, WILL, and TRUTH... it must be WRITTEN down in Context and in Meaning, and not by/through specific word/s only... Praise be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen.
@jonatasmachado72175 күн бұрын
Absence of body and relics, presence of biblical hints, dormition stories and references in old church liturgies... all this must be taken into account...
@FleefromROME5 күн бұрын
Christians should be anti-Catholic. Let's leave out the titles. You're either "born...of God"/"born again" - i.e. a Christian, or you are not.(John 1:13; 3:3) If you're Catholic, you are not a Christian. You cannot be "reborn" by water Baptism because water Baptism "delivers no one."(Catechism 980/978) There is no "grace" in water Baptism. "Yet the grace of Baptism delivers no one from all the weakness of nature" - i.e. sin.(978) That is a cheap, man-made grace because it doesn't deliver anyone from their sins. Only faith in Jesus Christ alone delivers sinners! He gives the "living water" the "Holy Spirit" to "those [who believe] in Him" summed up in John 7: "If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.” But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified" - John 7:37-39 Since Catholics trust in their "sacred Tradition" and "Magisterium" for salvation, they cannot be considered brothers in Christ.(Catechism 95) According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the "Catholic Church is necessary for salvation."(846) Baptism (which "delivers no one") and Penance to a sinner (a priest) are "necessary for salvation."(980) And Jesus Christ said, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."(John 14:6) Peter, the so-called first Pope, said of "the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth...Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”(Acts 4:10&12)
@hailholyqueen5 күн бұрын
I've heard it said that no apostolic church has her relics or has ever claimed to have her relics.
@daviddavis95255 күн бұрын
Debate Jeff .....
@MystoRobot6 күн бұрын
Durbin still hasn't figure out what the "Works of the Law" mentioned by St-Paul refer to... *The Works of the Mosaic Law, through which those under the past covenant were "justified".* It should be obvious though, when Paul said Circumcision was one of those "Works". And of course, we aren't "saved" through the Mosaic Law, because Christ's death on the Cross made these Laws obsolete. *Soooo simple to understand just by reading scripture...* but I guess reading scripture with protestant "pre-installed" lenses makes them blind to the Truth, as obvious as it could be.