I am a former reformed baptist. After looking deep into church history and finding out the truth about Martin Luther. I am convinced of the catholic faith
You might want to read about St.Anthanius and how the Church has anathamatized pretty much all his teachings, because he taught scripture was final authority and Jesus was 100% God and 100% man, which at that time considered heresy by the church. Constantine exiled him on threat of death in 339AD. Apparently, you stopped short in your studying! Keep reading and you will find that the Roman Catholic Church has probably killed more Christians than it has ever saved; furthermore, the council of Trent was a total apostasy from the word of God and if you do not see it, you may not be born again and you might want to do more self evaluation as the scripture teaches. Keep studying is my advice for you.
Every Protestant should listen to this, Scott is the man. I love listening to him. I used to listen to the news. This is so much more inspiring. God Bless you and please keep up your work Dr Hahn.
Ive learned more ,about my Catholic faith because of Dr Hahn.. he's truly gift of God..More Power and God bless your Family.Thanks for Evangelical Word..bless you
66yrs.old and a lifetime of Catholicism; Scott Hahn has got me reading and examining and '"finally" understanding the why of sooo many things in the Church. Scott you have no idea what a wonderful gift your work has been to so many confused Catholics. Thank-You
A very clear explanation Dr.Hahn, I like watching your videos, it is a big help for us, i am also a Catholic from the Philippines, God bless the Catholic church
This guy really has a way with words. God Bless you Dr Hahn. The Catechism is a great book however it is very deep for the average person. I hope his predictions are true but I do not think we have that long.
I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. Andrzej Noyszewski Michael Belisle ganda pelayo JAMOACHA AugustineInstitute Austin Evans
the reason why God sent scott hann Br chris is to introduce the MASS =(CHRIS T MAS) introduction of chris to the holy MASS.( Jesus is the (T) tora between chris and the mass
"My words are spirit the flesh profits nothing." Apparently means nothing to you. If you had eyes to see and ears to hear you would understand His words, but you are yet carnal and cannot understand what things are of the spirit. All that you do is perpetuate idolatry and will be judged for your error and for leading many simple minded into apostasy!
To igotresult, Please show me with scripture where Jesus gave Roman Catholic priests (mere men) the power to transform wine and a man-made wafer into His actual body and blood.
@@JohnSaggio the priest in his own merit has no power to transform the substance into real presence of our Lord Jesus Christ it is by the grace and love of God that we may partake His body and remain in Him through faith. In John 6:55 In-Context 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. Study also the 1st -3rd century Christians the early church those who were taught directly by the Apostles(writers of New testament) see their practice and interpretations. What about you,where did you get your interpretation?
I started listening, but once the Mary worship started had to shut it down! Not right! Wrong direction and all who follows is being lead into apostasy!
Eating flesh and drinking blood is prohibited since the times of the old testament. So eucharist does not fulfill anything. It would mean that Jesus broke the law by giving his desciples a blood to drink. Your teaching is way off the rails.
You didn’t get it. That’s the miracle that takes place when the priest consecrates the bread and wine that Jesus presence is really there and thus we are participating in His real flesh and real blood.That’s what John explained in John 6;47-65. That’s why the Jews walk away from Jesus when he taught this because it’s a hard teaching. But noticed Jesus didn’t stop them from walking away. It’s because God looks at the heart first. He examines it first if you willing to understand and is teachable. If you are, that’s when the Father opens your heart and mind to understand the hard teachings of God. That’s what Jesus meant in John 6:65. If you walk away because it’s hard or it doesn’t make sense to our limited minds then the more you won’t understand this. The Key here brother is to ask God for help that you want to understand some more, accept in humility to God that this teaching is hard. Don’t be like the mindset of the Jews who walked away from Jesus when he explained this to them.
@@AnabellaWherrett The bible is clear. Jesus will return to earth O NLY during His second coming. He does not come down to earth from heaven to live in the wafer everytime the priest "performs" conceration.
@sansebastiansj If Jesus is able to change the water into wine, or feed the 5,000 with just 5 loaves and 2 fish, or raised the dead, is it impossible for him to transform the bread and wine into his real flesh and real blood without us tasting the flesh and blood? It says on John 6:47-65 - if you don’t believe this you will not have eternal life. He is the living bread from heaven that we have to consume to sustain us on our own Exodus to heaven this time not to a promises land. Jesus said if you don’t eat the flesh of the Son of Man and do not drink His blood you have no life. You are walking and breathing but you’re l”dead inside. The people in the OT were sustained by ‘manna’ the miracle bread that came down from heaven to sustain them on their journey to the promised land. In the NT- Jesus is now the living bread our passover Lamb to escape eternal death but you have to consume Him. How? -- through the Eucharist! The OT- God instructed Moses to prepare an unblemished lamb and put the blood of the lamb of their door post to escape the death of their firstborn. But it didn’t stop there, they had to cook and consume the meat of the lamb for the angel of death to passover their houses. So in the NT- Jesus instituted the Eucharist. His flesh and blood -- but you must consume these 2 elements for you to escape hell. It’s not enough to just believe, accept Jesus death on the cross as atonement for those who believe and trust in Him, you must partake the Eucharist also then repent and start to re-orient your life toward Jesus and you will bear fruits. We are not here to force you to believe what we believe. Jesus didn’t shove His truth down their throats. He waits for us to come to Him and ask for more understanding, and for wisdom. When you put up a wall right away, you will nevet understand it and you will be at a loss here not Jesus. He provided us the way to eternal life but if you don’t want it that your own doinh.
The scriptures surely don't point to transubstantiation. All this word means is Hocus pocus. Jesus absolutely clarifies what he meant in John 6. The church has chosen to hand pick what scriptures were meant literally and which ones aren't. No wonder they claim sole authority to interpret scripture. V 63 Jesus said that "it is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profits nothing, the words that I speak into you, they are spirit and they are life". The biggest problem with the catholic mass is that the manner in which it is performed is nothing like the manner in which Christ performed it. Scripture dies NIT say that a priest and only a priest can do the mass. Scripture dies not give any man, much less a false priest, the power to bring Christ down onto the altar. I have yet to find that in scripture anywhere. The next problem is if the church teaches that you must eat his body and drink the blood, why does the church not allow Catholics to drink the blood? The church is afraid the blood will spill? Where does the bible give the priest the power over something the church claims God commands. Then if this is the body of Christ why do these wafers originate from a factory made by nuns? What happens to the remaining host. Does the priest return Jesus to heaven? Does he turn Jesus back into the wafer? Reverse the transubstantiation process? Truth is that the church just totally disregards scripture and follows it's own tradition.
@Rbn Mnt The belief of eating the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ and drinking his Blood originates directly from him. Here's just a part of his teaching regarding the necessity for our eternal life and future resurrection of our bodies: JOHN 6:53-55 53. So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have NO life in you; 54. he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has Eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55. For my flesh is FOOD INDEED, and my blood is drink indeed. It is quite evident Jesus was not expressing something symbolic in those clear and unambiguous "truly, truly" words. Those who think that would be "creating", not accepting His true teaching which our Lord continues to emphasize: JOHN 6:56-59 56. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. 58. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.” 59. This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Caper′na-um. How are we supposed to eat his flesh and drink his blood? Our Lord explains it step by step, in: ▪︎MARK 14:22-24 While they were eating, He TOOK some BREAD, and after a blessing He broke it, and gave it to them, and said, "Take it; THIS IS MY BODY." And when He had taken a CUP and given thanks, He gave it to them, and THEY all DRANK from it. And He said to them, "THIS IS MY BLOOD of the covenant, which is poured out for many. Do you see the word "symbol" anywhere? The reason is simple: Because it is real. Just like our Lord clearly says! If you want confirmation, St. Paul a former enemy of the Church, turned Apostle, explains it to you: ▪︎1 CORINTHIANS 11:23-29 23. For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of BREAD, 24. and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “THIS IS MY BODY that is for you. DO THIS in remembrance of me.” 25. In the same way he took THE CUP also, after supper, saying, “THIS CUP is the NEW COVENANT in MY BLOOD. DO THIS, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26. For AS OFTEN as you eat this bread and drink the cup, YOU PROCLAIM THE LORD’s DEATH until he comes. 27. WHOEVER, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an UNWORTHY MANNER will be answerable for the BODY and BLOOD of THE LORD. 28. Examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29. For all who eat and drink WITHOUT DISCERNING THE BODY, eat and drink JUDGMENT AGAINST THEMSELVES. Key: "ANSWERABLE FOR THE BODY and BLOOD of THE LORD". Can you understand that If it was only a symbol it would not refer to the Eucharist as Christ's Body and Blood? DEFINITION OF THE MIRACLE THAT TRANSFORMS BREAD AND WINE INTO THE DIVINE BODY AND BLOOD OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST: ▪︎Transubstantiation is the change that occurs in the sacrament of Holy Communion (Eucharist). Such change involves the whole substance of the bread and wine being turned miraculously into the whole substance of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ himself. Even though the accidents (Bread and wine) remain the same. During the Mass when the Eucharistic elements, which are the bread and the wine being consecrated by the priest, are transformed into the actual body and blood of Jesus while keeping only the appearance of bread and wine. Transubstantiation was defined by our Church at the Council of Trent: "... By the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation." (Session XIII, chapter IV) The term "real presence" refers to Christ's actual presence in the bread and the wine. The underlying essence of the bread and wine are believed to be changed, while they retain only the appearance, taste, odor, and texture of bread and wine. Our Catholic doctrine holds that the Godhead is indivisible, so every particle or drop that is changed is wholly identical in substance with the divinity, body, and blood of the Savior. ● Transubstantiation belief beyond the Apostles: ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH. In the early Church, 10 years after the Apostle John's death, one of his disciples, Ignatius the Bishop of Antioch, clearly believed in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. He so states it in letters written around A.D. 107. ▪︎Letter to Smyrneans A.D. 107 "They [the Docetists, early Christological heretics] 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 that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes". ▪︎Letter to the Romans A.D. 110 "I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the FLESH OF JESUS CHRIST, who was of the seed of David; and FOR DRINK I desire HIS BLOOD, which is love incorruptible". Beginnings of Transubstantiation type of language in 145AD: ▪︎JUSTIN MARTYR. Christian apologist, born at Flavia Neapolis, about A.D 100, converted to Christianity about A.D. 130, taught and defended the Christian religion in Asia Minor and at Rome, where he suffered martyrdom about the year 165. ▪︎1st. Apology #66 A. D. 145 For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise HAVE WE BEEN TAUGHT that the food which is blessed by the prayer of his word, and from which our blood and flesh by TRANSMUTATION (Early Church concept, later refined at Trent) are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, said, “This do in remembrance of me, this is my body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, he said, “This is my blood;” and gave it to them alone. May God bless your discernment.
@po18guy text alone displeases the Roman catholic church because it's doctrines and dogmas are not found therein. It's ironic that the church rejects scripture alone yet it says that "sacred tradition" is equal to scripture. Why sacred scripture? Why not the book of Mormon or the Koran? I guess sacred scripture was the ONLY source of divine truth at that time. In trying to disprove sola scriptura the church actually confirms it.
Christ is being literal in John 6 if not Paul would affirm it in 1 Corinthians and saying you are sinning against the body and blood of the Lord if you drink of the cup unworthily. Also people who did died and got sick. It’s right there in scripture. When the disciples say it’s a hard teaching who can accept it. Christ doubles down and some disciples walk away. I’m a former reformed baptist but Martin Luther was man filled with hate, who hated the Jews and wrote the Jews and their lies. He added the word alone to “faith alone” he also took out seven books out of the original cannon of scripture., and if he could of had it his way he’s on record saying if he could he would get rid of the book of James, and he didn’t think revaltions was inspired. We are not saved by faith alone. James makes that very clear. Faith without works is dead, Martin Luther said to sin godly. This is the man the reformers look too. He did not possess good fruit. You will know them by their fruit. The Catholic Church has been around since Christ. Protestants have 1000s of denominations all with different doctrines. The Catholic Church is the church of Christ. And sola scriputa, which is scripture alone, is a reformed doctrine. The faith was passed down by oral tradition for hundreds of years. Nowhere in scripture does it say scripture alone.
Scripture surely doesn't point to catholicism. Anyone who is able to discern what they read in scripture would not conclude that catholicism and much less the papacy, exist in scripture.
@Rbn Mnt Scripture clearly points to one single united Church built by Jesus Christ. Nowhere does Scripture teach: 1.- Bible alone 2.- Faith alone 3.- Separate churches 4.- Sects 5.- Self-appointed ministers 6.- "Services" based on preaching, not on Jesus' clear order May God bless your discernment.
@@joecastillo8798 it sure does. But can you show me where that says roman catholic church? You see the scriptures are not a "fill in the blank" bible. If you notice Matthew 16 does not give a particular religion or denomination. "The church" in scripture is the worldwide body of believers, not a particular religion. It's just that your church has taken the liberty of inserting itself into scripture to add credibility. It defies logic that Jesus being Jewish, of a Jewish mother, with Jewish apostles founded a ROMAN catholic church.
@@rbnmnt3341 My friend, You, sadly, have fallen in the trap of "Sola Scriptura", a doctrine invented by Martin Luther in 1521. Search Scripture. Nowhere does Jesus or His Apostles ever teach something must be written explicitly in order to be believed in a future Bible that would only be compiled for the first time in the year 382AD. However, it clearly says the following: ▪︎JOHN 15:26-27 26. But when the Advocate has arrived, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of TRUTH who proceeds from the Father, he will offer testimony about me. 27. And you shall offer testimony, because you are with me from the beginning.” ▪︎JOHN 16:13 13. When the SPIRIT of TRUTH comes, He WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL THE TRUTH; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. ▪︎JOHN 17:17-19 17. Sanctify them in TRUTH. Your word is TRUTH. 18. Just as you have sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. 19. And it is for them that I sanctify myself, so that they, too, may be sanctified in TRUTH. Therefore the Bible clearly affirms in: 1 TIMOTHY 3:15 15. if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is THE CHURCH of the living God, THE PILLAR and FOUNDATION OF THE TRUTH. Such truth will always be present in the one true Church founded by Christ until the end of times. Therefore, we must always listen to Christ's one Church, just like Scripture says: LUKE 10:16 16. “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me. Don't refuse to hear Christ's Church any longer. May God have mercy on you and open your heart and mind to His one Church and one truth.
@@joecastillo8798 you have fallen prey to adding to scripture. Let me ask you. If the bible or Sola scriptura is so wrong why does your church say that "sacred tradition" is equal to scripture? Why compare it to the bible. Could it be that it is the only divine source of truth? Why not make tradition to the book of Mormon or the Koran?
@@rbnmnt3341 Sacred Oral Tradition is as valid as written Tradition. Written Tradition is not sufficient as the complete rule of faith. In fact St. Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the Tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). St. Paul further instructs us the following way in: 2 THESSALONIANS 2:15 15. So then, brethren, stand firm and HOLD TO THE TRADITIONS which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. This oral teaching was accepted by Christians, just as they accepted the written teaching that came to them later. Jesus told his disciples: “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me” (Luke 10:16). The Catholic Church, in the persons of the apostles, was given full authority to teach by Christ; the Church is His representative. He commissioned them, saying, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:19). The question is: How was this supposed to be done, if the majority of population (90%) had no access to books and was illiterate? The answer: By preaching and by oral instruction: “So faith comes from what is HEARD, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ” (Rom. 10:17). Therefore the Church would always be the living teacher. It is a mistake for protestants like you to limit “Christ’s word” to the written word only, or to suggest that all His teachings were reduced to writing. The Bible NOWHERE supports either notion. The question is: What is Apostolic Tradition? We do not refer to legends or mythological accounts, nor transitory human customs or practices which, as you well know, may change, as circumstances warrant, such as styles of priestly dress, particular forms of devotion to saints, or even liturgical rubrics. Sacred or Apostolic Tradition consists of the TEACHINGS that the Apostles passed on ORALLY through their PREACHING. These teachings largely (perhaps entirely) overlap with those contained in Scripture, but the mode of their transmission is different. In the following quote, St. Paul illustrates for you what tradition is: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures. . . . Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed” (1 Cor. 15:3,11). Furthermore, the apostle Paul praised those who followed Tradition: 1 CORINTHIANS 11:2 2. I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the TRADITIONS even as I have delivered them to you. The first Christians “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching” (Acts 2:42) long before there was a New Testament. From the very beginning, the fullness of Christian teaching was found in the Church as the living embodiment of Christ, NOT IN A BOOK. The teaching Church, with its oral, apostolic tradition, was authoritative. Paul himself gives a quotation from Jesus that was handed down orally to him: “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). However, the problem with fundamentalists like you is that you want to equate Apostolic Tradition with "human traditions" condemned by Jesus when He said, “And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” (Matt. 15:3). St.Paul, as well, warned, “See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to "HUMAN TRADITION", according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ” (Col. 2:8). Let me clarify what is actually referred in the Bible as human traditions. It is known that Pharisees observed a rigid and simple mode of life, disdaining all luxurious delicacies, scrupulously following the dictates of their reasoning, and paying their greatest veneration and obedience to the opinions and traditions of their seniors. It is also evident that New Testament verses merely condemn those erroneous HUMAN traditions, NOT TRUTHS which were handed down orally and entrusted to the Church by the Apostles. These latter truths are part of what is known as APOSTOLIC Tradition, which is to be distinguished from human traditions or customs as delineated above. Unfortunately, what Evangelicals often do is see the word “tradition” in Matthew 15:3 or Colossians 2:8 or elsewhere and conclude that anything termed a “tradition” is to be rejected, obviating the fact that Jesus did not condemn all traditions; he condemned only erroneous traditions, whether doctrines or practices, that undermined Christian truths. The rest, as the apostles taught, were to be obeyed. FINALLY: What did the early Church, the inheritor of Apostolic teaching believed? ▪︎A prominent Bishop explains the following: ” ‘So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by Epistle of ours.’ Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition, seek no farther.” The above response was delivered at a Homily during a Mass by a prominent Eastern Catholic Bishop: St. John Chrysostom, Homily on 2nd Thessalonians, 4:2 (A.D. 404). May God bless your discernment.
Mr. H says he is a "Bible Christian" at around 11:00. Ummmm...his good buddy Karl Keating wrote, "Catholicsm & Fundamentalism: The Attack on Romanism by Bible Christians". Looks like Keating doesn't like the term, but Mr. H embraces it. Sad isn't it, that Catholics can never seem to agree with one another. Tsk, tsk.
The title of Keating's book is actually: CATHOLICISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM - THE ATTACK ON "ROMANISM' BY "BIBLE CHRISTIANS" www.amazon.com/Catholicism-Fundamentalism-Karl-Keating-ebook/dp/B0037BVKEE
Oh stop it Brock. As if the quotes around the words makes a bit of difference. Hahn the con can call himself a "Bible Christian" till the day he dies, but he has a passport to hell waiting for him, as well as all Catholics who think that eating the physical anatomy of Christ will save them. WAKE UP THOU FOOL. The gospel was never meant to satisfy our oral fixations! The prophet Job says "I have esteemed his ***WORD*** more than my necessary food", and the con-artist in the video thinks we ought to "eat Jesus" who is the word of God. Both thoughts are polar opposite to each other and only ONE is correct. Should you wish 95 reasons why Transubstantiation is a lie, you may request it at...eucharistangel@aol.com
'Scare quotes, shudder quotes, or sneer quotes are quotation marks placed around a word or phrase to signal that a term is being used in a non-standard, ironic, or otherwise special sense. Scare quotes may express that the author is using someone else's term, similar to preceding a phrase with the expression "so-called"; they may imply skepticism or disagreement, belief that the words are misused, or that the writer intends a meaning opposite to the words enclosed in quotes.' en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes (As in, so-called Romanism and so-called Bible Christians.) I had assumed that this would have been obvious to English speaking adults, but I was mistaken - as you have demonstrated - and for that, I apologize. Here is an anger management article from Focus on the Family that you may find helpful: www.focusonthefamily.com/lifechallenges/emotional-health/changing-an-angry-spirit/winning-the-war-against-anger
Oh Brock....must I put a dunce cap on your head? At the end of the day, Hahn the Con's lip service to the Bible is disingenuous. Catholicism has three EQUAL modes of authority; namely, The Bible, the Magisterium and "Tradition". Hence, to consider oneself a "Bible Christian" is simply trying to impress ignorant Protestants who don't know any better. The truth is, Catholics SHOULD, if they are consistent, label themselves at least on SOME occasions, a "Magisterium Christian", or a "Traditional Christian". But do they ever do this? NO, not EVER. In view of that, to label themselves "Bible Christians" certainly does not impress the Lord Jesus Christ let me assure you. True Christians are those who hold to God's word ALONE as their primary authority, as this very concept is contained from Genesis to Revelation, especially in all 176 verses of Psalm 119, the longest chapter in Holy Writ. Catholic dunderheads like Mr. Hahn who proclaim the magisterium and tradition as being on the same pedestal as Scripture are FRAUDS because God has magnified his word even above his very name (Psalm 138:2), which simply leaves no ROOM for the other two. Moreover, God is most pleased on those who meditate on his word day and night (Joshua 1:8), which of course leaves no TIME to bow our knee before some nebulous and ill-defined concept such as tradition. Catholics cannot even tell us how many traditions there are (!) nor can they tell us how many times the magisterium has spoken infallibly! One would supposedly need to know these things to be saved, but you get different answers from every Catholic you consult. Been there. Done that. Therefore, when one peels back the layer of the Catholic onion, we discover Catholicism to be counterfeit Christianity, an exquisite and very clever deception from the pit of hell that endorses "another jesus and another gospel" according to 2 Cor 11:4. As the apostle Paul said, "we are not deceived by Satan's devices".
You are, quite simply a "genius" and I mean that with all "sincerity". It seems you have your cap on a little too tight... time for you to visit www.j2theson.com/ That should help to loosen it a little.
🔔 Subscribe for more about understanding, living, and sharing the Catholic Faith! ruclips.net/user/AugustineInstitute
The gate of heaven is wide 😍 ❤️ but only few will enter.
I am a former reformed baptist. After looking deep into church history and finding out the truth about Martin Luther. I am convinced of the catholic faith
You might want to read about St.Anthanius and how the Church has anathamatized pretty much all his teachings, because he taught scripture was final authority and Jesus was 100% God and 100% man, which at that time considered heresy by the church. Constantine exiled him on threat of death in 339AD. Apparently, you stopped short in your studying! Keep reading and you will find that the Roman Catholic Church has probably killed more Christians than it has ever saved; furthermore, the council of Trent was a total apostasy from the word of God and if you do not see it, you may not be born again and you might want to do more self evaluation as the scripture teaches. Keep studying is my advice for you.
Every Protestant should listen to this, Scott is the man. I love listening to him. I used to listen to the news. This is so much more inspiring. God Bless you and please keep up your work Dr Hahn.
Ive learned more ,about my Catholic faith because of Dr Hahn.. he's truly gift of God..More Power and God bless your Family.Thanks for Evangelical Word..bless you
66yrs.old and a lifetime of Catholicism; Scott Hahn has got me reading and examining and '"finally" understanding the why of sooo many things in the Church. Scott you have no idea what a wonderful gift your work has been to so many confused Catholics. Thank-You
Scott Hahn came to my church today. He and his wife are wonderful speakers. God bless both of them.
Dr Scott Hahn is a wonderful man of God
A prolific evangelist who has that vast knowledge about the doctrines of the Church . Thus Dr. Hahn is a big blessing to the Church . God bless.
From 2nd grade till 8th grade I went to Catholic school .
We memorized things and didn't understand any of it.
Thank You Dr. Hahn I'm coming home.
Welcome back home! God bless!!
Listening to this right before I come into the church tonight!! Eucharist brought me home !
A very clear explanation Dr.Hahn, I like watching your videos, it is a big help for us, i am also a Catholic from the Philippines, God bless the Catholic church
Thank you for spreading the gospel of love and truth through the Catholic faith. May you be blessed mightily.
I am only about half through but got blown up already by "new testament." Thank you Dr. Hahn.
Thanks for your powerful message may the lord bless you because you truly blessing to many catholics.Amen
A Gracefull man of God, that all men should imitate,in order to achieve salvation. 🙌
Beyond excellent. God’s grace be with you.
Thank you Dr Hahn ! God bless
Dr Scott Hann is so great love his teaching
^AWESOMELY BRILLIANT^ THANK YOU with GOD^S BLESSINGS to Kimberly and Fr.Jeremiah.
Thank you so much your passion for our Lord is beautiful lindax
Truly appreciate this. Thank you Dr. Hahn. Very spiritually inspiring. God bless.
This guy really has a way with words. God Bless you Dr Hahn. The Catechism is a great book however it is very deep for the average person. I hope his predictions are true but I do not think we have that long.
I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. Andrzej Noyszewski Michael Belisle ganda pelayo JAMOACHA AugustineInstitute Austin Evans
Thank you for that talk!
qhimset
qhimset,
Brilliance!!!!!!!!!!
Love the video very much ❤
Evangelical Catholic as God intended.
Très Bon
If only James White were open to this.
Sacrifice
Divided by politics bonded by religion.
he was among us but not with us
sussy
HE NEVER GETS TO THE POINT!!!
Dr Hahn praised Jorge Bergoglio then. I wonder what he's say now???
Explain yourself
the reason why God sent scott hann Br chris is to introduce the MASS =(CHRIS T MAS) introduction of chris to the holy MASS.( Jesus is the (T) tora between chris and the mass
3/2023 Pope Francis says we should not evangelize. How's that for your Vatican 2
"My words are spirit the flesh profits nothing." Apparently means nothing to you. If you had eyes to see and ears to hear you would understand His words, but you are yet carnal and cannot understand what things are of the spirit. All that you do is perpetuate idolatry and will be judged for your error and for leading many simple minded into apostasy!
Jesus said "the flesh profits nothing" HE did not say "MY FLESH "
To igotresult,
Please show me with scripture where Jesus gave Roman Catholic priests (mere men) the power to transform wine and a man-made wafer into His actual body and blood.
@@JohnSaggio the priest in his own merit has no power to transform the substance into real presence of our Lord Jesus Christ it is by the grace and love of God that we may partake His body and remain in Him through faith.
In John 6:55 In-Context
54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.
Study also the 1st -3rd century Christians the early church those who were taught directly by the Apostles(writers of New testament) see their practice and interpretations.
What about you,where did you get your interpretation?
@@igotresult1773 You still have not proven with scriptures that transubstantiation is biblical.
@@JohnSaggio just read the scriptures in the lens of the Jewish Christians then you will see.. set aside first your interpretation..
I started listening, but once the Mary worship started had to shut it down! Not right! Wrong direction and all who follows is being lead into apostasy!
Read and learn
Catholics do not worship Mary. Protestants do not worship God. Worship is at the Mass.
Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament, NOT the man-made wafer-god. The priests of Baal and the priests of Rome are one and the same.
Eating flesh and drinking blood is prohibited since the times of the old testament. So eucharist does not fulfill anything. It would mean that Jesus broke the law by giving his desciples a blood to drink. Your teaching is way off the rails.
You didn’t get it. That’s the miracle that takes place when the priest consecrates the bread and wine that Jesus presence is really there and thus we are participating in His real flesh and real blood.That’s what John explained in John 6;47-65.
That’s why the Jews walk away from Jesus when he taught this because it’s a hard teaching. But noticed Jesus didn’t stop them from walking away. It’s because God looks at the heart first. He examines it first if you willing to understand and is teachable. If you are, that’s when the Father opens your heart and mind to understand the hard teachings of God. That’s what Jesus meant in John 6:65. If you walk away because it’s hard or it doesn’t make sense to our limited minds then the more you won’t understand this.
The Key here brother is to ask God for help that you want to understand some more, accept in humility to God that this teaching is hard. Don’t be like the mindset of the Jews who walked away from Jesus when he explained this to them.
@@AnabellaWherrett The bible is clear. Jesus will return to earth O NLY during His second coming. He does not come down to earth from heaven to live in the wafer everytime the priest "performs" conceration.
Sadly Just Another Bergoglio Lover.
@sansebastiansj If Jesus is able to change the water into wine, or feed the 5,000 with just 5 loaves and 2 fish, or raised the dead, is it impossible for him to transform the bread and wine into his real flesh and real blood without us tasting the flesh and blood? It says on John 6:47-65 - if you don’t believe this you will not have eternal life. He is the living bread from heaven that we have to consume to sustain us on our own Exodus to heaven this time not to a promises land. Jesus said if you don’t eat the flesh of the Son of Man and do not drink His blood you have no life. You are walking and breathing but you’re l”dead inside.
The people in the OT were sustained by ‘manna’ the miracle bread that came down from heaven to sustain them on their journey to the promised land.
In the NT- Jesus is now the living bread our passover Lamb to escape eternal death but you have to consume Him. How? -- through the Eucharist!
The OT- God instructed Moses to prepare an unblemished lamb and put the blood of the lamb of their door post to escape the death of their firstborn. But it didn’t stop there, they had to cook and consume the meat of the lamb for the angel of death to passover their houses.
So in the NT- Jesus instituted the Eucharist. His flesh and blood -- but you must consume these 2 elements for you to escape hell. It’s not enough to just believe, accept Jesus death on the cross as atonement for those who believe and trust in Him, you must partake the Eucharist also then repent and start to re-orient your life toward Jesus and you will bear fruits.
We are not here to force you to believe what we believe. Jesus didn’t shove His truth down their throats. He waits for us to come to Him and ask for more understanding, and for wisdom. When you put up a wall right away, you will nevet understand it and you will be at a loss here not Jesus. He provided us the way to eternal life but if you don’t want it that your own doinh.
Still blind to the truth.
The scriptures surely don't point to transubstantiation. All this word means is Hocus pocus. Jesus absolutely clarifies what he meant in John 6. The church has chosen to hand pick what scriptures were meant literally and which ones aren't. No wonder they claim sole authority to interpret scripture. V 63 Jesus said that "it is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profits nothing, the words that I speak into you, they are spirit and they are life". The biggest problem with the catholic mass is that the manner in which it is performed is nothing like the manner in which Christ performed it. Scripture dies NIT say that a priest and only a priest can do the mass. Scripture dies not give any man, much less a false priest, the power to bring Christ down onto the altar. I have yet to find that in scripture anywhere. The next problem is if the church teaches that you must eat his body and drink the blood, why does the church not allow Catholics to drink the blood? The church is afraid the blood will spill? Where does the bible give the priest the power over something the church claims God commands. Then if this is the body of Christ why do these wafers originate from a factory made by nuns? What happens to the remaining host. Does the priest return Jesus to heaven? Does he turn Jesus back into the wafer? Reverse the transubstantiation process? Truth is that the church just totally disregards scripture and follows it's own tradition.
So, you mean to tell us that the flesh of Jesus Christ "profits nothing"? Wow. You are wholly ignorant of the Christian faith.
@Rbn Mnt
The belief of eating the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ and drinking his Blood originates directly from him.
Here's just a part of his teaching regarding the necessity for our eternal life and future resurrection of our bodies:
JOHN 6:53-55
53. So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have NO life in you;
54. he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has Eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
55. For my flesh is FOOD INDEED, and my blood is drink indeed.
It is quite evident Jesus was not expressing something symbolic in those clear and unambiguous "truly, truly" words.
Those who think that would be "creating", not accepting His true teaching which our Lord continues to emphasize:
JOHN 6:56-59
56. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
57. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.
58. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.”
59. This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Caper′na-um.
How are we supposed to eat his flesh and drink his blood?
Our Lord explains it step by step, in:
▪︎MARK 14:22-24
While they were eating, He TOOK some BREAD, and after a blessing He broke it, and gave it to them, and said, "Take it; THIS IS MY BODY." And when He had taken a CUP and given thanks, He gave it to them, and THEY all DRANK from it. And He said to them, "THIS IS MY BLOOD of the covenant, which is poured out for many.
Do you see the word "symbol" anywhere?
The reason is simple:
Because it is real. Just like our Lord clearly says!
If you want confirmation, St. Paul a former enemy of the Church, turned Apostle, explains it to you:
▪︎1 CORINTHIANS 11:23-29
23. For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of BREAD,
24. and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “THIS IS MY BODY that is for you. DO THIS in remembrance of me.”
25. In the same way he took THE CUP also, after supper, saying, “THIS CUP is the NEW COVENANT in MY BLOOD. DO THIS, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
26. For AS OFTEN as you eat this bread and drink the cup, YOU PROCLAIM THE LORD’s DEATH until he comes.
27. WHOEVER, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an UNWORTHY MANNER will be answerable for the BODY and BLOOD of THE LORD.
28. Examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
29. For all who eat and drink WITHOUT DISCERNING THE BODY, eat and drink JUDGMENT AGAINST THEMSELVES.
Key:
"ANSWERABLE FOR THE BODY and BLOOD of THE LORD".
Can you understand that If it was only a symbol it would not refer to the Eucharist as Christ's Body and Blood?
DEFINITION OF THE MIRACLE THAT TRANSFORMS BREAD AND WINE INTO THE DIVINE BODY AND BLOOD OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST:
▪︎Transubstantiation is the change that occurs in the sacrament of Holy Communion (Eucharist). Such change involves the whole substance of the bread and wine being turned miraculously into the whole substance of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ himself. Even though the accidents (Bread and wine) remain the same.
During the Mass when the Eucharistic elements, which are the bread and the wine being consecrated by the priest, are transformed into the actual body and blood of Jesus while keeping only the appearance of bread and wine.
Transubstantiation was defined by our Church at the Council of Trent:
"... By the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation."
(Session XIII, chapter IV)
The term "real presence" refers to Christ's actual presence in the bread and the wine. The underlying essence of the bread and wine are believed to be changed, while they retain only the appearance, taste, odor, and texture of bread and wine. Our Catholic doctrine holds that the Godhead is indivisible, so every particle or drop that is changed is wholly identical in substance with the divinity, body, and blood of the Savior.
● Transubstantiation belief beyond the Apostles:
ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH.
In the early Church, 10 years after the Apostle John's death, one of his disciples, Ignatius the Bishop of Antioch, clearly believed in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. He so states it in letters written around A.D. 107.
▪︎Letter to Smyrneans A.D. 107
"They [the Docetists, early Christological heretics] 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 that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes".
▪︎Letter to the Romans A.D. 110
"I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the FLESH OF JESUS CHRIST, who was of the seed of David; and FOR DRINK I desire HIS BLOOD, which is love incorruptible".
Beginnings of Transubstantiation type of language in 145AD:
▪︎JUSTIN MARTYR.
Christian apologist, born at Flavia Neapolis, about A.D 100, converted to
Christianity about A.D. 130, taught and defended the Christian religion in Asia Minor and at Rome, where he suffered
martyrdom about the year 165.
▪︎1st. Apology #66 A. D. 145
For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise HAVE WE BEEN TAUGHT that the food which is blessed by the prayer of his word, and from which our blood and flesh by TRANSMUTATION (Early Church concept, later refined at Trent) are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, said, “This do in remembrance of me, this is my body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, he said, “This is my blood;” and gave it to them alone.
May God bless your discernment.
@po18guy text alone displeases the Roman catholic church because it's doctrines and dogmas are not found therein. It's ironic that the church rejects scripture alone yet it says that "sacred tradition" is equal to scripture. Why sacred scripture? Why not the book of Mormon or the Koran? I guess sacred scripture was the ONLY source of divine truth at that time. In trying to disprove sola scriptura the church actually confirms it.
Christ is being literal in John 6 if not Paul would affirm it in 1 Corinthians and saying you are sinning against the body and blood of the Lord if you drink of the cup unworthily. Also people who did died and got sick. It’s right there in scripture. When the disciples say it’s a hard teaching who can accept it. Christ doubles down and some disciples walk away. I’m a former reformed baptist but Martin Luther was man filled with hate, who hated the Jews and wrote the Jews and their lies. He added the word alone to “faith alone” he also took out seven books out of the original cannon of scripture., and if he could of had it his way he’s on record saying if he could he would get rid of the book of James, and he didn’t think revaltions was inspired. We are not saved by faith alone. James makes that very clear. Faith without works is dead, Martin Luther said to sin godly. This is the man the reformers look too. He did not possess good fruit. You will know them by their fruit. The Catholic Church has been around since Christ. Protestants have 1000s of denominations all with different doctrines. The Catholic Church is the church of Christ. And sola scriputa, which is scripture alone, is a reformed doctrine. The faith was passed down by oral tradition for hundreds of years. Nowhere in scripture does it say scripture alone.
SOLA SCRIPTURA is unbiblical. @@rbnmnt3341
Scripture surely doesn't point to catholicism. Anyone who is able to discern what they read in scripture would not conclude that catholicism and much less the papacy, exist in scripture.
@Rbn Mnt
Scripture clearly points to one single united Church built by Jesus Christ.
Nowhere does Scripture teach:
1.- Bible alone
2.- Faith alone
3.- Separate churches
4.- Sects
5.- Self-appointed ministers
6.- "Services" based on preaching, not on Jesus' clear order
May God bless your discernment.
@@joecastillo8798 it sure does. But can you show me where that says roman catholic church? You see the scriptures are not a "fill in the blank" bible. If you notice Matthew 16 does not give a particular religion or denomination. "The church" in scripture is the worldwide body of believers, not a particular religion. It's just that your church has taken the liberty of inserting itself into scripture to add credibility. It defies logic that Jesus being Jewish, of a Jewish mother, with Jewish apostles founded a ROMAN catholic church.
@@rbnmnt3341
My friend,
You, sadly, have fallen in the trap of "Sola Scriptura", a doctrine invented by Martin Luther in 1521.
Search Scripture. Nowhere does Jesus or His Apostles ever teach something must be written explicitly in order to be believed in a future Bible that would only be compiled for the first time in the year 382AD.
However, it clearly says the following:
▪︎JOHN 15:26-27
26. But when the Advocate has arrived, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of TRUTH who proceeds from the Father, he will offer testimony about me.
27. And you shall offer testimony, because you are with me from the beginning.”
▪︎JOHN 16:13
13. When the SPIRIT of TRUTH comes, He WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL THE TRUTH; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
▪︎JOHN 17:17-19
17. Sanctify them in TRUTH. Your word is TRUTH.
18. Just as you have sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world.
19. And it is for them that I sanctify myself, so that they, too, may be sanctified in TRUTH.
Therefore the Bible clearly affirms in:
1 TIMOTHY 3:15
15. if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is THE CHURCH of the living God, THE PILLAR and FOUNDATION OF THE TRUTH.
Such truth will always be present in the one true Church founded by Christ until the end of times. Therefore, we must always listen to Christ's one Church, just like Scripture says:
LUKE 10:16
16. “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.
Don't refuse to hear Christ's Church any longer.
May God have mercy on you and open your heart and mind to His one Church and one truth.
@@joecastillo8798 you have fallen prey to adding to scripture. Let me ask you. If the bible or Sola scriptura is so wrong why does your church say that "sacred tradition" is equal to scripture? Why compare it to the bible. Could it be that it is the only divine source of truth? Why not make tradition to the book of Mormon or the Koran?
@@rbnmnt3341
Sacred Oral Tradition is as valid as written Tradition.
Written Tradition is not sufficient as the complete rule of faith. In fact St. Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the Tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2).
St. Paul further instructs us the following way in:
2 THESSALONIANS 2:15
15. So then, brethren, stand firm and HOLD TO THE TRADITIONS which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.
This oral teaching was accepted by Christians, just as they accepted the written teaching that came to them later. Jesus told his disciples: “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me” (Luke 10:16).
The Catholic Church, in the persons of the apostles, was given full authority to teach by Christ; the Church is His representative. He commissioned them, saying, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:19).
The question is:
How was this supposed to be done, if the majority of population (90%) had no access to books and was illiterate?
The answer:
By preaching and by oral instruction:
“So faith comes from what is HEARD, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ” (Rom. 10:17).
Therefore the Church would always be the living teacher. It is a mistake for protestants like you to limit “Christ’s word” to the written word only, or to suggest that all His teachings were reduced to writing. The Bible NOWHERE supports either notion.
The question is:
What is Apostolic Tradition?
We do not refer to legends or mythological accounts, nor transitory human customs or practices which, as you well know, may change, as circumstances warrant, such as styles of priestly dress, particular forms of devotion to saints, or even liturgical rubrics.
Sacred or Apostolic Tradition consists of the TEACHINGS that the Apostles passed on ORALLY through their PREACHING. These teachings largely (perhaps entirely) overlap with those contained in Scripture, but the mode of their transmission is different.
In the following quote, St. Paul illustrates for you what tradition is: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures. . . . Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed” (1 Cor. 15:3,11).
Furthermore, the apostle Paul praised those who followed Tradition:
1 CORINTHIANS 11:2
2. I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the TRADITIONS even as I have delivered them to you.
The first Christians “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching” (Acts 2:42) long before there was a New Testament. From the very beginning, the fullness of Christian teaching was found in the Church as the living embodiment of Christ, NOT IN A BOOK. The teaching Church, with its oral, apostolic tradition, was authoritative. Paul himself gives a quotation from Jesus that was handed down orally to him: “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35).
However, the problem with fundamentalists like you is that you want to equate Apostolic Tradition with "human traditions" condemned by Jesus when He said, “And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” (Matt. 15:3).
St.Paul, as well, warned, “See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to "HUMAN TRADITION", according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ” (Col. 2:8).
Let me clarify what is actually referred in the Bible as human traditions.
It is known that Pharisees observed a rigid and simple mode of life, disdaining all luxurious delicacies, scrupulously following the dictates of their reasoning, and paying their greatest veneration and obedience to the opinions and traditions of their seniors.
It is also evident that New Testament verses merely condemn those erroneous HUMAN traditions, NOT TRUTHS which were handed down orally and entrusted to the Church by the Apostles. These latter truths are part of what is known as APOSTOLIC Tradition, which is to be distinguished from human traditions or customs as delineated above. Unfortunately, what Evangelicals often do is see the word “tradition” in Matthew 15:3 or Colossians 2:8 or elsewhere and conclude that anything termed a “tradition” is to be rejected, obviating the fact that Jesus did not condemn all traditions; he condemned only erroneous traditions, whether doctrines or practices, that undermined Christian truths. The rest, as the apostles taught, were to be obeyed.
FINALLY:
What did the early Church, the inheritor of Apostolic teaching believed?
▪︎A prominent Bishop explains the following:
” ‘So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by Epistle of ours.’ Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition, seek no farther.”
The above response was delivered at a Homily during a Mass by a prominent Eastern Catholic Bishop:
St. John Chrysostom, Homily on 2nd Thessalonians, 4:2 (A.D. 404).
May God bless your discernment.
Mr. H says he is a "Bible Christian" at around 11:00. Ummmm...his good buddy Karl Keating wrote, "Catholicsm & Fundamentalism: The Attack on Romanism by Bible Christians". Looks like Keating doesn't like the term, but Mr. H embraces it. Sad isn't it, that Catholics can never seem to agree with one another. Tsk, tsk.
The title of Keating's book is actually: CATHOLICISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM - THE ATTACK ON "ROMANISM' BY "BIBLE CHRISTIANS"
www.amazon.com/Catholicism-Fundamentalism-Karl-Keating-ebook/dp/B0037BVKEE
Oh stop it Brock. As if the quotes around the words makes a bit of difference. Hahn the con can call himself a "Bible Christian" till the day he dies, but he has a passport to hell waiting for him, as well as all Catholics who think that eating the physical anatomy of Christ will save them. WAKE UP THOU FOOL. The gospel was never meant to satisfy our oral fixations! The prophet Job says "I have esteemed his ***WORD*** more than my necessary food", and the con-artist in the video thinks we ought to "eat Jesus" who is the word of God. Both thoughts are polar opposite to each other and only ONE is correct. Should you wish 95 reasons why Transubstantiation is a lie, you may request it at...eucharistangel@aol.com
'Scare quotes, shudder quotes, or sneer quotes are quotation marks placed around a word or phrase to signal that a term is being used in a non-standard, ironic, or otherwise special sense. Scare quotes may express that the author is using someone else's term, similar to preceding a phrase with the expression "so-called"; they may imply skepticism or disagreement, belief that the words are misused, or that the writer intends a meaning opposite to the words enclosed in quotes.' en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes (As in, so-called Romanism and so-called Bible Christians.) I had assumed that this would have been obvious to English speaking adults, but I was mistaken - as you have demonstrated - and for that, I apologize.
Here is an anger management article from Focus on the Family that you may find helpful:
www.focusonthefamily.com/lifechallenges/emotional-health/changing-an-angry-spirit/winning-the-war-against-anger
Oh Brock....must I put a dunce cap on your head? At the end of the day, Hahn the Con's lip service to the Bible is disingenuous. Catholicism has three EQUAL modes of authority; namely, The Bible, the Magisterium and "Tradition". Hence, to consider oneself a "Bible Christian" is simply trying to impress ignorant Protestants who don't know any better. The truth is, Catholics SHOULD, if they are consistent, label themselves at least on SOME occasions, a "Magisterium Christian", or a "Traditional Christian". But do they ever do this? NO, not EVER. In view of that, to label themselves "Bible Christians" certainly does not impress the Lord Jesus Christ let me assure you. True Christians are those who hold to God's word ALONE as their primary authority, as this very concept is contained from Genesis to Revelation, especially in all 176 verses of Psalm 119, the longest chapter in Holy Writ. Catholic dunderheads like Mr. Hahn who proclaim the magisterium and tradition as being on the same pedestal as Scripture are FRAUDS because God has magnified his word even above his very name (Psalm 138:2), which simply leaves no ROOM for the other two. Moreover, God is most pleased on those who meditate on his word day and night (Joshua 1:8), which of course leaves no TIME to bow our knee before some nebulous and ill-defined concept such as tradition. Catholics cannot even tell us how many traditions there are (!) nor can they tell us how many times the magisterium has spoken infallibly! One would supposedly need to know these things to be saved, but you get different answers from every Catholic you consult. Been there. Done that. Therefore, when one peels back the layer of the Catholic onion, we discover Catholicism to be counterfeit Christianity, an exquisite and very clever deception from the pit of hell that endorses "another jesus and another gospel" according to 2 Cor 11:4. As the apostle Paul said, "we are not deceived by Satan's devices".
You are, quite simply a "genius" and I mean that with all "sincerity".
It seems you have your cap on a little too tight... time for you to visit www.j2theson.com/
That should help to loosen it a little.
Great Convert!