True Jesus is the true rock but he built his church on petros or Peter which He himself called a rock too. Maybe we can say the earthly rock. Not my words on Matthew 16:18-19 bro. I guess no conflict there, you protestants just create them.
@@gracianomendoza8671 What are you saying? I have no issues with the traditions the apostles learned from Jesus and taught. Catholic ones are not the ones talked about here and Catholics know that. The catechism is full of additions not found in Holy Scriptures and they are not holy nor in the plan of salvation. They are contrived of man. Even the mass has no basis in the Bible, though I know exactly where you will send me next. Jesus is the only ROCK, no matter that Simon's name was changed to Peter. Look at the verse above. It was the fact that God the Father in heaven, by his Spirit influenced Peter to say what he did and God is the only Rock. Both the Father and Jesus are known as "the" Rock. They are the same person, another controversy with trinitarians. See Ephesians 2:20 for the real foundation of the church. You believe there are priestly sacrifices in the N.T. There are no priests in the N.T. The offices of the church are prophets, apostles, bishops (who are "overseers") evangelists, pastors, teachers, elders and deacons. No mention of priests. No pope, no hierarchy. All made up. Compare your catechism to the Bible and you should want to leave the RCC. Be blessed in your search for truth.
So what. That does not contradict Catholicism in any way. You Protestant Bible-thumpers are so funny ...... Did you even know that your precious chapters & verses didn't even exist until more than a thousand years after Christ?!
Also, King David acknowledges the Lord as his rock in *Psalm 18:2* _2 The LORD is my rock, my fortress, and my deliverer. My God is my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold._
@@gracianomendoza8671 King David served the One True God, of Whom said, that King David was a man after His Own Heart, and HAVING God, as well, he had the Son, though the New Covenant did not take effect until after the death of Christ, King Solomon was under the Old Covenant. The Old Testament speaks of the New Testament, and the coming of Christ. Jesus did not come to abolish the Old Law, but to fulfill it, and to say that King David did not known Peter, is irrelevant, because Peter is not the center of focus, but God the Father, and His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, of Whom which brings all Believers together throughout all ages past, that we may be with Christ where He is Presently. What IS relevant, is that King David Knew God, not Peter. And what is just as important is that the Roman Catholic Church know God, through His Son, and not to permeate their beliefs on what Christ said Peter, but more so on what Christ is saying to ALL of us. Jesus said, "Upon this Rock I will build My Church", upon this "Rock" that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead you shall be saved, thus the Word is preserved from death, by the Father, not in the Written Letter, but there within our hearts, where the True Church is, and the True Believers. it is through Jesus alone, that we find our Salvation, not Peter, nor through the Roman Catholic Church. Jesus said "I will Build My Church", not Peter. There are only 12 Apostles of the Lamb of which are the only "Apostles" recognized with concern to the New Jerusalem: Revelation 21:14 (NKJV) "14 Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb." The Word of God does not recognize, neither in the past, nor in those things which are to come, as is evident in the above scripture, the Catholic Church's "Apostolic Succession", of which they admit themselves, that they are not "Apostles", but Bishops of Rome appointed to the man-made office. The Catholic Church believes itself to be the True Faith, the True Christians, and the True "Spiritual" Chosen of God. Where the church is in great error is this, that the Bible says "Many are called, but few are Chosen!", which is to imply that one can not be Called (Christian), and Chosen (Jew) simultaneously. This is why the Bible says, "I became AS a Jew to win the Jew to Christ", ..."AS" a Jew is not the same as "TO BE" a JEW, keeping in mind that it is not a name, nor genealogies that determine who a Jew is, and is not, but whether he who is a Jew, Chosen by God, has been circumcised inwards of the heart, not outwards in appearance. Man can not determine for himself whether he will be Chosen, or Called, this is by God's Will, that is why they are called "God's" Chosen, becaue they are Chosen BY God, and not by man.
@@haroldmcbroom7807 no conflict there. Read it again. Matthew 16:18-19 are not my words but Jesus'. I suppose He referred to Peter there as the rock, coz as I emphasized in many of people who has your views before, Jesus cpuld not have given that keys of the kingdom to Himself bro. Simply put yes He is the true rock but then there He pointed to Peter as the small rock or earthly rock whom He trusted His ONE church with. And with that ANY OTHER church founded will truly be a bogus church.
@@gracianomendoza8671 If God is the "rock of David, who then is the "rock" of Peter? himself? Did you read the entire message, that talks about the New Jerusalem and the 12 foundations recognizing ONLY 12 Apostles, which destroys the ideal of apostolic succession. Upon this rock, is not a reference to Peter, but upon a principle, that if you confess with your mouth, and believe in your heart, as did "Peter", then you will be saved, not through Peter, nor the Roman Church, but by God's Grace, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ, and it is upon this "foundation", or "rock" that Jesus is building His Church within our hearts. Why would Jesus or Peter have the desire to establish the Roman church, both to be crucified on a Roman cross. The entire life of Jesus was spent preaching "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand", not that Christ had any intention of forming a church out of bricks. Matthew 24:2 "I tell all of you with certainty, there isn't a single stone here that will be left standing on top of another." So if Jesus didn't come to build a church built from stones, why would he build another of stone. Kind of reminds me of Ronald Reagan telling Berlin to "Tear down that wall!", only to have Trump build a new one. Talk about hypocrisy at it's finest.
@@gracianomendoza8671 Jesus said my Kingdom is not of this world, why would he establish an Peter as an "earthly rock". God gave you His Word that you may judge the world by that Word, even the church itself, to ensure that the church stay in conformity to Christ, not the congregation in conformity to the church.
Like Mike Gendron , brother Fred is shining the Light of Christ on the dark teachings of Roman Paganism. ! Thanks for your faithfulness to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. !
Peter was called to be A leader IN the Church! He was never asked to appoint any predecessor to his leadership. Paul even confronted the issue of followers being divided by who they followed. He made it very clear that they must follow Jesus only!
Mike McGomer The Bible doesn't say that he was never in Rome, it doesn't need to explicitly say everything about his where abouts, that's why there's sacred, oral and other written traditions which are not in the Bible referring to the Apostles where abouts and deaths or their mayrtordoms and the ancient writings and oral traditions stare that St Peter was the bishop of both Antioch and Rome where he was crucified upside down by request because he didn't feel worthy enough to be crucified up right like Jesus was, this happened in Rome under the Emperor Nero.
Thanks, Fred. Your series is encouraging. Hoe great to have so many people benefit from your teaching! Just put out info and they will come, no fancy thumbnails or click-bait, just teaching. Glory to God for the gift you have in this area.
@@EpiGenosko O.K., so why then do some (many?) evangelical Protestants “convert” to Catholicism? 1) Aesthetic - Many appeal to the experience of being moved by the architecture of RC church structures, the incense, the beauty of liturgy, the mystery, the solemnity, the drama, the vestments of the clergy, the church calendar, the sense of transcendence, religious symbolism, etc. 2) Historical - Some appeal to the belief that the reformation was a rebellion and that Protestantism is a deviation from the historic stream of the true church. They also point to a desire for unity with the past and the appeal of tradition. 3) Theological - Some convert for strictly theological reasons. They insist that sola scriptura, sola fide, etc. are wrong. Many have become persuaded of a sacramental/sacerdotal approach to God’s mechanism for dispensing grace together with a belief that Protestantism is Gnostic and fails to embrace the incarnational principle of scripture. 4) Social - The growing secularization of society, together with the diminishing influence of the evangelical church, have led many to Rome. They often find in the RCC a stabilizing anchor and unified front to fight the battle against the paganizing of culture. 5) Personal - Many Protestants point to their bad experience in the church, often citing an oppressive and legalistic fundamentalism. (6) Authority - Many appeal to papal infallibility, as over against the theological schisms in Protestantism, that they believe offers a stability in which their souls/minds might find rest in an uncertain and irrational age. In other words, it is the allure of a purported unshakable voice of authority that puts to rest countless and otherwise irresolvable theological disputes that draws so many to Rome. The idea of a Spirit-led, authoritative teaching office, known as the Magisterium, brings a measure of relief to those who’ve grown weary of arguments, debates, and doubts about what the Bible means and how we should live. (7) Denominational - By this I have in mind the disdain many feel toward the divisions and denominations in Protestantism. They are offended by the obvious disunity that exists and what they perceive as the failure to take seriously the prayer of Jesus in John 17 that we all be one. Needless to say, this wrongly assumes that there is in contemporary Catholicism a monolithic and unified theology, when in fact there are numerous “catholicisms” that often deviate from Rome. I’
Dr. Fred this is from the Philippines, what a very encouraging teachings you have, it is very scriptural, you are a blessing to every catholic believer may we pray that all of your teachings be watched and heard by every catholic who is not born again. Of course, even other people who are searching for truth surely they will be blessed. AMEN!
Don't be silly, every Catholic is Baptised, (born again), we eat of his flesh and drink his blood ( Holy communion), laying of hands (Confirmation), we profess the Jesus Christ is our Lord and believe his resurrection. Only Catholic and Orthodox have Apostolic procession the rest have no valid priesthood. Why do yall in your fake heritical churches not follow all the requirements?
@@anomalousviewer3164 My church baptizes professing believers by immersion in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Being born again is to take place before baptism.
Dr. Tarsitano, excellent exposition, I have watched, read and compared the scriptures you gave and it is concise to the point and correct according to the Bible! Thank you for opening my eyes., Martin Christopher Pretorius.
He (God) is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.- Deuteronomy 32:4; KJV ...and that Rock was Christ. - 1 Corinthians 10:4; KJV A Psalm of David My soul, wait thou only upon God; for my expectation is from him. He only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved...TRUST IN HIM (God) AT ALL TIMES; ye people, pour out your heart before him: GOD IS A REFUGE FOR US.Selah.- Psalm 62:5-8; KJV
Something interesting to think about: If Jesus changed Simon Peter's name to Peter in Matthew 16:18, then how come in John 1:42 upon meeting Simon Peter for the first time Jesus says to him, "you shall be called Cephas (which translated means 'petros'- Peter or a stone)?" Jesus didn't change Peter's name at the confession of calling Jesus "Christ the Son of the Living God" as in Matthew 16:18, but upon first meeting him in John 1:42. Even Koine Greek uses the word "petros" or a stone for Peter's name change in both instances. If Peter is referred to as a stone, then how come Jesus uses a different word "and upon this 'petra'-big rock I will build My church?" Peter cannot be a stone and a big rock at the same time, since by definition they are different.
I would like to add an important commentary. First of all, the Christian faith and the Christian church did not originate in Rome, it first originated in Jerusalem. I understand the early church structure elected an Episcopate (Bishop) as leader of the assembly called the church and James, the brother of Jesus was that first episcopate in the first church at Jerusalem. That would tell me that literally this James was the first elected leader of the first church and possibly be considered the first "pope." But considering the title of pope, which derived it's title with a Latin word meaning "Father" and scripture tells us call no man father but your Father in heaven......James would never be called a pope. Also, one of the titles of the pope is the "Holy Pontiff" more known as the "Pontifix Maximus." The title of pontifix maximus was the title of the pagan priest of Rome's pagan religion....The religion of "Numas" and was the High Priest over the practice of the pagan Vestal Virgins in honor of the goddess Vesta (Greek: Hesta). Why does a Pope of the Christian faith carry the title of a Pagan Priesthood that originated in Rome way before the Christian faith ever became present in Rome? Something to think about!!
Since when did the Catholic Church said they originated from Rome? By the way its Catholic Church as Roman is simply a Rite just as there ither Catholic Churches with other Rites. It just so happens that Bishop of Rome or rather the Pope - resides where Peter died - in Rome. As far as saying we should call anyone Father - is that what he really meant..are you saying I cant call my dad Father? You take ancient writing and make it literal interpretation. In the parable of the rich man and the beggar, Lazarus, the rich man, cries out from the depths of Hell, “Father Abraham, have pity on me,” and the usage of the title “father” occurs three times (cf. Lk 16:19-31). One has to wonder: if Jesus prohibited the use of the title “father,” why does He instruct the people with a parable in which the characters use the titl. Early Church Father you know those Catholics who canonized the bible - use this term and continued. Jesus never abolished a Rabbi from teaching..please reflect a little deeper as ancientvwrithing and historical tradition will bite you everytime you make a literal interpretation of everything in the bible
Jesus Christ our great and kind God and savior, built His Church on Peter the rock, way before the new testament was even written or its canon later determined. The same Peter who as rock and sole key holder, stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem since Scripture alone could not. As far as call no one Father, Paul says Abraham is our Father in Romans, and Paul says he too is our Father in 1 Corinthian, so holy father is biblical, ca as believers are called both holy, and father as well. You are in my prayers! God bless you!
@@matthewbroderick8756 i believe that the rock was " you are the christ son of the most high God" as for the keys anyone whose bornagain by the spirit has the " keys" the spirit came and even women and gentiles have him May the spirit reveal this to you!
@@cedriceric9730 The Holy Spirit has confirmed the Divine Truth that Peter is the rock on whom Jesus Christ our great and kind God and savior, built His Church. In Matthew 16, "upon THIS ", has to refer to the nearest of noun which is Peter, the same Simon renamed rock by Jesus Christ in John 1:42. In Matthew 16, Simon alone received the keys of the Kingdom from Jesus Christ the true King, just as in Isaiah 22, where the king would appoint one prime minister from among his 12 officers by giving him alone the keys of the kingdom. The same Church authority in Peter that stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem since Scripture alone could not. You are in my prayers! God bless you!
@@matthewbroderick8756 matt 16:16-18. The word for Peter in greek is 'Petros'. If Jesus was talking about the rock Peter He was going to built His church on, the second 'rock' in the verse should be Petros too. Instead the word is 'Petra'. It is the same word that is used in 1kor 10:4: and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock (Petra) that followed them, and that Rock (Petra) was Christ. For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. I Corinthians 3:11 NKJV He is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently against that house, and could not shake it, for it was founded on the rock (Jesus teaching about Himself) Luke 6:48 NKJV having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone, Ephesians 2:20 NKJV Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus, Hebrews 3:1 NKJV Also Peter could not be a pope. He was married (matt 8:14), he didn't speak infallably (matt 16:22-23, gal 2:11-14), Jesus told the disciples to call no one father ( matt 23:8-9), Peter was not discribed/ treated superior or after superior to the other disciples, Paul even corrected him ( 1 pet 5:1, luk 22:24, acts 15:19), Peter declared Jesus as head of the church ( 1 cor 3:11, eph 1:22, 1 Tim 2:5, coll 1:18, eph 5:21, 1 cor 11:3), Peter never went to Rome, Paul did, before 300 AD no letters are found that discribed Peter as head of the church, or the title 'pope' is mentioned.
It is teaching like this this thru the years that holds the RCC accountable in some ways as much as can be. I appreciate this teaching as a former Catholic. I hate to think what would be today without the reformation.
“Mary responded, “Oh, how my soul praises the Lord. How my spirit rejoices in God my Savior! For he took notice of his lowly servant girl, and from now on all generations will call me blessed. For the Mighty One is holy, and he has done great things for me.” Luke 1:46-49 NLT
Very interesting point. Yes and so are we also blessed when we obey Mary's last recorded word in the Bible. She said whatever Jesus tells you to do do it. However, you are either 100% sure that you will be accepted by God in heaven or on your way to be 100% sure which one are you? To prove your point you should actually read the book "Rome has spoken" by two nuns Maureen Fiedler and Linda Rabben both PhDs. Also kindly Read; Acts 4 verse 12; John 1 verse 12 and 3 verse 16 then 1 John 1 verse 8+9. Rom 3 verse 23 to the end and Rom 10 vers 9+10 be blessed brother Martin Christopher Pretorius Show less REPLY
@@gerdapretorius7653 yes Jesus Christ is The Rock HE was crucified ✝️ for our Sin Peter told Jesus depart from me Lord a Sinner! Peter could not even say he Loved Jesus agape but used the lesser philo brotherly love
5 .WHY CATHOLICS BE DO WORSHIP IMAGES??? Catholics do not worship idols or images. Bowing before an image does not mean a Catholic is worshipping that image or picture. If it is the image of Jesus, a Catholic is merely giving honor to Him who is represented by the image or picture. It is like the statues of our national heroes that are honored. It doesn’t mean however that we worship such statues or that we believe them to be the same as the persons and heroes they represent. It is also like the photos of our loved ones we keep in our wallets or put in our walls. They remind us of our loved ones. We even kiss such photos out of love for those whom they represent. We DO NOT love the photos for their own sake. We know that they ARE NOT are families and friends. EXPLANATION: 1. The first commandment forbids making images or idols that people will serve as gods. Catholics HOWEVER, do not serve images of Jesus or Mary or the saints. They are mere representations that are honored in love and in respect of those whom they represent. God spoke all these words, saying, “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage “You shall have no other gods before me. “You shall not make for yourselves an idol, nor any image of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: you shall not bow yourself down to them, nor serve them, for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and on the fourth generation of those who hate me, and showing loving kindness to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments. -Exodus 20:1-6, We Catechism of the Catholic Church states 2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype," and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it." The honor paid to sacred images is a "respectful veneration," not the adoration due to God alone: Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is. (St. Thomas Aquinas) 2. If it is ABSOLUTELY forbidden to make ANY IMAGES in a literal sense in the Old Testament, why then was the instruction to make several graven images in the form of cherubs, flowers and even of a snake? The LORD said to Moses, “Make a venomous snake, and set it on a pole. It shall happen, that everyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.” Moses made a serpent of brass, and set it on the pole. If a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked at the serpent of brass, he lived. - Numbers 21:8-9, You shall make two cherubim of hammered gold. You shall make them at the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub at the one end, and one cherub at the other end. You shall make the cherubim on its two ends of one piece with the mercy seat. The cherubim shall spread out their wings upward, covering the mercy seat with their wings, with their faces towards one another. The faces of the cherubim shall be towards the mercy seat. You shall put the mercy seat on top of the ark, and in the ark you shall put the testimony that I will give you. There I will meet with you, and I will tell you from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which are on the ark of the testimony, all that I command you for the children of Israel. - Exodus 25:18-22, The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to Aaron, and tell him, ‘When you light the lamps, the seven lamps shall give light in front of the lamp stand.’” Aaron did so. He lit its lamps to light the area in front of the lamp stand, as the LORD commanded Moses. This was the workmanship of the lamp stand, beaten work of gold. From its base to its flowers, it was beaten work: according to the pattern which the LORD had shown Moses, so he made the lamp stand. -Numbers 8:1-4, It is clear that such IMAGES have been allowed because the intention was NOT to worship such images but to serve other purposes e.g. to decorate, to be an instrument of God’s healing It is very different however when the Israelites made the image of a golden calf to SPECIFICALLY AND INTENTIONALLY WORSHIP IT. The LORD spoke to Moses, “Go, get down; for your people, who you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves! They have turned away quickly out of the way which I commanded them. They have made themselves a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed to it, and said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, which brought you up out of the land of Egypt.’” - Exodus 32:7-8, 3. When the Lord commanded the Israelites not to make any graven images, it is to help them avoid the temptation of worshipping anything that is not GOD Himself. During that time, God has not yet revealed His image to them. When Jesus came however, the image of God has finally been revealed to men. Thus, when we make statues or pictures depicting Jesus, we are worshipping God Himself. Not that we worship the statue or the picture itself, but the very One whom they depict - Jesus, the very image of God. Be very careful, for you saw no kind of form on the day that the LORD spoke to you in Horeb out of the middle of the fire, lest you corrupt yourselves, and make yourself a carved image in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female, the likeness of any animal that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged bird that flies in the sky, the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the water under the earth; and lest you lift up your eyes to the sky, and when you see the sun and the moon and the stars, even all the army of the sky, you are drawn away and worship them, and serve them, which the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole sky. - Deuteronomy 4:15-19, God, having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds. His Son is the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, who, when he had by himself purified us of our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they have. - Hebrews 1:1-4, NOTE; More than the literal issue of making a graven image, we should concern ourselves about the true nature of idolatry because idolatry consists of worshipping things other than GOD. When we put other things in our hearts above the importance we are giving to God, we are creating idols for ourselves to worship. Catechism of the Catholic Church states: 2113 Idolatry not only refers to false pagan worship. It remains a constant temptation to faith. Idolatry consists in divinizing what is not God. Man commits idolatry whenever he honors and reveres a creature in place of God, whether this be gods or demons (for example, satanism), power, pleasure, race, ancestors, the state, money, etc. Jesus says, "You cannot serve God and mammon." Many martyrs died for not adoring "the Beast" refusing even to simulate such worship. Idolatry rejects the unique Lordship of God; it is therefore incompatible with communion with God.
I detest commercials, but am glad that you've been monetized. I've been following you for years and have been blessed by your in-context Bible teaching. Keep on doing God's work! 👍
@@EpiGenosko Actually, I think that if you have more than 1k subscribers (...which you do) and over 100k overall views, RUclips will monetize your channel and compensate you. The commercials are the tripping mechanism. You might also need a PayPal account in order to collect. Check it out and keep up the biblical teaching. :-)
Dear brother Fred, you're work and explanations about the Catholic Church are absolutely tremendous. I appreciate your dedication and research greatly!!!
Fred Tarsitano , hello. I am as of now, on #8 of your series. I have been very amazed at the truth you are not afraid to speak. I myself believe that the Roman Catholic Church has many “traditions “ that are so untrue to scripture. And that they persecuted many believers in years ago, and we will see that same persecution directed soon, among true believers of ALL of God’s Commandments. They are called and described as the “Antichrist “, in the book of Revelation. Opening up the truth, of God’s Word, as I see you doing so far, it is truth that so many need to hear in today’s time. I am going to finish your series today, and just wanted to let you know that the reverberations of your directing so many towards this truth, will be wonderful! Oh, yes, by the way, I am a Seventh Day Adventist, and feel like you left out important truth in trying to describe our faith. I am not surprised or hurt, just disappointed that your incomplete view was given. God bless your work going forward, now... off to finish your series!
Is there any Biblical reason to call a Catholic priest Father? Is there any Biblical reason that commands us to confess our sins to another sinner to be forgiven? Is there any Biblical reason for a POPE? Is there any Biblical reason NOT to encourage reading the Holy Bible?
Alfred Doten you are absolutely right friend and I went to a Catholic school but I had enough sense to see through them you don't call nobody father except for your dad and Jesus !!!!
Alfred, You asked whether there is any Biblical reason to call a Catholic priest Father. Yes, there is. AFTER Jesus said "Call no man father" the apostles called themselves Fathers. They understood what Jesus meant when He said that. That was an example of a hyperbole. There was a lot of hyperbole used in the Bible. Jesus used hyperbole a lot. He knew that the people of that time would understand it. The apostles understood it, that is why AFTER Jesus said not to call men fathers, they did exactly that, referred to themselves as FATHERS. There is a Biblical basis for confessing sins to priests. After Jesus rose from the dead, He appeared to the apostles. He breathed on them, gave them the Holy Spirit, and said "The sins you forgive will be forgiven, the sins you retain will be retained." Jesus gave them the power....Actually they had no power. The power came from the Holy Spirit, who forgave sins through them. Priests today have the authority....It came from JESUS, who gave the apostles the Holy Spirit....GOD forgives sins, not the priests. Why can't people understand this? The early Christian Church knew about this. The early Church fathers spoke of confessing sins to a priest. No priest in their right mind would say that THEY forgive sins. It is GOD doing the forgiving through the priest, the same as He forgave sins through the apostles. IF you would like the verses, I will be glad to supply them to you. One question that I have of you and others: WHY do people choose to follow that one verse LITERALLY, when they know better...or they should. Not every verse was meant to be taken literally, yet, many choose to follow that verse literally.....It seems to me that the only reason that some choose to follow that verse literally is because it seems to point to the Catholic Church.....Yet, other verses they know better than to follow it literally. Jesus also said to "POKE out an EYE." How many Christians do you know that have followed THAT verse LITERALLY.?" How many ONE-EYED Christians do you see running around that chose to do that? Jesus never meant that it should be followed literally....It meant something. Everything that He said was important, yet, He never meant that people should go out and POKE out one of their eyes. The apostles, the early Church understood when Jesus said to poke out an eye.....and when He said to call No man father...The apostles called themselves Fathers AFTER that. They understand the meaning of the idea of hyperbole...it was used throughout the Bible.
Alfred, You might start by reading I JOHN 2:13-14 where John addresses men in his congregation as FATHERS. John understood that Jesus' command was not to be understood , taken literally. Also, notice that in I CORINTHIANS 4: 14-15, Paul says: "...For I have become your FATHER in Christ through the gospel." I am not sure whether you will be able to pull up this LINK. IF you can't pull it up, Just TYPE IN: CALL NO MAN "Father"-CATHOLIC ANSWERS. www.catholic.com/tract/call-no-man-father Many people focus on ONE word, and ignore the rest. In MATTHEW 23: 9 Jesus does say " ...Call no man Father on earth..." Yet, He also said "But, you are not to be called Rabbi, for you have one TEACHER..." Yet, although Jesus seemed to be prohibiting the use of the word TEACHER ......Look at MATTHEW 28: 19-20 In these verses Jesus APPOINTS certain men to be TEACHERS.....AFTER He said not to...Christ said " ...Go therefore and make disciples of all nations...TEACHING them to observe all that I have commanded you.." (MATTHEW 28:19-20) Paul also spoke of his commission to be a TEACHER in 2 TIMOTHY 1:11 and in I COR. 12: 28 he tells us that "..Some should be first apostles, second prophets, third TEACHERS ( I COR. 12: 28) Jesus said to call no man FATHER...To show the scribes and pharisees how sinful and proud they were for NOT looking humbly to GOD as the source of all authority and FATHERHOOD. The apostles did not do that....they looked at GOD as being the ULTIMATE Authority, and as the FATHER Figure and TEACHER. The scribes and pharisees did not do that. They wanted everyone to look up to them. The apostles didn't do that. The apostles looked UP to God as the Ultimate Father Figure and Teacher. The pharisees and scribes didn't do that. They didn't glorify God like the apostles did. The apostles understood that. They understood what Jesus meant when He said to call No man FATHER, and TEACHER. Yet, AFTER He said not to call anyone Teacher, He commissioned the apostles to be TEACHERS. That was an example of hyperbole....We need to read ALL the words in a verse, not pick one word out and ignore the others. We also need to read ALL the verses....to look forward at other verses. To pick one verse and ignore others really doesn't make much sense. Hopefully you will see that. Hopefully you can pull up the LINK that I provided. If for some reason you can't pull it up , just Type in the TITLE of the article that I provided. I believe the article makes sense. You may not think it does. We can all learn something new. Hopefully you will understand it a little better. Thanks
I always believed that it was Peter's confession, his absolute conviction that Jesus was the one and only Son of the living God, that was "the rock" the church would be built on. I don't consider a church built upon a fallible human to be what God had in mind. If you look at the pagan religious beliefs that existed in Rome before Christianity and mix them in with some Christian doctrine, then you get the Catholic religion.
Jesus Christ our great and kind God and savior, built His Church on Peter the rock, way before the new testament was even written or its canon later determined. The same Peter, who as rock and sole key holder, stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem since Scripture alone could not. In Matthew 16, "Upon THIS", has to refer to the nearest proceeding noun, which is Peter. You are in my prayers! God bless you!
@@matthewbroderick8756 Peter is not an "it" as in "This" rock. Jesus was always the ONLY ROCK. Maybe he pointed to himself for all we know. I hope you consider watching all of Dr. Tarsitano's videos because they are truthful.
@@geedfaith even many Protestant scholars attest that Peter is the rock in Matthew 16 and John 1:42. Jesus says, "thou art Simon, but though shall be called Cephas ". Cephas is Aramaic for rock. Even grammatically speaking, in Matthew 16, "upon THIS ", has to refer to the nearest proceeding noun, which is Peter. This same Peter alone received the keys of the kingdom in Matthew 16. Keys denote authority. See Isaiah 22, where the King would appoint one prime minister from among his twelve officers, by giving him alone the keys of the kingdom. The office of sole key holder is one of succession. This same Church authority in Peter later stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem, since Scripture alone could not. Whenever the Apostles are mentioned in the Gospels, Peter is always listed as first. You are in my prayers! God bless you!
Revelation 1:4-18, to the churches in Asia, not rome: the church was formed by Christ in Judah, which is in Asia, not in rome which is not in Asia but in Europe.. the first church came out of Jerusalem, then spread throughout by the apostles who were jews, not gentiles.. Paul went to some of the different churches but wrote epistles to 7 of them: on some of Paul's journey's, he went to, Greece and Rome, where him and Peter were eventually crucified.. revelation 1 does not mention Rome as being the first church, as the catholic church claims it happened that there were those that belonged to the church that preached there after the church was formed, so, how could that be the first church? I wonder how it's possible to be born in two places at the same time, and be one?
Fantastic series! The LORD will liberate many through you and the series of videos you have made. Many will be saved through your testimony, research, and obedience to Christ. Thank you brother.
The narrow path leads to the Narrow Gate which is one Church wide. The wide path is wide indeed. It is 40,000 and growing Protestant denominations and cults wide. ONE GOD ONE CHRIST ONE BIBLE 40,000 and growing denominations and cults. The Reformation is Satan's Greatest Victory: ruclips.net/video/UfOCqTfPXbQ/видео.html
Hi Fred , watched your series of 9, it says it all . May you continue to bring more people to Jesus Christ our lord and savior . May I kmow which church you belong ? Keep up the good work Fred . Thanks !
It’s really obvious that the Lord was talking about himself John 14:6 KJV 6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If we built our faith on man how on earth do we get to the Father . When we stand before the Lord one day religion , be it catholic or Protestant won’t be taken into account , it will be the Holy Spirit within us that makes us alive in Christ Jesus which we obtain through faith .You cannot work for sanctification its a gift 🎁 through faith , it cannot be found in a building or a religion but through the power of Holy Spirit.
"What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, and one of you says to them, 'Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well, ' but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it? So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead." James 2:14-17 I wish you God's blessings. I keep you in prayer. 🙏 A Roman Catholic.
thank you, brother. it is all about control. thank you for giving us the Truth ... and once again, the answer is Jesus. who the Son makes free is FREE INDEED. how do i know? ha. ask me.......
@@George040270 No protestants love truth and worship Jesus alone. I'm a Christian by the way. Eternity is a long time to cling to this apostate religion. #Matthew715 #falseprophets
It blows me away… If you listen to the book of first Peter, in the second chapter read carefully what he says he says that we are stones of the living stone, which is Christ. In other words we are the Petros the small stones, including PETER. And Jesus is the Petra the foundation stone. PETER himself is explaining this in first Peter starting with chapter 2. Better yet, listen to the audio version without music and listen carefully Peter his self is explaining how we are part of the foundation of the church, the rock. There is somebody online that has a challenge called the zell challenge. I encourage true Christians to answer this to him. He says and leaves blank certain spaces that say who is the foundation and instruction for salvation of course it's the church it says in the Bible and the tradition of the church, but the tradition, must coincide with the original tradition of not what you make up called tradition, man-made tradition
I am enjoying watching your videos. They are very helpful to me. I have been trying to talk to some Catholics but their hearts are hardened. One verse that I like to use is from Romans 2:16. It states with Paul speaking "In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel". Not Peter. Blessings to you!
As a famous theologian ones said "Each time the Apostle Paul is rediscovered, The Church is reborn". He is the exclusive revelator of the gospel of Jesus Christ to The Church particularly to the 'gentiles'. We can only be saved by his gospel.
Sounds like the guy over here that I'm attempting to minister to for the past 3 months. He keeps making excuses and adding to the Bible things that are not there. I don't even tell him much anymore like I used to because it's like bringing a horse to water... And you know the rest. It can be tiring. If a person is not careful, it can turn into like casting your pearls before swine, so to speak. I pray for him daily. I've even given him information that I downloaded and printed out on the false doctrines of the Catholic church. And he threw it out. He blatantly refuses to see the TRUTH. IDK.
Dear brother Fred . I also believe in the King James version of the Holy Scriptures . What ever happened to preachers ? They are using other bibles with other words that are somewhat confusing to the believers . Keep up the good work . The Lord needs more people like you to open the eyes of the blind . May the Lord use you mightily . Amen
Gerda Pretorius what about ROMANS 9:13,”JACOB I HAVE LOVED,AND ESAU HAVE I HATED” EXODUS 20:4,”THOU SHALT NOT MAKE UNTO THEE ANY IMAGE OF ANYTHING IN HEAVEN,OR ON THE EARTH,OR IN THE WATER UNDER THE EARTH,THOU SHALT NOT BOW DOWN TO THEM OR SERVE THEM,FOR I AM A JEALOUS GOD VISITING INIQUITY ON THEM THAT DO TO THE THIRD AND FOURTH GENERATION” THERE GOES YOUR JESUS LOVES CATHOLICS THEORY.
Jesus may not wish that any be lost, but he knows that some will be. Otherwise, everything else he said, and everything in the letter of Paul to the Romans is invalid.
thanks so much its make everything clear for me now. many peoples here in my country said Christian n catholic is just the same. inside my heart i always doubt that since just like u said so many contradiction with The Scriptures. Jesus bless you.
I like your videos Fred, one thing I notice people are missing is not knowing the heart of the Father, The Lord would never put fallen flesh in leadership of the entire body of Christ, he never wanted Israel to have a fleshly king and he would never do the same for his body, Jesus is truly the head of the church!
I even let that man the guy that I've been ministering to that Catholic I even let him watch the video and he refused to believe it but I hope he never forgets it. Amen
Don't go by what it looks like. I dealt with a brother who was a strong Jehovah's Witness and he was sooooooo strong, one night, in a debate, I saw that he was set in cement and was positive that I would never make an effect. I had given up completely forever. But less than two weeks later, he told me he had left the cult and it was because of a little thing I said about the unpardonable sin. So looks (behavior) can be deceiving. I made a huge dent after I was SURE he would stay in his cult forever. God works in mysterious way. So, be encouraged! Your work with him was anointed. I have a guy like this too but not as obstinate as your guy. Dr. Tarsitano's videos are great tools. Be blessed!
Hi Dr. Fred, I am a Cree survivor of what they done up here in Canada. Through this experience I hated God and wanted nothing to do with this “white God” but Our Lord Jesus Christ had other plans. In our small First Nations community I confront these priests to tell the truth and from the Word of God and I find it rather ironic, they never send a white priest but rather black priests whom I tell the truth too…one black priest told me I was a wise man, I told him I am not wise.. read the Word of God, that’s where wisdom, knowledge and a relationship with Jesus Christ comes from. Sadly, many Elders cling to their false teachings even after their school experiences. Enjoyed your video👍🏽
Dr. Tarsitano, Is there a way to contact you besides RUclips? If you wear different colored button downs for each series of talks, it will be easy for those of us down loading random lectures and putting them in order later. What do make of Marian apparitions? Thanks for all you do. BJP-G
Dr. Gonzalez - My videos are grouped together by subjects in what You Tube calls Playlists. They make it easy to find all of my videos. A short answer to your question on apparitions is 1. Many of them are false emotionalism enduced by people who "need a sign" 2. I believe some are demonic deceptions sent to mislead people and strengthen their belief in a false religion. 3. They are not sent from Heaven because what they proclaim is not biblical. 4. You can email me directly at fdj@comcast.net - Hope this helps - Fred
@@EpiGenosko P.S. Thanks for the tip. I'm kind of an IT idiot - just learned yesterday what a podcast is. Too much time in chem lab in college, I guess ... . Sorry!
Thank you Fred , I’m catholic and I agree with what you’re saying , my uncle turned Christian and he was also catholic and I’m considering turning Christian
@@EpiGenosko Yes indeed , I want to accept Jesus as my savior , and thank you so much for the videos you make , they really help , God bless you Fred !
Research catholic teaching. There can only be one true church. Prior to 1516 if you were Christian you were catholic. None of the churches created after the 1500’s can be the true church.
@Dr.Fred. could you tell me where I can find approximately who originated & Genesis of the catholic mass. I believe it was pope inocent the 3rd who declared transubstantiation. Thanks
Ewald - The following is from Loraine Boettner in his book Roman Catholicism. "In view of the prominent place given the mass in the present day Roman Church, it is of particular interest to find that it was unknown in the early church, that it was first proposed by a Benedictine monk, Radbertus, in the ninth century, and that it did not become an official part of Romanist doctrine until so pronounced by the Lateran Council of 1215 under the direction of pope Innocent III. It was reaffirmed by the Council of Trent in 1545. Transubstantiation is not mentioned in the Apostles' Creed or in the Nicene or Athanasian creeds. Its first creedal mention is by pope Pius IV, in the year 1564." Hope this helps - Fred
@@EpiGenosko. Thanks 4 getting back 2 me. I really appreciate u & your research & videos. I get a lot from them & have suggested others view. Thank u so much & God bless
Acts 1 establishes apostolic succession as an apostle having followed Jesus in His ministry. Last I checked, no one alive today walked with Christ. This makes the catholic church invalid.
Well I can't say that's necessarily a debunking of apostolic succession. We can see other places where apostolic succession takes place. Also looking at the word it's self is very telling in the Greek apostle means one who is sent off. Furthermore The role of apostolic succession in preserving true doctrine is illustrated in the Bible. To make sure that the apostles’ teachings would be passed down after the deaths of the apostles, Paul told Timothy, “[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession-his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach.
Not really interested in debating people. It tends to prove fruitless and a big waste of time and energy. I put my time and energy into :Rightly dividing the Word of truth"
Dr. Tarsitano - Great 9-Part series; it ties up several related topics that are based on both biblical teachings and historical information. RCs whose eyes and ears will be opened by the Holy Spirit via your teaching series, will need guidance as to what to do or where to go once they decide to leave the RCC. God Bless.
George Pierson - There is no group greater than the Church/Ekklesia that Christ established which consisted of believing (Messianic)Hebrew-Israelite-Jews and who followed Mosaic and/or TaNaKh teachings; it is into this Ekklesia that the believing Gentiles were later grafted.
George Pierson - you have to study the bible (library of 66 books)Genesis - Revelation as one coherent interrelated teachings/instructions from God re His "way" to understand where circumcision (of the flesh and of the heart) and/or dietary laws fit into the total picture.
I have the Bible, the writings of the Church Fathers, Councils, Synods, Popes, Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Men and Women Religious, and the Lay Faithful. The Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 dispensed with Circumcision. It also did not require anybody to keep the Jewish dietary laws aside from a few specific items.
When the current pope was elected, pope the first thing he said: I will pray to the madonna! Does not the Bible say there is one mediator between men and God? So why is he praying to mary first over Jesus as a mediator to God! How can Catholics not see this deception?
Thanks for establishing the pattern of a false religion. It's eerily the same with the current Jewish belief system that excludes Jesus as the Messiah. The traditions established by the rabbis outweighs the actual word of God (and Jesus Himself testified to that, and it still carries on to this day!). Whatever the rabbis say is what the people believe and how they act. Very few read their scriptures for themselves, just as many of the catholics do today and unfortunately what many "christians" do as well!
The foundation for the office of the Pope is rooted primarily in Matthew 16:13-20. Here Jesus asked the question, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” The apostles responded, “Some say John the Baptizer, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” Our Lord then turned to them and point-blank asked them, “And you, who do you say that I am?” St. Peter, still officially known as Simon, replied, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Our Lord recognized that this answer was grace-motivated: “No mere man has revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.” Because of this response, our Lord first said to St. Peter, “You are ‘Rock,’ and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The name change itself from “Simon” to “Peter” indicates the apostle being called to a special role of leadership. Recall how Abram’s name was changed to Abraham, or Jacob’s to Israel, or Saul’s to Paul when each of them was called to assume a special role of leadership among God’s people. The word rock also has special significance. On one hand, to be called “rock” was a Semitic expression designating the solid foundation upon which a community would be built. For instance, Abraham was considered “rock” because he was the father of the Jewish people (and we too refer to him in the First Eucharistic Prayer of the Mass as “our father in faith”) and the one with whom the covenant was first made. On the other hand, no one except God was called specifically “rock,” nor was it ever used as a proper name except for God. To give the name “rock” to St. Peter indicates that our Lord entrusted to him a special authority. Some anti-papal parties try to play linguistic games with the original Greek gospel text where the masculine gender word petros, meaning a small, moveable rock, refers to St. Peter while the feminine gender word petra, meaning a massive, immoveable rock, refers to the foundation of the Church. However, in the Aramaic language, which is what Jesus spoke and which is the original language of St. Matthew’s gospel, the word kephas, meaning rock, would be used in both places without gender distinction or difference in meaning. The gender problem arises when translating from Aramaic to Greek and using the proper form to modify the masculine word Peter or feminine word Church. The “Gates of Hell” is also an interesting semitic expression. The heaviest forces were positioned at the gates, so this expression captures the great war-making power of a nation. Here this expression refers to the powers opposed to what our Lord is establishing- the Church. (A similar expression is used in reference to our Lord in Acts 2:24: “God freed Him from the bitter pangs of hell, however, and raised Him up again, for it was impossible that death should keep its hold on Him.”) Jesus associated St. Peter and his office so closely with Himself that he became a visible force for protecting the Church and keeping back the power of hell. Second, Jesus says, “I will entrust to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” In the Old Testament, the “number two” person in the Kingdom literally held the keys. In Isaiah 22:19-22 we find a reference to Eliakim, the master of the palace of King Hezekiah (II Kings 18:17ff) and keeper of the keys. As a sign of his position, the one who held the keys represented the king, acted with his authority, and had to act in accord with the king’s mind. Therefore, St. Peter and each of his successors represent our Lord on this earth as His Vicar and lead the faithful flock of the Church to the Kingdom of Heaven. Finally, Jesus says, “Whatever you declare bound on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever you declare loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” This is rabbinic terminology. A rabbi could bind, declaring an act forbidden or excommunicating a person for serious sin; or, a rabbi could loose, declaring an act permissible or reconciling an excommunicated sinner to the community. Here Christ entrusted a special authority to St. Peter to preserve, interpret, and teach His truth.
@@michaeladamonis2620 according to the Roman Catholic Church,no. The council of Trent, which was confirmed by Vatican too, curses those who do not agree with all the Roman Catholic church teaches.
I praise God, that He drew me out of the false RCC. He saved me and gave me a new heart an Spirit. I am a new creature in Christ born from above, to God alone be the glory!! HALLELUYAH!!
You are a SUPERB teacher. I love to listen to you. Your way of teaching is simple and clear. My goodness! So many are being lied to. My own mother i can't reach. She is devoted to her catholic tradition even more now.... that I have left the church. I pray for her that God would open the eyes of her understanding.
hello sir, thank you for the questions for seeking elightenment on the Gospel according to Mathew 16:18. i would suggest that no one is supposed to re-translate the Gospels written in the Bible with the inspiration of God. so sir, it depends on which Bible are you reading from, the Catholics or any other Bible's. ask for the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, and beware of other spirits.
i heard you asked who followed Peter (32-67) as Pope: Linus (67-76), Anacletus (76-88), Clement I85-97), Evaristus )97-105).These are the first 5 popes.There have been 266 Popesto date. The were called Bishops of Rome originally. The title Bishop of Romeis still in use today when referring to the Papacy. The first Bishop of Rome to be call Pope was Siricius (384-399). You also doubted that Peter was ever in Rome. He was crucified upside down in Rome and his remains are buried underneath the High Altar in St. peter’s Bascilica
I'm an ex-catholic from Dublin, Ireland. As soon as I started reading the bible especially the New Testament I could see how it didn't line up with the catholic church teachings eg prayer to Mary, Saints, to and for dead and so many layers of traditions and rituals. The way they built their church on one scripture saying Peter is the rock when Jesus has always been the rock, chief cornerstone, Alpha and Omega, beginning and the End. The way there are so many vain repetitions like 📿🦜when Mary only said she was blessed and in need of a Saviour herself. I believe all the apparitions fulfills this scripture : 2 Corinthians 11:14 No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. 2 Corinthians 11:3 But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ. when bible is very clear that we have one mediator between God and man - Christ Jesus but ultimately it's the bad fruit that convinced me like all the recent revelations (personally I think forced celibacy as opposed to choice in bible contributed a lot to the abuse in mother and baby homes/residential schools etc). My only hope is for my family and husband to leave this blasphemous apostate church. 🙏🌏🙏
"There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering." ~ St. Cyprian of Carthage, A.D. 253
Again, the Bible says word-for-word we are not justified by faith alone (James 2:24), but you say we are. It says Baptism saves us (1 Peter 3:21), you say it does not. It says a person is born again by water and spirit (John 3:5), you say they're born again by faith alone. It says bread and wine are the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:23-30), you say they are not. It says Christ's flesh is true food (John 6:52-56), you say its not. It says to Anoint (unction) the sick (James 5:14), you posted a video on why we should not. It says those who don't feed the poor will go to the place prepared for the devil (Mathew 25:41-46), you say they won't if they have faith. It says those who do not forgive others will not be forgiven (Mathew 16:15), you say they will if they have faith. ect.... As I said, that is simply not a biblical denomination. Your brother in Christ, Fr. David Sacred Heart Catholic Church
One of the most respected and referenced Greek dictionaries among Evangelicals is Gerhard Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. In a most candid statement about Matthew 16:18, Dr. Oscar Cullman, a contributing editor to this work, writes: The obvious pun which has made its way into the Greek text . . . suggests a material identity between petra and Petros . . . as it is impossible to differentiate strictly between the two words. . . . Petros himself is this petra, not just his faith or his confession. . . . The idea of the Reformers that he is referring to the faith of Peter is quite inconceivable. . . . For there is no reference here to the faith of Peter. Rather, the parallelism of “thou art Rock” and “on this rock I will build” shows that the second rock can only be the same as the first. It is thus evident that Jesus is referring to Peter, to whom he has given the name Rock. . . . To this extent Roman Catholic exegesis is right and all Protestant attempts to evade this interpretation are to be rejected.
@Phelebas Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter (Kephas which means a rock) in John 1:42 for a special reason. This reason becomes clear in Matthew 16:18. If you look at the wording of Matthew 16:18; And I tell you that you are Peter (a rock), and on this "rock" I will build My church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I don't see Peter's faith as being referred to by Jesus as the "rock" in this verse, but Peter alone. I realize Protestant's would prefer it to be his faith, but it makes much more sense that it is Peter himself because of the play on words that Jesus uses. I agree with you that all of the Twelve are a foundation, Jesus being the cornerstone. The Catholic church believes in a succession of bishops, if one dies, then another needs to be selected to replace him, on down through history. When you read the NT from Acts onward, you can see that bishops were ordained to oversee certain geographical areas, and it is obvious that this succession would have to continue in order for the church to function according to the way it did during the Apostles lifetimes. Nowhere in Scripture does it say anything about an end to the selection of bishops at some point in time.
@Phelebas quote; You forgot to add that no where does it say Rome has authority above the others. They ordain a bishop for areas where there are churches. You can't expect every last detail of the church's structure to be spelled out in Scripture. There no doubt was some evolution that took place in a growing church, and one of them was that Rome was preeminent among the other churches, and the Bishop of Rome became the head Bishop and supreme pastor of the whole entire church. If you read some of the writings of the early church fathers and councils, you'll see that Rome was the seat of authority and power. quote; I don't think Rome or the Papal seat are above correction or a final authority more important than others. You would need to prove that to me from history. And just because the Orthodox church refused to submit to Rome at some point (late 1st millenium) is not proof of what you are saying. quote; Luther was Catholic and wanted to discuss a corruption he saw in the Catholic Church. The Pope responded with, " my authority is above correction". The fact is, the CC did change some things because of Luther, however, it wasn't done immediately, and by that time the Reformation had already started. quote; I truly feel some of the Catholic practices back then and today are un-biblical. Yes, I understand they are developed based on authority but I feel they have strayed. Such as? PEACE!
The RCC from whatever time, put a curse/ anathema on Believers ie, We who believe we are SAVED by What christ did for us at the cross, the death, the burial, the ressurection and Why he did it/we are sinners and fall short of the glory of God. This the bible calls the gospel and we believe it. This is called Faith. Because of this Faith Im credited with righteousness and have it imputed to me and am no longer under condemnation. According to the RCC Im cursed for this faith because its a faith without works in christ alone that the bible says justifies me. Therefore being justified by faith we have peace with God through our lord Jesus Christ. Therefore this curse on me/us means they DONT believe the gospel( as portrayed above) therefore they are under condemnation and are actually under a curse. The curse of the law. For to redeem/save themselves (to make right) with God they must do it by works. Religious works, sacrements etc and good deeds which of course are filthy rags IF you come this WAY. Christ said I am the WAY, he who believeth in me shall not perish, but have eternal life. Centuries ago i wud have been tortured and murdered for this Faith alone in Christ alone. You see to the RCC and many others Christ is no more than a vehicle or instrument used by God to bring you the Gentile to the God of the jews to Redeem/SAVE( to make right, atone, justify) yourself by WORKS... This way of cain is all you have left...
I wanted to share this RUclips video/testimony with you about this now Christian woman who was Catholic. Amazing testimony that she had died and went to hell and then she cried out to Jesus and he brought her into his presence and what he told her about Mary worship and Catholic doctrine was no surprise. Wow! She's a Colombian woman she's wearing a purple blouse I couldn't copy the link so this is the title that it's under: "She died, went to hell and heaven, then woke up at the morgue - Christian testimony." Enjoy!
Hi Fred, can you please explain what the point of “peters primacy” was? The RCC obviously says “well to be the pope of the Roman Catholic Church !” But we know this is not true. On the other hand, we know Peter was indeed distinctive from other disciples in the NT. A lot of Protestants agree Peter had a unique and important role, perhaps first among equals- but not in the way Catholics say. So, could you answer in your wisdom, what the point of Peter’s elevation WAS then? If it wasn’t for the purpose of successors and a hierarchy in the church bishops, then what was his primacy for? Genuinely wondering.
Peter was central in the early spread of the gospel the teaching of but Scripture nowhere teaches that Peter was in authority over the other apostles, or over the church (having primacy). See Acts 15:1-23; Galatians 2:1-14; and 1 Peter 5:1-5. Scripture shows that Peter’s authority was shared by the other apostles (Ephesians 2:19-20), and the “loosing and binding” authority attributed to him was likewise shared by the local churches, not just their church leaders (see Matthew 18:15-19; 1 Corinthians 5:1-13; 2 Corinthians 13:10; Titus 2:15; 3:10-11). Remember that the Apostle Paul had to rebuke Peter for adding works to the gospel because he was afraid of the Jews. A serious error that Peter repented of. Overall, Peter went primarily to the Jews and Paul went primarily to the Gentiles. If anything, Paul had a greater influence. They were all equal fellow servants of the Lord.
Fred, you have honorable mention in a book I just read by Gabriel Shepherd. The book is called "Rescue Guide For The Salvation of Roman Catholics" kind of lenghty title but boy what a terrific book. I was spellbound thoughout. The author totally agrees with your teachings. check it out.
It's simply amazes me that Catholics can hear all this information and still refute actual biblical truth they would rather believe the tradition of the fathers of the church or leading them astray, then to believe the truth.! I suppose more and more, and believing that predestination was ordained, people just will not listen. They are, blind to the truth and hardened, but I believe God gives everyone a choice. But they just choose to not hear the way pharoah listen. Thus, God hardens their hearts further because they will not accept the truth.
First understand that the word used for kingdom can also mean "royal majesty or regal splendor" I believe that Christ was referring to His transfiguration that was seen by Peter, James and John which happened six days after this statement. See Mt. 17:1.
Thank you Fred for your Biblical and rational approach to this topic. I’ve always had a gut feeling that Roman Catholic Doctrine was overly complex and unbiblical, and it relies heavily on excluding the average person from making reasonable inquiry into the authority of those teaching this as doctrine. I think that the words of Jesus are quite appropriate when He says, “in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” (Matt. 15:9)
Why does the apostle John use the Aramaic word for rock and not pebble or small stone when referencing Peter? Because Simon’s name was changed to Peter Matthew wasn’t going to use a feminine word for a male. He was simply using good Greek grammar.
James was the first Bishop of Jerusalem from what it looks like in Acts. Apostle Peter was 1st in Apostles but Acts 15 shows Apostle James brother of the Lord as bishop or Pastor of the first church in Jerusalem. Acts 16 says the Jerusalem church was the head of all other churches where instruction came out of.
When Protestants claim that the Catholic Church is not the Church that Jesus founded, I ask them to show me the Church that Jesus founded. So far no Protestant is able to show me where we can find the Church that Jesus founded more than 2000 years ago. Can Dr. Fred show me?
@@hannahs4779 Ok, fine, the church is the body of all believers. How does this church function? Are all believers one in mind and heart? Do they have any leaders like in the early Church? Do these believers believe all that Jesus taught? You are welcome to call the Catholic Church anything you like, but remember from what you say you also reveal what you are, whether you are a true believer in Jesus and whether you are filled with the Holy Spirit. Your mouth speaks what your heart is full of.
You are not looking for a church. You are looking for a denomination. Christ did not start a denomination. He started a body of true born again believers. Denominations are man made, including the Roman Catholic Church. I put the same challenge to you. Give me one verse of scripture where Christ taught He was starting the Roman Catholic Church. Please don't refer to Peter. It was man that made Peter a pope not Christ, Peter or any other Apostle. But then again, you are the person who trusts more in tradition than the Bible. That is why you fail to see the truth.
@@EpiGenosko Jesus promised to found his Church on the rock of Peter (Matthew 16:15-19). This promise of Jesus was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost when the Church was born and its visible leader was Peter. No man made Peter a Pope; it was Jesus who appointed him to be the chief shepherd and steward of the Church. Peter and his successors were called Popes by later Christians. The name Pope is man-made and you are correct, but the office of Peter was not man-made, it was created by Jesus. The Church established by Jesus was later on called Catholic Church in order to distinguish it from heretical groups. Yes, afterwards it was called Roman Catholic Church after the great Schism. Then in the 16th century Protestants broke away from this Church. Can you see the continuity of the Church established by Jesus through apostolic succession? The Roman Catholic Church is not a denomination like the Protestant ones. Only the former can be traced back to the Apostles. All the other breakaway churches and denominations are man-made and have human founders. The Catholic Church has no other founder than Jesus. You may claim that Constantine founded the Catholic Church; yes, many Protestants do that, but any proof or evidence? None. You may describe the Church as a body of born again believers, but the believers you have in mind ought to be born in the Bible way and not according to man’s way. If the Roman Catholic Church is not the Church founded by Jesus, please show me what happened to the Church founded by Jesus. If you claim that wherever there are born again believers, there the true Church is, please tell me how these believers become born again, who is their founder, whose Bible do they follow? Do these believers believe in one baptism, one faith, one Lord, one Church? I follow the Bible along with the Catholic traditions. In fact, the Catholic Church is more faithful to the Bible than you or your Protestant brethren. You are making a mockery of the Word of God with your free-for-all interpretations. Your distortion of the Bible has resulted in more than 40000 Protestant denominations and sects and cults. And you are talking about Jesus starting a body of born again believers. Where are these believers, please? Do they believe and understand Matthew 16:15-19?
I'm sorry but Jesus and Peter spoke Aremaic and Jesus called him Cephus (rock) in Aremaic now to see Peter and the other Apostles in their roles as church leaders with Authority you have to really just read Act 15. Which was the 1st church council in Jerusalem with James as the Bishop and Peter making and summing up the argument or the debates and making the Descision for the church as the spirit lead him. Finally you will not see any reference to a papacy in the New Testament out right, but in Isaiah ch. 22 you would see the structure of the Davidic Kingdom after which the church is to be fashioned the King always had a prime minister with Keys to open and shut and to lock and unlock the keys where the sign of the Prime Minister's Authority and that is demonstrated in Isaiah ch. 22. As Cardinal Newman once wrote on the development of doctrine all of these things didn't happen in one period of time but they developed over time so I hope that that helps your viewers.
I love how you love the word of god and look to the bible not the word of the church ,we need more teachers like you.the world needs to know the truth .and ask jesus to open our eyes and ears .and know we will go to heaven , thankyou so much for your teaching about jesus and his words.
1) Peter is the ONLY man in the NT to receive a new name by God. 2) Strong's Concordance states that Peter means rock. 3) Study the OT on new names and see the Biblical significance of God given new names. When God gives a person a new name in the OT He is giving them a new and significant mission. Jesus grafted Peter into Himself as the rock upon which Jesus would build His church. 4) Jesus is the Cornerstone Rock of the church, however Jesus is naming Peter, which means Rock, to lead the church AFTER the death and resurrection of Jesus. Jesus said to Peter... Feed my Lambs Tend to my Sheep Feed my Sheep Jesus is giving Peter his new mission. Jesus is naming Peter as the Shepherd of the Church on which He will build His Church.
Very interesting point. However, you are either 100% sure that you will be accepted by God in heaven or on your way to be 100% sure which one are you? To prove your point you should actually read the book "Rome has spoken" by two nuns Maureen Fiedler and Linda Rabben both PhDs. Also kindly Read; Acts 4 vers 12; John 1 vers 12 and 3 vers 16 then 1 John 1 vers 8+9. Rom 3 vers 23 to the end and Rom 10 vers 9+10 be blessed brother Martin Christopher Pretorius
Ryan McCoy God didn't change Saul's name to Paul... He had two names (Saul is Hebrew since his mother was Jewish and Paul is Latin due to his father being a Roman citizen)
Fun facts about the Catholic Church that we don't hear about: The title Roman Catholic Church is msleading. There are actually 24 individual autonomous churches making up the Catholic Church. These churches are sometimes referred to as Rites having to do with their liturgical worship. (think of that as a Protestant service:). I like to think of them as 24 churches grouped under 6 Rites: Roman Rite Alexandrian Rite Armenian Rite Byzantine Rite East Syriac Rite West Syriac Rite The Roman Rite is the only Western Rite Catholic Church. The Eastern Catholic Churches, listed below, are generally grouped in their five Rites or liturgical traditions. One of the Rites uses interchangeable titles which I don't recall: I. Alexandrian Rite, originating in Egypt: Coptic Catholic Church Eritrean Catholic Church Ethiopian Catholic Church II. Antiochian Rite, originating in Antioch and West Syria: Maronite Church Syrian Catholic Church Syro-Malankara Catholic Church III. Armenian Rite: Armenian Catholic Church IV. Chaldean or East Syrian Rite, originating in Mesopotamia: Chaldean Catholic Church Syro-Malabar Church V. Byzantine or Constantinopolitan Rite, originating in Constantinople: Albanian Catholic Church Belarusian Catholic Church Bulgarian Catholic Church Croatian Byzantine Catholic Church or Croatian Greek Catholic Church Greek Catholic Church Hungarian Catholic Church Italo-Albanian Catholic Church Macedonian Catholic Church Melkite Greek Catholic Church Romanian Church United with Rome Russian Catholic Church Ruthenian Catholic Church Slovak Catholic Church Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church Some differences between the Roman Rite Catholic Church and the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches. Easter Catholics: Do the sign of the cross backwards from the Roman Rite. They wear breads and They can all marry. The priest might hold a cross during service. They use icons (paintings) in place of statues. They use a Prayer rope in place of a Rosary. The consecrate the Eucharist behind an icon wall. They baptize, confirm & give Eucharist to infants at one time. They call the Sacraments.... Mysteries. They had no connection to or affect from the Reformation. Similarities between East and West: They all wear funny looking clothes (Vestments). They all use incense (see Malachi 1:11). They were all established by an Apostle or their successors. They are all in union with the Pope in Rome. They cannot remarry after spouse's death. Some Roman Rite priests are allowed to be married. God's blessings to Free and all his viewers.
I've heard this aurgument but I have to say you gotta study more Dr. “In Greek, the word for rock is petra, which means a large, massive stone. The word used for Simon’s new name is different; it’s Petros, which means a little stone, a pebble.” In reality, what you're saying is false. As Greek scholars-even non-Catholic ones-admit, the words petros and petra were synonyms in first century Greek. They meant “small stone” and “large rock” in some ancient Greek poetry, centuries before the time of Christ, but that distinction had disappeared from the language by the time Matthew’s Gospel was rendered in Greek. The difference in meaning can only be found in Attic Greek, but the New Testament was written in Koine Greek-an entirely different dialect. In Koine Greek, both petros and petra simply meant “rock.” If Jesus had wanted to call Simon a small stone, the Greek lithos would have been used. The missionary’s argument didn’t work and showed a faulty knowledge of Greek. (For an Evangelical Protestant Greek scholar’s admission of this, see D. A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984], Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., 8:368 Many, if not most of them, knew Greek, of course, because Greek was the lingua franca of the Mediterranean world. It was the language of culture and commerce; and most of the books of the New Testament were written in it, because they were written not just for Christians in Palestine but also for Christians in places such as Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, places where Aramaic wasn’t the spoken language. “I say most of the New Testament was written in Greek, but not all. Many hold that Matthew was written in Aramaic-we know this from records kept by Eusebius of Caesarea-but it was translated into Greek early on, perhaps by Matthew himself. In any case the Aramaic original is lost (as are all the originals of the New Testament books), so all we have today is the Greek.” “We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic because some of his words are preserved for us in the Gospels. Look at Matthew 27:46, where he says from the cross, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ That isn’t Greek; it’s Aramaic, and it means, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ “What’s more,” I said, “in Paul’s epistles-four times in Galatians and four times in 1 Corinthians-we have the Aramaic form of Simon’s new name preserved for us. In our English Bibles it comes out as Cephas. That isn’t Greek. That’s a transliteration of the Aramaic word Kepha (rendered as Kephas in its Hellenistic form). “And what does Kepha mean? It means a rock, the same as petra. It doesn’t mean a little stone or a pebble. What Jesus said to Simon in Matthew 16:18 was this: ‘You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my Church.’ “When you understand what the Aramaic says, you see that Jesus was equating Simon and the rock; he wasn’t contrasting them. We see this vividly in some modern English translations, which render the verse this way: ‘You are Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church.’ In French one word, pierre, has always been used both for Simon’s new name and for the rock. To say that Jesus is downplaying Peter flies in the face of the context. Jesus is installing Peter as a form of chief steward or prime minister under the King of Kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom. As can be seen in Isaiah 22:22, kings in the Old Testament appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatim from this passage in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. He is raising Peter up as a father figure to the household of faith (Isa. 22:21), to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17). This authority of the prime minister under the king was passed on from one man to another down through the ages by the giving of the keys, which were worn on the shoulder as a sign of authority. Likewise, the authority of Peter has been passed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy.”
I am also an ex-Catholic who believed blindly in the teachings...then one day I woke up. I agree with all he has said so far. The Papacy is not inerrant...only God is. They (Catholic priests) openly defy Jesus' own teachings by being called, "Father," when Jesus said, bluntly, " 9. And call no one your father on earth, for you have one Father--the one in heaven." (Matthew 23:9, NRSV)
Hello my friend. My name is Will. Was wondering if I can ask you've question? I'm been witnessing To a man at work who is a very deceived diehard Catholic. I been a Christian for a long time and I know what the kjv of the Bible says and what it does not say. That conveyed, the past 5 months or so I've been diving headlong into the Catholic teachings, ect. Furthermore, I even bought this man where I work a kjv so that he can read, because we know that the Catholic Bible the Commandments are all messed up and also have the Apocrypha which is not the inspired word of God. In trying to defend his false doctrine,, he keeps telling that Catholics were around before the Bible even came out. What your take on how to counter this excuse every time? I have pointed scripture out to home clearly several times and he refuses to see the Bible for what ibis and what it plainly teaches. Looking for your feedback. Thanks
The Roman Catholic Church did not formally exist until 300 AD. That is long after the Bible was written. Plus the Bible was not written by Catholics. Most of their teaching comes from their made up traditions not the Word of God. But little of this will make a difference. Your friend's loyalty is to the Catholic Church and not the Bible. He will not see the truth until he is willing to ask God to show him the truth. Until then he will blindly defend the Catholic Church regardless of what you tell him. He most likely sees you as a "Protestant" which makes you an enemy of the Catholic Church. Keep praying that God will open his eyes.
If I hated Catholics then I would say nothing and simply leave them to their false beliefs. Please don't make accusations without giving facts - What lies have I told?
@@EpiGenosko How do you know their beliefs are false. Do you have all the truths and all the Catholics have are false? The Bible says Jesus is the truth, ... not the Catholics, ... not you.
@Ray Brower To understand their beliefs match up with scripture or not, you should really understand what they believe and what the scripture command you to do. Otherwise what right or what truth the non-catholic have to attack other's belief. Why don't they just stop attacking other's belief and focus only preaching what they believe regardless they are heretic or not? There are many out there who don't know Christ yet. Focus preaching to them. Imitate Pope Francis. Love others regardless different belief or even the enemy. It's only God that will be able to convert someone to true faith. All we have to do is only to love others as Jesus has loved us.
Lamkupar Shangdiar The church is the mystical Body of Christ. He knows his own. Those who are called according to his word are the church. Arguing about when human institutions which refer to themselves as churches started is a red herring, irrelevant.
His name is Chris Murphy. Please pray in agreement with me that the Lord will OPEN up his eyes and the scales will fall off. That's his only hope - that the holy Spirit "himself" will take the time to open his eyes.
@@TheJeanette53 yes he has his Catholic Bible. But about a month ago I went to I believe it was Barnes and Nobles here where I live in the Westfarms Mall there's a book store bought them King James Bible it's a real nice one really nice it's extra big letters so we can read it that all the last time the rest of his life. I also gave him my Strong's Concordance Hebrew / Greek dictionary so we can look up words in the Hebrew and Greek. I showed him how to use it. I opened the word to him I sat down with them for like 2 hours a while back and I try to explain to him. I see him like three times a week so I talked to him pretty often. the last five months I've been telling him about the Lord and the discrepancies in the Catholic beliefs but he's not seeing it he keeps adding to God scripture about Mary and he says he's going to stick with Mary cuz she's really nice and she's the mother of God. I went over scripture with him and I keep telling him over and over again he won't listen to me I tried giving him some liked tracks Christian tracks and he says his church won't allow him to read it but keeps throwing them out but he doesn't know that's going to save his life he just refuses stubborn
Gerard - Scripturally there is one universal church that is made up of every true born again Christian. We have local churches that may adopt a name to identify their local congregation. e.g. Grace Bible Church, Family Worship Church, etc. etc. Denominations started at different times as man started to make his own rules and beliefs - Baptist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Roman Catholic, Episcopalian, etc. There is no one universal denomination started by Jesus Christ.
How can u explain and guarantee that the holy spirit spoke to you after you based in one bible (protestant bible), but ended up different doctrines compare to other sect? So we are now have more than 40 thousands christian denominations and counting. Justify please
Wow. Thank you so much. I been a Christian for almost 4 decades but do appreciate a good teaching on Catholicism. So that I can answer when the time comes or when I feel totally equipped. Thank you so much for your clear teaching.
please be steadfast, don't get weary, I know every time you explain to one you have to explain it again to another, and it can get to be wearisome,however for the human soul it IS worth pouring ALL your strength and ALL your soul into this very very urgent NEED. Its the Up most for HIS HIGHEST
Peter didn’t just say get up, I am just a man but he also literally picked Cornelius up as the text says. This suggests Peter felt very uncomfortable with that. 🤓
Was Peter the rock Jesus was referring to? I’m not catholic, but if he wasn’t the rock, why did Jesus himself change Peters name from Simon to Peter (meaning rock)? Why would he change his name to “rock” and from then on have everyone call him “rock” if Jesus was referring to himself as the rock? Sorry that doesn’t make sense.
He changed his name to "a small stone" The Rock was the profession that Peter just made that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Scripture refers to Jesus as the Rock numerous times. Even Peter called Jesus the Rock. Even if Perter was the rock (which he was not) there is nothing in scriptures that teaches that Peter was a pope or the church was Roman Catholic. They just made it up.
Fred Tarsitano God always changed names when something important was happening. Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel, etc. I don’t see that being too hard to believe, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic and probably used the name Cephas. I don’t think your argument is worthy of a name change and Jesus definitely changed his name to Cephas/Peter. Also, you say “they made it up”, why would someone do that? What is the reasoning behind the deception?
@@EpiGenosko Fake News. Greek scholars-even non-Catholic ones-admit, the words petros and petra were synonyms in first century Greek. They meant "small stone" and "large rock" in some ancient Greek poetry, centuries before the time of Christ, but that distinction had disappeared from the language by the time Matthew’s Gospel was rendered in Greek. The difference in meaning can only be found in Attic Greek, but the New Testament was written in Koine Greek-an entirely different dialect. In Koine Greek, both petros andpetra simply meant "rock." If Jesus had wanted to call Simon a small stone, the Greek lithos would have been used. You demonstrate a faulty knowledge of Greek. (For an Evangelical Protestant Greek scholar’s admission of this, see D. A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984], Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., 8:368).
@@simonocarroll Catholics build an entire religious system on the interpretation of one word. They say Peter is the rock Christ built His church on and from there they try to justify all of the unbiblical teachings of Catholicism. Think This Through 1. Scripture clearly refers to Jesus Christ as the Rock. Peter referred to Christ as the Rock. The apostles referred to Christ as the Rock. Do you really believe Christ would build His church on a man and not on Himself. 2. If Peter is the rock, that does not mean he was a pope. The scriptures say nothing about Peter or anyone else being a pope or being infallible. 3. If Peter is the rock of the church and was the first infallible pope, why did the Apostle Paul have to publicly rebuke Peter for preaching a false gospel. Peter was putting people back under the law in order to receive salvation 4. If Peter is building Christ’s Church the Scriptures say nothing about that church being the Roman Catholic Church. The RCC did not come on the scene for until over 300 years later. 5. Catholicism is built on assumptions and false traditions invented by the Catholic church and accepted as gospel 6. As long as a Roman Catholic is more interested in blindly defending their church as opposed to seeking the truth of the Scriptures, these things will mean nothing to them and sadly they will never come to a knowledge of the truth. I know - I have been there - Fred
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
OUR LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST IS THE ROCK EVERYTHING ELSE IS BUILT ON SAND
Quicksand I might add
True Jesus is the true rock but he built his church on petros or Peter which He himself called a rock too. Maybe we can say the earthly rock. Not my words on Matthew 16:18-19 bro. I guess no conflict there, you protestants just create them.
@@gracianomendoza8671 The RCC created traditions not in the Bible.
@@geedfaith 2Thessalonians 2:15 I think. Read it. Doesn't matter Luke 10:16, they have the authority, Mt 16:18-19
@@gracianomendoza8671 What are you saying? I have no issues with the traditions the apostles learned from Jesus and taught. Catholic ones are not the ones talked about here and Catholics know that. The catechism is full of additions not found in Holy Scriptures and they are not holy nor in the plan of salvation. They are contrived of man. Even the mass has no basis in the Bible, though I know exactly where you will send me next.
Jesus is the only ROCK, no matter that Simon's name was changed to Peter. Look at the verse above. It was the fact that God the Father in heaven, by his Spirit influenced Peter to say what he did and God is the only Rock. Both the Father and Jesus are known as "the" Rock. They are the same person, another controversy with trinitarians. See Ephesians 2:20 for the real foundation of the church.
You believe there are priestly sacrifices in the N.T. There are no priests in the N.T. The offices of the church are prophets, apostles, bishops (who are "overseers") evangelists, pastors, teachers, elders and deacons. No mention of priests. No pope, no hierarchy. All made up. Compare your catechism to the Bible and you should want to leave the RCC. Be blessed in your search for truth.
“Jesus told him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.”
John 14:6 NLT
So what. That does not contradict Catholicism in any way.
You Protestant Bible-thumpers are so funny ...... Did you even know that your precious chapters & verses didn't even exist until more than a thousand years after Christ?!
Also, King David acknowledges the Lord as his rock in *Psalm 18:2*
_2 The LORD is my rock, my fortress, and my deliverer. My God is my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold._
Harold McBroom King David never heard of Peter bro. You cannot peat that Psalm AGAINST Matt 16:18. Again you protestants love to do that.
@@gracianomendoza8671 King David served the One True God, of Whom said, that King David was a man after His Own Heart, and HAVING God, as well, he had the Son, though the New Covenant did not take effect until after the death of Christ, King Solomon was under the Old Covenant.
The Old Testament speaks of the New Testament, and the coming of Christ.
Jesus did not come to abolish the Old Law, but to fulfill it, and to say that King David did not known Peter, is irrelevant, because Peter is not the center of focus, but God the Father, and His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, of Whom which brings all Believers together throughout all ages past, that we may be with Christ where He is Presently.
What IS relevant, is that King David Knew God, not Peter. And what is just as important is that the Roman Catholic Church know God, through His Son, and not to permeate their beliefs on what Christ said Peter, but more so on what Christ is saying to ALL of us.
Jesus said, "Upon this Rock I will build My Church", upon this "Rock" that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead you shall be saved, thus the Word is preserved from death, by the Father, not in the Written Letter, but there within our hearts, where the True Church is, and the True Believers.
it is through Jesus alone, that we find our Salvation, not Peter, nor through the Roman Catholic Church.
Jesus said "I will Build My Church", not Peter. There are only 12 Apostles of the Lamb of which are the only "Apostles" recognized with concern to the New Jerusalem:
Revelation 21:14 (NKJV)
"14 Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb."
The Word of God does not recognize, neither in the past, nor in those things which are to come, as is evident in the above scripture, the Catholic Church's "Apostolic Succession", of which they admit themselves, that they are not "Apostles", but Bishops of Rome appointed to the man-made office.
The Catholic Church believes itself to be the True Faith, the True Christians, and the True "Spiritual" Chosen of God. Where the church is in great error is this, that the Bible says "Many are called, but few are Chosen!", which is to imply that one can not be Called (Christian), and Chosen (Jew) simultaneously.
This is why the Bible says, "I became AS a Jew to win the Jew to Christ", ..."AS" a Jew is not the same as "TO BE" a JEW, keeping in mind that it is not a name, nor genealogies that determine who a Jew is, and is not, but whether he who is a Jew, Chosen by God, has been circumcised inwards of the heart, not outwards in appearance.
Man can not determine for himself whether he will be Chosen, or Called, this is by God's Will, that is why they are called "God's" Chosen, becaue they are Chosen BY God, and not by man.
@@haroldmcbroom7807 no conflict there. Read it again. Matthew 16:18-19 are not my words but Jesus'. I suppose He referred to Peter there as the rock, coz as I emphasized in many of people who has your views before, Jesus cpuld not have given that keys of the kingdom to Himself bro. Simply put yes He is the true rock but then there He pointed to Peter as the small rock or earthly rock whom He trusted His ONE church with. And with that ANY OTHER church founded will truly be a bogus church.
@@gracianomendoza8671 If God is the "rock of David, who then is the "rock" of Peter? himself? Did you read the entire message, that talks about the New Jerusalem and the 12 foundations recognizing ONLY 12 Apostles, which destroys the ideal of apostolic succession.
Upon this rock, is not a reference to Peter, but upon a principle, that if you confess with your mouth, and believe in your heart, as did "Peter", then you will be saved, not through Peter, nor the Roman Church, but by God's Grace, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ, and it is upon this "foundation", or "rock" that Jesus is building His Church within our hearts.
Why would Jesus or Peter have the desire to establish the Roman church, both to be crucified on a Roman cross. The entire life of Jesus was spent preaching "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand", not that Christ had any intention of forming a church out of bricks.
Matthew 24:2
"I tell all of you with certainty, there isn't a single stone here that will be left standing on top of another."
So if Jesus didn't come to build a church built from stones, why would he build another of stone.
Kind of reminds me of Ronald Reagan telling Berlin to "Tear down that wall!", only to have Trump build a new one. Talk about hypocrisy at it's finest.
@@gracianomendoza8671 Jesus said my Kingdom is not of this world, why would he establish an Peter as an "earthly rock".
God gave you His Word that you may judge the world by that Word, even the church itself, to ensure that the church stay in conformity to Christ, not the congregation in conformity to the church.
Like Mike Gendron , brother Fred is shining the Light of Christ on the dark teachings of Roman Paganism. ! Thanks for your faithfulness to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. !
Amen!!
Except that his arguments are based on half truths and a poor understanding of catholic teaching.
@@echo88charlie Roman read the Scriptures and Submit to God' s Word and you will see Truth over human traditions and man made doctrines !
@Mike Swilp Except all of those doctrines are derived from what the scripture says. The Catechism explains every single one of these.
@@echo88charliebased on facts
Peter was called to be A leader IN the Church! He was never asked to appoint any predecessor to his leadership. Paul even confronted the issue of followers being divided by who they followed. He made it very clear that they must follow Jesus only!
Amen!!
Mike McGomer That's Very interesting, so how did Peter die? Is it mentioned in the Bible?
Mike McGomer So you don't know where or how he died?
Mike McGomer The Bible doesn't say that he was never in Rome, it doesn't need to explicitly say everything about his where abouts, that's why there's sacred, oral and other written traditions which are not in the Bible referring to the Apostles where abouts and deaths or their mayrtordoms and the ancient writings and oral traditions stare that St Peter was the bishop of both Antioch and Rome where he was crucified upside down by request because he didn't feel worthy enough to be crucified up right like Jesus was, this happened in Rome under the Emperor Nero.
Mike McGomer The Holy Bible will not tell you about everything that happened during salvation/Christian history.
Thanks, Fred. Your series is encouraging. Hoe great to have so many people benefit from your teaching! Just put out info and they will come, no fancy thumbnails or click-bait, just teaching. Glory to God for the gift you have in this area.
Thank you - I appreciate it!!
@@EpiGenosko O.K., so why then do some (many?) evangelical Protestants “convert” to Catholicism?
1) Aesthetic - Many appeal to the experience of being moved by the architecture of RC church structures, the incense, the beauty of liturgy, the mystery, the solemnity, the drama, the vestments of the clergy, the church calendar, the sense of transcendence, religious symbolism, etc.
2) Historical - Some appeal to the belief that the reformation was a rebellion and that Protestantism is a deviation from the historic stream of the true church. They also point to a desire for unity with the past and the appeal of tradition.
3) Theological - Some convert for strictly theological reasons. They insist that sola scriptura, sola fide, etc. are wrong. Many have become persuaded of a sacramental/sacerdotal approach to God’s mechanism for dispensing grace together with a belief that Protestantism is Gnostic and fails to embrace the incarnational principle of scripture.
4) Social - The growing secularization of society, together with the diminishing influence of the evangelical church, have led many to Rome. They often find in the RCC a stabilizing anchor and unified front to fight the battle against the paganizing of culture.
5) Personal - Many Protestants point to their bad experience in the church, often citing an oppressive and legalistic fundamentalism.
(6) Authority - Many appeal to papal infallibility, as over against the theological schisms in Protestantism, that they believe offers a stability in which their souls/minds might find rest in an uncertain and irrational age. In other words, it is the allure of a purported unshakable voice of authority that puts to rest countless and otherwise irresolvable theological disputes that draws so many to Rome. The idea of a Spirit-led, authoritative teaching office, known as the Magisterium, brings a measure of relief to those who’ve grown weary of arguments, debates, and doubts about what the Bible means and how we should live.
(7) Denominational - By this I have in mind the disdain many feel toward the divisions and denominations in Protestantism. They are offended by the obvious disunity that exists and what they perceive as the failure to take seriously the prayer of Jesus in John 17 that we all be one. Needless to say, this wrongly assumes that there is in contemporary Catholicism a monolithic and unified theology, when in fact there are numerous “catholicisms” that often deviate from Rome.
I’
Dear brother Fred , you're doing good work . Keep on going until the end .
Dr. Fred this is from the Philippines, what a very encouraging teachings you have, it is very scriptural, you are a blessing to every catholic believer may we pray that all of your teachings be watched and heard by every catholic who is not born again. Of course, even other people who are searching for truth surely they will be blessed. AMEN!
Amen brother!!! Thanks - Fred
Don't be silly, every Catholic is Baptised, (born again), we eat of his flesh and drink his blood ( Holy communion), laying of hands (Confirmation), we profess the Jesus Christ is our Lord and believe his resurrection. Only Catholic and Orthodox have Apostolic procession the rest have no valid priesthood.
Why do yall in your fake heritical churches not follow all the requirements?
@@anomalousviewer3164 Baptism is not the same as being born again.
@@juanitadudley4788 what does your church teach about it, as in scripture born again refers to baptism.
@@anomalousviewer3164 My church baptizes professing believers by immersion in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Being born again is to take place before baptism.
Dr. Tarsitano, excellent exposition, I have watched, read and compared the scriptures you gave and it is concise to the point and correct according to the Bible! Thank you for opening my eyes., Martin Christopher Pretorius.
Thank you Martin - I appreciate your thoroughness and comments - Fred
Old hymn: on Christ the solid rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand, all other ground is sinking sand..
He (God) is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.- Deuteronomy 32:4; KJV
...and that Rock was Christ.
- 1 Corinthians 10:4; KJV
A Psalm of David
My soul, wait thou only upon God; for my expectation is from him.
He only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved...TRUST IN HIM (God) AT ALL TIMES; ye people, pour out your heart before him: GOD IS A REFUGE FOR US.Selah.- Psalm 62:5-8; KJV
Are you missing a book or two in your Bible?
Amy Morelos Matthew 16:18 not my words but Jesus'. No conflict with that you just create them
Something interesting to think about: If Jesus changed Simon Peter's name to Peter in Matthew 16:18, then how come in John 1:42 upon meeting Simon Peter for the first time Jesus says to him, "you shall be called Cephas (which translated means 'petros'- Peter or a stone)?" Jesus didn't change Peter's name at the confession of calling Jesus "Christ the Son of the Living God" as in Matthew 16:18, but upon first meeting him in John 1:42. Even Koine Greek uses the word "petros" or a stone for Peter's name change in both instances. If Peter is referred to as a stone, then how come Jesus uses a different word "and upon this 'petra'-big rock I will build My church?" Peter cannot be a stone and a big rock at the same time, since by definition they are different.
I would like to add an important commentary. First of all, the Christian faith and the Christian church did not originate in Rome, it first originated in Jerusalem. I understand the early church structure elected an Episcopate (Bishop) as leader of the assembly called the church and James, the brother of Jesus was that first episcopate in the first church at Jerusalem. That would tell me that literally this James was the first elected leader of the first church and possibly be considered the first "pope." But considering the title of pope, which derived it's title with a Latin word meaning "Father" and scripture tells us call no man father but your Father in heaven......James would never be called a pope. Also, one of the titles of the pope is the "Holy Pontiff" more known as the "Pontifix Maximus." The title of pontifix maximus was the title of the pagan priest of Rome's pagan religion....The religion of "Numas" and was the High Priest over the practice of the pagan Vestal Virgins in honor of the goddess Vesta (Greek: Hesta). Why does a Pope of the Christian faith carry the title of a Pagan Priesthood that originated in Rome way before the Christian faith ever became present in Rome? Something to think about!!
Since when did the Catholic Church said they originated from Rome? By the way its Catholic Church as Roman is simply a Rite just as there ither Catholic Churches with other Rites. It just so happens that Bishop of Rome or rather the Pope - resides where Peter died - in Rome. As far as saying we should call anyone Father - is that what he really meant..are you saying I cant call my dad Father? You take ancient writing and make it literal interpretation.
In the parable of the rich man and the beggar, Lazarus, the rich man, cries out from the depths of Hell, “Father Abraham, have pity on me,” and the usage of the title “father” occurs three times (cf. Lk 16:19-31). One has to wonder: if Jesus prohibited the use of the title “father,” why does He instruct the people with a parable in which the characters use the titl. Early Church Father you know those Catholics who canonized the bible - use this term and continued. Jesus never abolished a Rabbi from teaching..please reflect a little deeper as ancientvwrithing and historical tradition will bite you everytime you make a literal interpretation of everything in the bible
Jesus Christ our great and kind God and savior, built His Church on Peter the rock, way before the new testament was even written or its canon later determined. The same Peter who as rock and sole key holder, stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem since Scripture alone could not. As far as call no one Father, Paul says Abraham is our Father in Romans, and Paul says he too is our Father in 1 Corinthian, so holy father is biblical, ca as believers are called both holy, and father as well. You are in my prayers! God bless you!
@@matthewbroderick8756
i believe that the rock was " you are the christ son of the most high God" as for the keys anyone whose bornagain by the spirit has the " keys"
the spirit came and even women and gentiles have him
May the spirit reveal this to you!
@@cedriceric9730 The Holy Spirit has confirmed the Divine Truth that Peter is the rock on whom Jesus Christ our great and kind God and savior, built His Church. In Matthew 16, "upon THIS ", has to refer to the nearest of noun which is Peter, the same Simon renamed rock by Jesus Christ in John 1:42.
In Matthew 16, Simon alone received the keys of the Kingdom from Jesus Christ the true King, just as in Isaiah 22, where the king would appoint one prime minister from among his 12 officers by giving him alone the keys of the kingdom. The same Church authority in Peter that stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem since Scripture alone could not. You are in my prayers! God bless you!
@@matthewbroderick8756
matt 16:16-18. The word for Peter in greek is 'Petros'. If Jesus was talking about the rock Peter He was going to built His church on, the second 'rock' in the verse should be Petros too.
Instead the word is 'Petra'. It is the same word that is used in 1kor 10:4: and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock (Petra) that followed them, and that Rock (Petra) was Christ.
For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
I Corinthians 3:11 NKJV
He is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently against that house, and could not shake it, for it was founded on the rock (Jesus teaching about Himself)
Luke 6:48 NKJV
having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone,
Ephesians 2:20 NKJV
Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus,
Hebrews 3:1 NKJV
Also Peter could not be a pope. He was married (matt 8:14), he didn't speak infallably (matt 16:22-23, gal 2:11-14), Jesus told the disciples to call no one father ( matt 23:8-9), Peter was not discribed/ treated superior or after superior to the other disciples, Paul even corrected him ( 1 pet 5:1, luk 22:24, acts 15:19), Peter declared Jesus as head of the church ( 1 cor 3:11, eph 1:22, 1 Tim 2:5, coll 1:18, eph 5:21, 1 cor 11:3), Peter never went to Rome, Paul did, before 300 AD no letters are found that discribed Peter as head of the church, or the title 'pope' is mentioned.
It is teaching like this this thru the years that holds the RCC accountable in some ways as much as can be. I appreciate this teaching as a former Catholic. I hate to think what would be today without the reformation.
“Mary responded, “Oh, how my soul praises the Lord. How my spirit rejoices in God my Savior! For he took notice of his lowly servant girl, and from now on all generations will call me blessed. For the Mighty One is holy, and he has done great things for me.”
Luke 1:46-49 NLT
Very interesting point. Yes and so are we also blessed when we obey Mary's last recorded word in the Bible. She said whatever Jesus tells you to do do it.
However, you are either 100% sure that you will be accepted by God in heaven or on your way to be 100% sure which one are you? To prove your point you should actually read the book "Rome has spoken" by two nuns Maureen Fiedler and Linda Rabben both PhDs. Also kindly Read; Acts 4 verse 12; John 1 verse 12 and 3 verse 16 then 1 John 1 verse 8+9. Rom 3 verse 23 to the end and Rom 10 vers 9+10 be blessed brother Martin Christopher Pretorius
Show less
REPLY
@@gerdapretorius7653 yes Jesus Christ is The Rock HE was crucified ✝️ for our Sin
Peter told Jesus depart from me Lord a Sinner!
Peter could not even say he Loved Jesus agape but used the lesser philo brotherly love
5 .WHY CATHOLICS BE DO WORSHIP IMAGES???
Catholics do not worship idols or images. Bowing before an image does not mean a Catholic is worshipping that image or picture. If it is the image of Jesus, a Catholic is merely giving honor to Him who is represented by the image or picture. It is like the statues of our national heroes that are honored. It doesn’t mean however that we worship such statues or that we believe them to be the same as the persons and heroes they represent. It is also like the photos of our loved ones we keep in our wallets or put in our walls. They remind us of our loved ones. We even kiss such photos out of love for those whom they represent. We DO NOT love the photos for their own sake. We know that they ARE NOT are families and friends.
EXPLANATION:
1. The first commandment forbids making images or idols that people will serve as gods. Catholics HOWEVER, do not serve images of Jesus or Mary or the saints. They are mere representations that are honored in love and in respect of those whom they represent.
God spoke all these words, saying, “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage
“You shall have no other gods before me.
“You shall not make for yourselves an idol, nor any image of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: you shall not bow yourself down to them, nor serve them, for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and on the fourth generation of those who hate me, and showing loving kindness to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.
-Exodus 20:1-6,
We
Catechism of the Catholic Church states
2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype," and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it." The honor paid to sacred images is a "respectful veneration," not the adoration due to God alone:
Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is. (St. Thomas Aquinas)
2. If it is ABSOLUTELY forbidden to make ANY IMAGES in a literal sense in the Old Testament, why then was the instruction to make several graven images in the form of cherubs, flowers and even of a snake?
The LORD said to Moses, “Make a venomous snake, and set it on a pole. It shall happen, that everyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.” Moses made a serpent of brass, and set it on the pole. If a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked at the serpent of brass, he lived. - Numbers 21:8-9,
You shall make two cherubim of hammered gold. You shall make them at the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub at the one end, and one cherub at the other end. You shall make the cherubim on its two ends of one piece with the mercy seat. The cherubim shall spread out their wings upward, covering the mercy seat with their wings, with their faces towards one another. The faces of the cherubim shall be towards the mercy seat. You shall put the mercy seat on top of the ark, and in the ark you shall put the testimony that I will give you. There I will meet with you, and I will tell you from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which are on the ark of the testimony, all that I command you for the children of Israel. - Exodus 25:18-22,
The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to Aaron, and tell him, ‘When you light the lamps, the seven lamps shall give light in front of the lamp stand.’”
Aaron did so. He lit its lamps to light the area in front of the lamp stand, as the LORD commanded Moses. This was the workmanship of the lamp stand, beaten work of gold. From its base to its flowers, it was beaten work: according to the pattern which the LORD had shown Moses, so he made the lamp stand.
-Numbers 8:1-4,
It is clear that such IMAGES have been allowed because the intention was NOT to worship such images but to serve other purposes e.g. to decorate, to be an instrument of God’s healing
It is very different however when the Israelites made the image of a golden calf to SPECIFICALLY AND INTENTIONALLY WORSHIP IT.
The LORD spoke to Moses, “Go, get down; for your people, who you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves! They have turned away quickly out of the way which I commanded them. They have made themselves a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed to it, and said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, which brought you up out of the land of Egypt.’” - Exodus 32:7-8,
3. When the Lord commanded the Israelites not to make any graven images, it is to help them avoid the temptation of worshipping anything that is not GOD Himself. During that time, God has not yet revealed His image to them. When Jesus came however, the image of God has finally been revealed to men. Thus, when we make statues or pictures depicting Jesus, we are worshipping God Himself. Not that we worship the statue or the picture itself, but the very One whom they depict - Jesus, the very image of God.
Be very careful, for you saw no kind of form on the day that the LORD spoke to you in Horeb out of the middle of the fire, lest you corrupt yourselves, and make yourself a carved image in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female, the likeness of any animal that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged bird that flies in the sky, the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the water under the earth; and lest you lift up your eyes to the sky, and when you see the sun and the moon and the stars, even all the army of the sky, you are drawn away and worship them, and serve them, which the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole sky. - Deuteronomy 4:15-19,
God, having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds. His Son is the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, who, when he had by himself purified us of our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they have. - Hebrews 1:1-4,
NOTE;
More than the literal issue of making a graven image, we should concern ourselves about the true nature of idolatry because idolatry consists of worshipping things other than GOD. When we put other things in our hearts above the importance we are giving to God, we are creating idols for ourselves to worship.
Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
2113 Idolatry not only refers to false pagan worship. It remains a constant temptation to faith. Idolatry consists in divinizing what is not God. Man commits idolatry whenever he honors and reveres a creature in place of God, whether this be gods or demons (for example, satanism), power, pleasure, race, ancestors, the state, money, etc. Jesus says, "You cannot serve God and mammon." Many martyrs died for not adoring "the Beast" refusing even to simulate such worship. Idolatry rejects the unique Lordship of God; it is therefore incompatible with communion with God.
Semantics: Satan's legalism at work in his "church".
I detest commercials, but am glad that you've been monetized. I've been following you for years and have been blessed by your in-context Bible teaching. Keep on doing God's work! 👍
I strongly dislike these commercials as well. I had nothing to do with it. RUclips just started adding them on their own - Ugh!!!
@@EpiGenosko Hopefully, that means you'll be able to collect a buck or two from it.
@@EpiGenosko Actually, I think that if you have more than 1k subscribers (...which you do) and over 100k overall views, RUclips will monetize your channel and compensate you. The commercials are the tripping mechanism. You might also need a PayPal account in order to collect. Check it out and keep up the biblical teaching. :-)
Jesus is the rock the firm foundation of christian faith He is my rock and my salvation
Dear brother Fred, you're work and explanations about the Catholic Church are absolutely tremendous. I appreciate your dedication and research greatly!!!
Thank you!! I praise the Lord He is using these videos to strengthen you in His Word - Fred
Fred Tarsitano , hello. I am as of now, on #8 of your series. I have been very amazed at the truth you are not afraid to speak. I myself believe that the Roman Catholic Church has many “traditions “ that are so untrue to scripture. And that they persecuted many believers in years ago, and we will see that same persecution directed soon, among true believers of ALL of God’s Commandments. They are called and described as the “Antichrist “, in the book of Revelation. Opening up the truth, of God’s Word, as I see you doing so far, it is truth that so many need to hear in today’s time. I am going to finish your series today, and just wanted to let you know that the reverberations of your directing so many towards this truth, will be wonderful! Oh, yes, by the way, I am a Seventh Day Adventist, and feel like you left out important truth in trying to describe our faith. I am not surprised or hurt, just disappointed that your incomplete view was given. God bless your work going forward, now... off to finish your series!
THIS IS GREAT ! THANK YOU !
Amen!!
Is there any Biblical reason to call a Catholic priest Father? Is there any Biblical reason that commands us to confess our sins to another sinner to be forgiven? Is there any Biblical reason for a POPE? Is there any Biblical reason NOT to encourage reading the Holy Bible?
Alfred Doten you are absolutely right friend and I went to a Catholic school but I had enough sense to see through them you don't call nobody father except for your dad and Jesus !!!!
Amen brother! Seek the truth-and the truth will set us free!
Alfred, You asked whether there is any Biblical reason to call a Catholic priest Father. Yes, there is. AFTER Jesus said "Call no man father" the apostles called themselves Fathers. They understood what Jesus meant when He said that. That was an example of a hyperbole. There was a lot of hyperbole used in the Bible. Jesus used hyperbole a lot. He knew that the people of that time would understand it. The apostles understood it, that is why AFTER Jesus said not to call men fathers, they did exactly that, referred to themselves as FATHERS. There is a Biblical basis for confessing sins to priests. After Jesus rose from the dead, He appeared to the apostles. He breathed on them, gave them the Holy Spirit, and said "The sins you forgive will be forgiven, the sins you retain will be retained." Jesus gave them the power....Actually they had no power. The power came from the Holy Spirit, who forgave sins through them. Priests today have the authority....It came from JESUS, who gave the apostles the Holy Spirit....GOD forgives sins, not the priests. Why can't people understand this? The early Christian Church knew about this. The early Church fathers spoke of confessing sins to a priest. No priest in their right mind would say that THEY forgive sins. It is GOD doing the forgiving through the priest, the same as He forgave sins through the apostles. IF you would like the verses, I will be glad to supply them to you. One question that I have of you and others: WHY do people choose to follow that one verse LITERALLY, when they know better...or they should. Not every verse was meant to be taken literally, yet, many choose to follow that verse literally.....It seems to me that the only reason that some choose to follow that verse literally is because it seems to point to the Catholic Church.....Yet, other verses they know better than to follow it literally. Jesus also said to "POKE out an EYE." How many Christians do you know that have followed THAT verse LITERALLY.?" How many ONE-EYED Christians do you see running around that chose to do that? Jesus never meant that it should be followed literally....It meant something. Everything that He said was important, yet, He never meant that people should go out and POKE out one of their eyes. The apostles, the early Church understood when Jesus said to poke out an eye.....and when He said to call No man father...The apostles called themselves Fathers AFTER that. They understand the meaning of the idea of hyperbole...it was used throughout the Bible.
So peggy just What scripture and verse are you quoting to back up your catholic dogma then?
Alfred, You might start by reading I JOHN 2:13-14 where John addresses men in his congregation as FATHERS. John understood that Jesus' command was not to be understood , taken literally. Also, notice that in I CORINTHIANS 4: 14-15, Paul says: "...For I have become your FATHER in Christ through the gospel." I am not sure whether you will be able to pull up this LINK. IF you can't pull it up, Just TYPE IN: CALL NO MAN "Father"-CATHOLIC ANSWERS. www.catholic.com/tract/call-no-man-father Many people focus on ONE word, and ignore the rest. In MATTHEW 23: 9 Jesus does say " ...Call no man Father on earth..." Yet, He also said "But, you are not to be called Rabbi, for you have one TEACHER..." Yet, although Jesus seemed to be prohibiting the use of the word TEACHER ......Look at MATTHEW 28: 19-20 In these verses Jesus APPOINTS certain men to be TEACHERS.....AFTER He said not to...Christ said " ...Go therefore and make disciples of all nations...TEACHING them to observe all that I have commanded you.." (MATTHEW 28:19-20) Paul also spoke of his commission to be a TEACHER in 2 TIMOTHY 1:11 and in I COR. 12: 28 he tells us that "..Some should be first apostles, second prophets, third TEACHERS ( I COR. 12: 28) Jesus said to call no man FATHER...To show the scribes and pharisees how sinful and proud they were for NOT looking humbly to GOD as the source of all authority and FATHERHOOD. The apostles did not do that....they looked at GOD as being the ULTIMATE Authority, and as the FATHER Figure and TEACHER. The scribes and pharisees did not do that. They wanted everyone to look up to them. The apostles didn't do that. The apostles looked UP to God as the Ultimate Father Figure and Teacher. The pharisees and scribes didn't do that. They didn't glorify God like the apostles did. The apostles understood that. They understood what Jesus meant when He said to call No man FATHER, and TEACHER. Yet, AFTER He said not to call anyone Teacher, He commissioned the apostles to be TEACHERS. That was an example of hyperbole....We need to read ALL the words in a verse, not pick one word out and ignore the others. We also need to read ALL the verses....to look forward at other verses. To pick one verse and ignore others really doesn't make much sense. Hopefully you will see that. Hopefully you can pull up the LINK that I provided. If for some reason you can't pull it up , just Type in the TITLE of the article that I provided. I believe the article makes sense. You may not think it does. We can all learn something new. Hopefully you will understand it a little better. Thanks
I always believed that it was Peter's confession, his absolute conviction that Jesus was the one and only Son of the living God, that was "the rock" the church would be built on. I don't consider a church built upon a fallible human to be what God had in mind. If you look at the pagan religious beliefs that existed in Rome before Christianity and mix them in with some Christian doctrine, then you get the Catholic religion.
You are absolutely correct!!!
Jesus Christ our great and kind God and savior, built His Church on Peter the rock, way before the new testament was even written or its canon later determined. The same Peter, who as rock and sole key holder, stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem since Scripture alone could not. In Matthew 16, "Upon THIS", has to refer to the nearest proceeding noun, which is Peter. You are in my prayers! God bless you!
@@matthewbroderick8756 Peter is not an "it" as in "This" rock. Jesus was always the ONLY ROCK. Maybe he pointed to himself for all we know. I hope you consider watching all of Dr. Tarsitano's videos because they are truthful.
@@geedfaith even many Protestant scholars attest that Peter is the rock in Matthew 16 and John 1:42. Jesus says, "thou art Simon, but though shall be called Cephas ". Cephas is Aramaic for rock. Even grammatically speaking, in Matthew 16, "upon THIS ", has to refer to the nearest proceeding noun, which is Peter. This same Peter alone received the keys of the kingdom in Matthew 16. Keys denote authority. See Isaiah 22, where the King would appoint one prime minister from among his twelve officers, by giving him alone the keys of the kingdom. The office of sole key holder is one of succession. This same Church authority in Peter later stood up and put an end to all the debating at the council in Jerusalem, since Scripture alone could not. Whenever the Apostles are mentioned in the Gospels, Peter is always listed as first. You are in my prayers! God bless you!
@@matthewbroderick8756 We will have a friendly disagreement.
I feel sorry for all the blind Catholics, I hope they wake up.
Revelation 1:4-18, to the churches in Asia, not rome: the church was formed by Christ in Judah, which is in Asia, not in rome which is not in Asia but in Europe.. the first church came out of Jerusalem, then spread throughout by the apostles who were jews, not gentiles.. Paul went to some of the different churches but wrote epistles to 7 of them: on some of Paul's journey's, he went to, Greece and Rome, where him and Peter were eventually crucified.. revelation 1 does not mention Rome as being the first church, as the catholic church claims it happened that there were those that belonged to the church that preached there after the church was formed, so, how could that be the first church? I wonder how it's possible to be born in two places at the same time, and be one?
Fantastic series! The LORD will liberate many through you and the series of videos you have made. Many will be saved through your testimony, research, and obedience to Christ. Thank you brother.
Thank you - And I pray that you are right - Amen!! - Fred
The narrow path leads to the Narrow Gate which is one Church wide. The wide path is wide indeed. It is 40,000 and growing Protestant denominations and cults wide.
ONE GOD
ONE CHRIST
ONE BIBLE
40,000 and growing denominations and cults.
The Reformation is Satan's Greatest Victory: ruclips.net/video/UfOCqTfPXbQ/видео.html
Hi Fred , watched your series of 9, it says it all . May you continue to bring more people to Jesus Christ our lord and savior . May I kmow which church you belong ? Keep up the good work Fred . Thanks !
I attend an independent Bible preaching church - Grace Bible Church
It’s really obvious that the Lord was talking about himself John 14:6 KJV
6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
If we built our faith on man how on earth do we get to the Father .
When we stand before the Lord one day religion , be it catholic or Protestant won’t be taken into account , it will be the Holy Spirit within us that makes us alive in Christ Jesus which we obtain through faith .You cannot work for sanctification its a gift 🎁 through faith , it cannot be found in a building or a religion but through the power of Holy Spirit.
"What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, and one of you says to them, 'Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well, ' but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it? So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead." James 2:14-17
I wish you God's blessings.
I keep you in prayer. 🙏
A Roman Catholic.
So thankful for your teachings!!!
Thank you!!
thank you, brother. it is all about control. thank you for giving us the Truth ... and once again, the answer is Jesus. who the Son makes free is FREE INDEED. how do i know? ha. ask me.......
And Protestants love control.
@@George040270 No protestants love truth and worship Jesus alone. I'm a Christian by the way. Eternity is a long time to cling to this apostate religion. #Matthew715 #falseprophets
It blows me away… If you listen to the book of first Peter, in the second chapter read carefully what he says he says that we are stones of the living stone, which is Christ. In other words we are the Petros the small stones, including PETER. And Jesus is the Petra the foundation stone. PETER himself is explaining this in first Peter starting with chapter 2. Better yet, listen to the audio version without music and listen carefully Peter his self is explaining how we are part of the foundation of the church, the rock. There is somebody online that has a challenge called the zell challenge. I encourage true Christians to answer this to him. He says and leaves blank certain spaces that say who is the foundation and instruction for salvation of course it's the church it says in the Bible and the tradition of the church, but the tradition, must coincide with the original tradition of not what you make up called tradition, man-made tradition
Your intro music is to loud. I listen with AirPods and I get blasted first thing.
I am enjoying watching your videos. They are very helpful to me. I have been trying to talk to some Catholics but their hearts are hardened. One verse that I like to use is from Romans 2:16. It states with Paul speaking "In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel". Not Peter. Blessings to you!
Keep praying for them to look for truth. Only then will they be willing to listen to the Word of God - Fred
As a famous theologian ones said "Each time the Apostle Paul is rediscovered, The Church is reborn". He is the exclusive revelator of the gospel of Jesus Christ to The Church particularly to the 'gentiles'. We can only be saved by his gospel.
And Muslims hate Paul so much
What is the name of the book you mintioned and the author who is a former RC Ptiest?
Sounds like the guy over here that I'm attempting to minister to for the past 3 months. He keeps making excuses and adding to the Bible things that are not there. I don't even tell him much anymore like I used to because it's like bringing a horse to water... And you know the rest. It can be tiring. If a person is not careful, it can turn into like casting your pearls before swine, so to speak. I pray for him daily. I've even given him information that I downloaded and printed out on the false doctrines of the Catholic church. And he threw it out. He blatantly refuses to see the TRUTH. IDK.
Maybe try the way of the master: ruclips.net/video/m5tQKwYwSrA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/uL3Wsu3VeiQ/видео.html
If (1) Peter was the first pope, and (2) a pope is infallible, the why (3) did Paul need to correct Peter on being a Judaizer?
Dear brother Fred . I also believe in the King James version of the Holy Scriptures . What ever happened to preachers ? They are using other bibles with other words that are somewhat confusing to the believers . Keep up the good work . The Lord needs more people like you to open the eyes of the blind . May the Lord use you mightily . Amen
Thanks for giving your insights into the scriptures, Your words have been very helpful to me.
Jesus loves Catholics and all sinners and does not want anyone to be lost John 3 vers 16
Gerda Pretorius what about ROMANS 9:13,”JACOB I HAVE LOVED,AND ESAU HAVE I HATED”
EXODUS 20:4,”THOU SHALT NOT MAKE UNTO THEE ANY IMAGE OF ANYTHING IN HEAVEN,OR ON THE EARTH,OR IN THE WATER UNDER THE EARTH,THOU SHALT NOT BOW DOWN TO THEM OR SERVE THEM,FOR I AM A JEALOUS GOD VISITING INIQUITY ON THEM THAT DO TO THE THIRD AND FOURTH GENERATION”
THERE GOES YOUR JESUS LOVES CATHOLICS THEORY.
Jesus may not wish that any be lost, but he knows that some will be. Otherwise, everything else he said, and everything in the letter of Paul to the Romans is invalid.
Lots to think about. Amazing we are still talking about Jesus after all these years. :-)
thanks so much its make everything clear for me now. many peoples here in my country said Christian n catholic is just the same. inside my heart i always doubt that since just like u said so many contradiction with The Scriptures. Jesus bless you.
I am glad that the Lord is showing His truth to you. May the Lord continue to bless you - Fred
I like your videos Fred, one thing I notice people are missing is not knowing the heart of the Father, The Lord would never put fallen flesh in leadership of the entire body of Christ, he never wanted Israel to have a fleshly king and he would never do the same for his body, Jesus is truly the head of the church!
He understood it literally
Thank you, now I feel like I have some valid points to make when getting into this with my husband.
Amen!!!
I even let that man the guy that I've been ministering to that Catholic I even let him watch the video and he refused to believe it but I hope he never forgets it. Amen
Don't go by what it looks like. I dealt with a brother who was a strong Jehovah's Witness and he was sooooooo strong, one night, in a debate, I saw that he was set in cement and was positive that I would never make an effect. I had given up completely forever. But less than two weeks later, he told me he had left the cult and it was because of a little thing I said about the unpardonable sin. So looks (behavior) can be deceiving. I made a huge dent after I was SURE he would stay in his cult forever. God works in mysterious way. So, be encouraged! Your work with him was anointed. I have a guy like this too but not as obstinate as your guy. Dr. Tarsitano's videos are great tools. Be blessed!
Hi Dr. Fred, I am a Cree survivor of what they done up here in Canada. Through this experience I hated God and wanted nothing to do with this “white God” but Our Lord Jesus Christ had other plans. In our small First Nations community I confront these priests to tell the truth and from the Word of God and I find it rather ironic, they never send a white priest but rather black priests whom I tell the truth too…one black priest told me I was a wise man, I told him I am not wise.. read the Word of God, that’s where wisdom, knowledge and a relationship with Jesus Christ comes from. Sadly, many Elders cling to their false teachings even after their school experiences. Enjoyed your video👍🏽
Thank you for sharing, I have seen this for years, but my family our devout and blind.
Dr. Tarsitano,
Is there a way to contact you besides RUclips?
If you wear different colored button downs for each series of talks, it will be easy for those of us down loading random lectures and putting them in order later.
What do make of Marian apparitions?
Thanks for all you do.
BJP-G
Dr. Gonzalez - My videos are grouped together by subjects in what You Tube calls Playlists. They make it easy to find all of my videos. A short answer to your question on apparitions is 1. Many of them are false emotionalism enduced by people who "need a sign" 2. I believe some are demonic deceptions sent to mislead people and strengthen their belief in a false religion. 3. They are not sent from Heaven because what they proclaim is not biblical. 4. You can email me directly at fdj@comcast.net - Hope this helps - Fred
@@EpiGenosko You rock. Thanks so much.
@@EpiGenosko P.S. Thanks for the tip. I'm kind of an IT idiot - just learned yesterday what a podcast is. Too much time in chem lab in college, I guess ... . Sorry!
Thank you Fred , I’m catholic and I agree with what you’re saying , my uncle turned Christian and he was also catholic and I’m considering turning Christian
I assume by "turning Christian" you mean personally trusting in and accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior. Do it my friend - Do it!!! - Fred
@@EpiGenosko Yes indeed , I want to accept Jesus as my savior , and thank you so much for the videos you make , they really help , God bless you Fred !
@@Sebastian-jx2jl You said that you want to accept Jesus as your Savior. Have you done so???
Research catholic teaching. There can only be one true church. Prior to 1516 if you were Christian you were catholic. None of the churches created after the 1500’s can be the true church.
I sincerely hope you made that profession of faith and are born again❣️
@Dr.Fred. could you tell me where I can find approximately who originated & Genesis of the catholic mass. I believe it was pope inocent the 3rd who declared
transubstantiation. Thanks
Ewald - The following is from Loraine Boettner in his book Roman Catholicism. "In view of the prominent place given the mass in the present day Roman Church, it is of particular interest to find that it was unknown in the early church, that it was first proposed by a Benedictine monk, Radbertus, in the ninth century, and that it did not become an official part of Romanist doctrine until so pronounced by the Lateran Council of 1215 under the direction of pope Innocent III. It was reaffirmed by the Council of Trent in 1545. Transubstantiation is not mentioned in the Apostles' Creed or in the Nicene or Athanasian creeds. Its first creedal mention is by pope Pius IV, in the year 1564." Hope this helps - Fred
@@EpiGenosko. Thanks 4 getting
back 2 me. I really appreciate u & your research & videos. I get a lot from them & have suggested others view. Thank u so much & God bless
Truly amazing insights and teaching! God bless!
Les feldick
Beautiful Explanation Thanks Sir
Thanks!!
Acts 1 establishes apostolic succession as an apostle having followed Jesus in His ministry. Last I checked, no one alive today walked with Christ. This makes the catholic church invalid.
The scary thing is that the popes equate themselves equal to God. "I can do all that God can do - what therefore can you make of me but God?" . Sad.
Immanuel did tell people that some of them standing will see His 2nd coming but I could be wrong idk.
@@watchgoose can't find that quote. Link?
Well I can't say that's necessarily a debunking of apostolic succession. We can see other places where apostolic succession takes place. Also looking at the word it's self is very telling in the Greek apostle means one who is sent off. Furthermore The role of apostolic succession in preserving true doctrine is illustrated in the Bible. To make sure that the apostles’ teachings would be passed down after the deaths of the apostles, Paul told Timothy, “[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession-his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach.
Have you ever debated Scott Hahn
Not really interested in debating people. It tends to prove fruitless and a big waste of time and energy. I put my time and energy into :Rightly dividing the Word of truth"
Dr. Tarsitano - Great 9-Part series; it ties up several related topics that are based on both biblical teachings and historical information. RCs whose eyes and ears will be opened by the Holy Spirit via your teaching series, will need guidance as to what to do or where to go once they decide to leave the RCC. God Bless.
Which Refiormation or post Reformation group is greater than the Church?
George Pierson - There is no group greater than the Church/Ekklesia that Christ established which consisted of believing (Messianic)Hebrew-Israelite-Jews and who followed Mosaic and/or TaNaKh teachings; it is into this Ekklesia that the believing Gentiles were later grafted.
So, your religion insists on Circumcision and the dietary laws?
George Pierson - you have to study the bible (library of 66 books)Genesis - Revelation as one coherent interrelated teachings/instructions from God re His
"way" to understand where circumcision (of the flesh and of the heart) and/or dietary laws fit into the total picture.
I have the Bible, the writings of the Church Fathers, Councils, Synods, Popes, Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Men and Women Religious, and the Lay Faithful. The Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 dispensed with Circumcision. It also did not require anybody to keep the Jewish dietary laws aside from a few specific items.
When the current pope was elected, pope the first thing he said: I will pray to the madonna! Does not the Bible say there is one mediator between men and God? So why is he praying to mary first over Jesus as a mediator to God! How can Catholics not see this deception?
Thanks for establishing the pattern of a false religion. It's eerily the same with the current Jewish belief system that excludes Jesus as the Messiah. The traditions established by the rabbis outweighs the actual word of God (and Jesus Himself testified to that, and it still carries on to this day!). Whatever the rabbis say is what the people believe and how they act. Very few read their scriptures for themselves, just as many of the catholics do today and unfortunately what many "christians" do as well!
Unfortunately, you are correct - Thanks
The foundation for the office of the Pope is rooted primarily in Matthew 16:13-20. Here Jesus asked the question, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” The apostles responded, “Some say John the Baptizer, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” Our Lord then turned to them and point-blank asked them, “And you, who do you say that I am?”
St. Peter, still officially known as Simon, replied, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Our Lord recognized that this answer was grace-motivated: “No mere man has revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.”
Because of this response, our Lord first said to St. Peter, “You are ‘Rock,’ and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The name change itself from “Simon” to “Peter” indicates the apostle being called to a special role of leadership. Recall how Abram’s name was changed to Abraham, or Jacob’s to Israel, or Saul’s to Paul when each of them was called to assume a special role of leadership among God’s people.
The word rock also has special significance. On one hand, to be called “rock” was a Semitic expression designating the solid foundation upon which a community would be built. For instance, Abraham was considered “rock” because he was the father of the Jewish people (and we too refer to him in the First Eucharistic Prayer of the Mass as “our father in faith”) and the one with whom the covenant was first made.
On the other hand, no one except God was called specifically “rock,” nor was it ever used as a proper name except for God. To give the name “rock” to St. Peter indicates that our Lord entrusted to him a special authority. Some anti-papal parties try to play linguistic games with the original Greek gospel text where the masculine gender word petros, meaning a small, moveable rock, refers to St. Peter while the feminine gender word petra, meaning a massive, immoveable rock, refers to the foundation of the Church. However, in the Aramaic language, which is what Jesus spoke and which is the original language of St. Matthew’s gospel, the word kephas, meaning rock, would be used in both places without gender distinction or difference in meaning. The gender problem arises when translating from Aramaic to Greek and using the proper form to modify the masculine word Peter or feminine word Church.
The “Gates of Hell” is also an interesting semitic expression. The heaviest forces were positioned at the gates, so this expression captures the great war-making power of a nation. Here this expression refers to the powers opposed to what our Lord is establishing- the Church. (A similar expression is used in reference to our Lord in Acts 2:24: “God freed Him from the bitter pangs of hell, however, and raised Him up again, for it was impossible that death should keep its hold on Him.”) Jesus associated St. Peter and his office so closely with Himself that he became a visible force for protecting the Church and keeping back the power of hell.
Second, Jesus says, “I will entrust to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” In the Old Testament, the “number two” person in the Kingdom literally held the keys. In Isaiah 22:19-22 we find a reference to Eliakim, the master of the palace of King Hezekiah (II Kings 18:17ff) and keeper of the keys. As a sign of his position, the one who held the keys represented the king, acted with his authority, and had to act in accord with the king’s mind. Therefore, St. Peter and each of his successors represent our Lord on this earth as His Vicar and lead the faithful flock of the Church to the Kingdom of Heaven.
Finally, Jesus says, “Whatever you declare bound on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever you declare loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” This is rabbinic terminology. A rabbi could bind, declaring an act forbidden or excommunicating a person for serious sin; or, a rabbi could loose, declaring an act permissible or reconciling an excommunicated sinner to the community. Here Christ entrusted a special authority to St. Peter to preserve, interpret, and teach His truth.
I left the catholic church for 25 years and now am back. but I think that I must leave again. pray for me.
can someone stay in the catholic church even if they do not accept some teachings?
@@michaeladamonis2620 like what?
@@michaeladamonis2620 according to the Roman Catholic Church,no. The council of Trent, which was confirmed by Vatican too, curses those who do not agree with all the Roman Catholic church teaches.
I praise God, that He drew me out of the false RCC. He saved me and gave me a new heart an Spirit. I am a new creature in Christ born from above, to God alone be the glory!! HALLELUYAH!!
Amen and Amen!!
You are a SUPERB teacher. I love to listen to you. Your way of teaching is simple and clear. My goodness! So many are being lied to. My own mother i can't reach. She is devoted to her catholic tradition even more now.... that I have left the church. I pray for her that God would open the eyes of her understanding.
hello sir, thank you for the questions for seeking elightenment on the Gospel according to Mathew 16:18. i would suggest that no one is supposed to re-translate the Gospels written in the Bible with the inspiration of God. so sir, it depends on which Bible are you reading from, the Catholics or any other Bible's. ask for the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, and beware of other spirits.
i heard you asked who followed Peter (32-67) as Pope: Linus (67-76), Anacletus (76-88), Clement I85-97), Evaristus )97-105).These are the first 5 popes.There have been 266 Popesto date. The were called Bishops of Rome originally. The title Bishop of Romeis still in use today when referring to the Papacy. The first Bishop of Rome to be call Pope was Siricius (384-399). You also doubted that Peter was ever in Rome. He was crucified upside down in Rome and his remains are buried underneath the High Altar in St. peter’s Bascilica
I'm an ex-catholic from Dublin, Ireland. As soon as I started reading the bible especially the New Testament I could see how it didn't line up with the catholic church teachings eg prayer to Mary, Saints, to and for dead and so many layers of traditions and rituals. The way they built their church on one scripture saying Peter is the rock when Jesus has always been the rock, chief cornerstone, Alpha and Omega, beginning and the End. The way there are so many vain repetitions like 📿🦜when Mary only said she was blessed and in need of a Saviour herself. I believe all the apparitions fulfills this scripture :
2 Corinthians 11:14
No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
2 Corinthians 11:3
But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.
when bible is very clear that we have one mediator between God and man - Christ Jesus but ultimately it's the bad fruit that convinced me like all the recent revelations (personally I think forced celibacy as opposed to choice in bible contributed a lot to the abuse in mother and baby homes/residential schools etc). My only hope is for my family and husband to leave this blasphemous apostate church. 🙏🌏🙏
Catholic=CULT
"There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering."
~ St. Cyprian of Carthage, A.D. 253
Dear Catholics don't be deceived by this! Pls. watch EWTN or THE JOURNEY HOME
I'm firmly Catholic :) I'm just interested in other people's ideas. Even if they're false, it's fun to refute them.
Malech Hamelachim screw you
Again, the Bible says word-for-word we are not justified by faith alone (James 2:24), but you say we are. It says Baptism saves us (1 Peter 3:21), you say it does not. It says a person is born again by water and spirit (John 3:5), you say they're born again by faith alone. It says bread and wine are the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:23-30), you say they are not. It says Christ's flesh is true food (John 6:52-56), you say its not. It says to Anoint (unction) the sick (James 5:14), you posted a video on why we should not. It says those who don't feed the poor will go to the place prepared for the devil (Mathew 25:41-46), you say they won't if they have faith. It says those who do not forgive others will not be forgiven (Mathew 16:15), you say they will if they have faith. ect.... As I said, that is simply not a biblical denomination.
Your brother in Christ,
Fr. David
Sacred Heart Catholic Church
One of the most respected and referenced Greek dictionaries among Evangelicals is Gerhard Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. In a most candid statement about Matthew 16:18, Dr. Oscar Cullman, a contributing editor to this work, writes:
The obvious pun which has made its way into the Greek text . . . suggests a material identity between petra and Petros . . . as it is impossible to differentiate strictly between the two words. . . . Petros himself is this petra, not just his faith or his confession. . . . The idea of the Reformers that he is referring to the faith of Peter is quite inconceivable. . . . For there is no reference here to the faith of Peter. Rather, the parallelism of “thou art Rock” and “on this rock I will build” shows that the second rock can only be the same as the first. It is thus evident that Jesus is referring to Peter, to whom he has given the name Rock. . . . To this extent Roman Catholic exegesis is right and all Protestant attempts to evade this interpretation are to be rejected.
Amen!
@Phelebas
So which is it, is Peter a rock or isn't he according to Scripture?
@Phelebas
Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter (Kephas which means a rock) in John 1:42 for a special reason. This reason becomes clear in Matthew 16:18. If you look at the wording of Matthew 16:18;
And I tell you that you are Peter (a rock), and on this "rock" I will build My church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.
I don't see Peter's faith as being referred to by Jesus as the "rock" in this verse, but Peter alone. I realize Protestant's would prefer it to be his faith, but it makes much more sense that it is Peter himself because of the play on words that Jesus uses.
I agree with you that all of the Twelve are a foundation, Jesus being the cornerstone.
The Catholic church believes in a succession of bishops, if one dies, then another needs to be selected to replace him, on down through history. When you read the NT from Acts onward, you can see that bishops were ordained to oversee certain geographical areas, and it is obvious that this succession would have to continue in order for the church to function according to the way it did during the Apostles lifetimes. Nowhere in Scripture does it say anything about an end to the selection of bishops at some point in time.
@Phelebas
quote; You forgot to add that no where does it say Rome has authority above the others. They ordain a bishop for areas where there are churches.
You can't expect every last detail of the church's structure to be spelled out in Scripture. There no doubt was some evolution that took place in a growing church, and one of them was that Rome was preeminent among the other churches, and the Bishop of Rome became the head Bishop and supreme pastor of the whole entire church. If you read some of the writings of the early church fathers and councils, you'll see that Rome was the seat of authority and power.
quote; I don't think Rome or the Papal seat are above correction or a final authority more important than others.
You would need to prove that to me from history. And just because the Orthodox church refused to submit to Rome at some point (late 1st millenium) is not proof of what you are saying.
quote; Luther was Catholic and wanted to discuss a corruption he saw in the Catholic Church. The Pope responded with, " my authority is above correction".
The fact is, the CC did change some things because of Luther, however, it wasn't done immediately, and by that time the Reformation had already started.
quote; I truly feel some of the Catholic practices back then and today are un-biblical. Yes, I understand they are developed based on authority but I feel they have strayed.
Such as?
PEACE!
Very wise words and presentation. I follow your chanel 😀
Amen and thank you!!
The RCC from whatever time, put a curse/ anathema on Believers ie, We who believe we are SAVED by What christ did for us at the cross, the death, the burial, the ressurection and Why he did it/we are sinners and fall short of the glory of God. This the bible calls the gospel and we believe it. This is called Faith. Because of this Faith Im credited with righteousness and have it imputed to me and am no longer under condemnation.
According to the RCC Im cursed for this faith because its a faith without works in christ alone that the bible says justifies me. Therefore being justified by faith we have peace with God through our lord Jesus Christ.
Therefore this curse on me/us means they DONT believe the gospel( as portrayed above) therefore they are under condemnation and are actually under a curse. The curse of the law.
For to redeem/save themselves (to make right) with God they must do it by works. Religious works, sacrements etc and good deeds which of course are filthy rags IF you come this WAY. Christ said I am the WAY, he who believeth in me shall not perish, but have eternal life.
Centuries ago i wud have been tortured and murdered for this Faith alone in Christ alone.
You see to the RCC and many others Christ is no more than a vehicle or instrument used by God to bring you the Gentile to the God of the jews to Redeem/SAVE( to make right, atone, justify) yourself by WORKS... This way of cain is all you have left...
But "Faith without works is dead." James 2:17 Works come after salvation to prove our faith but no part of salvation.
is your stuff found on podcast ~ I'd love to listen on my way to work.
So far all my small computer savvy brain can handle is youtube. After that I am lost.
@@EpiGenosko I'll see if I can find a young person in my church to help me convert to MP3. ;) I'm not tech savvy either. :/
I wanted to share this RUclips video/testimony with you about this now Christian woman who was Catholic. Amazing testimony that she had died and went to hell and then she cried out to Jesus and he brought her into his presence and what he told her about Mary worship and Catholic doctrine was no surprise. Wow! She's a Colombian woman she's wearing a purple blouse I couldn't copy the link so this is the title that it's under: "She died, went to hell and heaven, then woke up at the morgue - Christian testimony." Enjoy!
Here the link 😃: ruclips.net/video/tFNtQ0B04W0/видео.html
Hi Fred, can you please explain what the point of “peters primacy” was? The RCC obviously says “well to be the pope of the Roman Catholic Church !” But we know this is not true. On the other hand, we know Peter was indeed distinctive from other disciples in the NT. A lot of Protestants agree Peter had a unique and important role, perhaps first among equals- but not in the way Catholics say. So, could you answer in your wisdom, what the point of Peter’s elevation WAS then? If it wasn’t for the purpose of successors and a hierarchy in the church bishops, then what was his primacy for? Genuinely wondering.
Peter was central in the early spread of the gospel the teaching of but Scripture nowhere teaches that Peter was in authority over the other apostles, or over the church (having primacy). See Acts 15:1-23; Galatians 2:1-14; and 1 Peter 5:1-5. Scripture shows that Peter’s authority was shared by the other apostles (Ephesians 2:19-20), and the “loosing and binding” authority attributed to him was likewise shared by the local churches, not just their church leaders (see Matthew 18:15-19; 1 Corinthians 5:1-13; 2 Corinthians 13:10; Titus 2:15; 3:10-11). Remember that the Apostle Paul had to rebuke Peter for adding works to the gospel because he was afraid of the Jews. A serious error that Peter repented of. Overall, Peter went primarily to the Jews and Paul went primarily to the Gentiles. If anything, Paul had a greater influence. They were all equal fellow servants of the Lord.
Fred, you have honorable mention in a book I just read by Gabriel Shepherd. The book is called "Rescue Guide For The Salvation of Roman Catholics" kind of lenghty title but boy what a terrific book. I was spellbound thoughout. The author totally agrees with your teachings. check it out.
Thanks Maureen for letting me know. I will check it out - Fred
It's simply amazes me that Catholics can hear all this information and still refute actual biblical truth they would rather believe the tradition of the fathers of the church or leading them astray, then to believe the truth.! I suppose more and more, and believing that predestination was ordained, people just will not listen. They are, blind to the truth and hardened, but I believe God gives everyone a choice. But they just choose to not hear the way pharoah listen. Thus, God hardens their hearts further because they will not accept the truth.
Good on you well put together you have done an excellent job.
There are none so blind than those who refuse to see.
Thanks John
What is the meaning of Matthew 16:28?
First understand that the word used for kingdom can also mean "royal majesty or regal splendor" I believe that Christ was referring to His transfiguration that was seen by Peter, James and John which happened six days after this statement. See Mt. 17:1.
Thank you Fred for your Biblical and rational approach to this topic. I’ve always had a gut feeling that Roman Catholic Doctrine was overly complex and unbiblical, and it relies heavily on excluding the average person from making reasonable inquiry into the authority of those teaching this as doctrine. I think that the words of Jesus are quite appropriate when He says, “in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” (Matt. 15:9)
Daniel - Amen!! and Thanks - Fred
Why does the apostle John use the Aramaic word for rock and not pebble or small stone when referencing Peter? Because Simon’s name was changed to Peter Matthew wasn’t going to use a feminine word for a male. He was simply using good Greek grammar.
James was the first Bishop of Jerusalem from what it looks like in Acts. Apostle Peter was 1st in Apostles but Acts 15 shows Apostle James brother of the Lord as bishop or Pastor of the first church in Jerusalem. Acts 16 says the Jerusalem church was the head of all other churches where instruction came out of.
When Protestants claim that the Catholic Church is not the Church that Jesus founded, I ask them to show me the Church that Jesus founded. So far no Protestant is able to show me where we can find the Church that Jesus founded more than 2000 years ago. Can Dr. Fred show me?
The ‘church’ is the body of all believers, not a criminal institution like the Catholic Church.
@@hannahs4779 Ok, fine, the church is the body of all believers. How does this church function? Are all believers one in mind and heart? Do they have any leaders like in the early Church? Do these believers believe all that Jesus taught?
You are welcome to call the Catholic Church anything you like, but remember from what you say you also reveal what you are, whether you are a true believer in Jesus and whether you are filled with the Holy Spirit. Your mouth speaks what your heart is full of.
You are not looking for a church. You are looking for a denomination. Christ did not start a denomination. He started a body of true born again believers. Denominations are man made, including the Roman Catholic Church. I put the same challenge to you. Give me one verse of scripture where Christ taught He was starting the Roman Catholic Church. Please don't refer to Peter. It was man that made Peter a pope not Christ, Peter or any other Apostle. But then again, you are the person who trusts more in tradition than the Bible. That is why you fail to see the truth.
@@EpiGenosko Jesus promised to found his Church on the rock of Peter (Matthew 16:15-19). This promise of Jesus was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost when the Church was born and its visible leader was Peter. No man made Peter a Pope; it was Jesus who appointed him to be the chief shepherd and steward of the Church. Peter and his successors were called Popes by later Christians. The name Pope is man-made and you are correct, but the office of Peter was not man-made, it was created by Jesus.
The Church established by Jesus was later on called Catholic Church in order to distinguish it from heretical groups. Yes, afterwards it was called Roman Catholic Church after the great Schism. Then in the 16th century Protestants broke away from this Church. Can you see the continuity of the Church established by Jesus through apostolic succession? The Roman Catholic Church is not a denomination like the Protestant ones. Only the former can be traced back to the Apostles. All the other breakaway churches and denominations are man-made and have human founders. The Catholic Church has no other founder than Jesus. You may claim that Constantine founded the Catholic Church; yes, many Protestants do that, but any proof or evidence? None.
You may describe the Church as a body of born again believers, but the believers you have in mind ought to be born in the Bible way and not according to man’s way.
If the Roman Catholic Church is not the Church founded by Jesus, please show me what happened to the Church founded by Jesus. If you claim that wherever there are born again believers, there the true Church is, please tell me how these believers become born again, who is their founder, whose Bible do they follow? Do these believers believe in one baptism, one faith, one Lord, one Church?
I follow the Bible along with the Catholic traditions. In fact, the Catholic Church is more faithful to the Bible than you or your Protestant brethren. You are making a mockery of the Word of God with your free-for-all interpretations. Your distortion of the Bible has resulted in more than 40000 Protestant denominations and sects and cults. And you are talking about Jesus starting a body of born again believers. Where are these believers, please? Do they believe and understand Matthew 16:15-19?
I'm sorry but Jesus and Peter spoke Aremaic and Jesus called him Cephus (rock) in Aremaic now to see Peter and the other Apostles in their roles as church leaders with Authority you have to really just read Act 15. Which was the 1st church council in Jerusalem with James as the Bishop and Peter making and summing up the argument or the debates and making the Descision for the church as the spirit lead him. Finally you will not see any reference to a papacy in the New Testament out right, but in Isaiah ch. 22 you would see the structure of the Davidic Kingdom after which the church is to be fashioned the King always had a prime minister with Keys to open and shut and to lock and unlock the keys where the sign of the Prime Minister's Authority and that is demonstrated in Isaiah ch. 22.
As Cardinal Newman once wrote on the development of doctrine all of these things didn't happen in one period of time but they developed over time so I hope that that helps your viewers.
I love how you love the word of god and look to the bible not the word of the church ,we need more teachers like you.the world needs to know the truth .and ask jesus to open our eyes and ears .and know we will go to heaven , thankyou so much for your teaching about jesus and his words.
Thank You Belinda
1) Peter is the ONLY man in the NT to receive a new name by God.
2) Strong's Concordance states that Peter means rock.
3) Study the OT on new names and see the Biblical significance of God given new names. When God gives a person a new name in the OT He is giving them a new and significant mission.
Jesus grafted Peter into Himself as the rock upon which Jesus would build His church.
4) Jesus is the Cornerstone Rock of the church, however Jesus is naming Peter, which means Rock, to lead the church AFTER the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Jesus said to Peter...
Feed my Lambs
Tend to my Sheep
Feed my Sheep
Jesus is giving Peter his new mission. Jesus is naming Peter as the Shepherd of the Church on which He will build His Church.
Anna Pennrose that says it all friend !!!!
Very interesting point. However, you are either 100% sure that you will be accepted by God in heaven or on your way to be 100% sure which one are you? To prove your point you should actually read the book "Rome has spoken" by two nuns Maureen Fiedler and Linda Rabben both PhDs. Also kindly Read; Acts 4 vers 12; John 1 vers 12 and 3 vers 16 then 1 John 1 vers 8+9. Rom 3 vers 23 to the end and Rom 10 vers 9+10 be blessed brother Martin Christopher Pretorius
Paul was renamed too.
Ryan McCoy God didn't change Saul's name to Paul... He had two names (Saul is Hebrew since his mother was Jewish and Paul is Latin due to his father being a Roman citizen)
Anna Pennrose God changed Abram's name to Abraham... Funny enough though, Abraham was also referred to as a rock
Fun facts about the Catholic Church that we don't hear about:
The title Roman Catholic Church is msleading. There are actually 24 individual autonomous churches making up the Catholic Church. These churches are sometimes referred to as Rites having to do with their liturgical worship. (think of that as a Protestant service:).
I like to think of them as 24 churches grouped under 6 Rites:
Roman Rite
Alexandrian Rite
Armenian Rite
Byzantine Rite
East Syriac Rite
West Syriac Rite
The Roman Rite is the only Western Rite Catholic Church.
The Eastern Catholic Churches, listed below, are generally grouped in their five Rites or liturgical traditions. One of the Rites uses interchangeable titles which I don't recall:
I. Alexandrian Rite, originating in Egypt:
Coptic Catholic Church
Eritrean Catholic Church
Ethiopian Catholic Church
II. Antiochian Rite, originating in Antioch and West Syria:
Maronite Church
Syrian Catholic Church
Syro-Malankara Catholic Church
III. Armenian Rite:
Armenian Catholic Church
IV. Chaldean or East Syrian Rite, originating in Mesopotamia:
Chaldean Catholic Church
Syro-Malabar Church
V. Byzantine or Constantinopolitan Rite, originating in Constantinople:
Albanian Catholic Church
Belarusian Catholic Church
Bulgarian Catholic Church
Croatian Byzantine Catholic Church or Croatian Greek Catholic Church
Greek Catholic Church
Hungarian Catholic Church
Italo-Albanian Catholic Church
Macedonian Catholic Church
Melkite Greek Catholic Church
Romanian Church United with Rome
Russian Catholic Church
Ruthenian Catholic Church
Slovak Catholic Church
Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church
Some differences between the Roman Rite Catholic Church and the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches.
Easter Catholics:
Do the sign of the cross backwards from the Roman Rite.
They wear breads and They can all marry.
The priest might hold a cross during service.
They use icons (paintings) in place of statues.
They use a Prayer rope in place of a Rosary.
The consecrate the Eucharist behind an icon wall.
They baptize, confirm & give Eucharist to infants at one time.
They call the Sacraments.... Mysteries.
They had no connection to or affect from the Reformation.
Similarities between East and West:
They all wear funny looking clothes (Vestments).
They all use incense (see Malachi 1:11).
They were all established by an Apostle or their successors.
They are all in union with the Pope in Rome.
They cannot remarry after spouse's death.
Some Roman Rite priests are allowed to be married.
God's blessings to Free and all his viewers.
That's God's blessings to Fred and his viewers I meant to type.
I've heard this aurgument but I have to say you gotta study more Dr. “In Greek, the word for rock is petra, which means a large, massive stone. The word used for Simon’s new name is different; it’s Petros, which means a little stone, a pebble.”
In reality, what you're saying is false. As Greek scholars-even non-Catholic ones-admit, the words petros and petra were synonyms in first century Greek. They meant “small stone” and “large rock” in some ancient Greek poetry, centuries before the time of Christ, but that distinction had disappeared from the language by the time Matthew’s Gospel was rendered in Greek. The difference in meaning can only be found in Attic Greek, but the New Testament was written in Koine Greek-an entirely different dialect. In Koine Greek, both petros and petra simply meant “rock.” If Jesus had wanted to call Simon a small stone, the Greek lithos would have been used. The missionary’s argument didn’t work and showed a faulty knowledge of Greek. (For an Evangelical Protestant Greek scholar’s admission of this, see D. A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984], Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., 8:368
Many, if not most of them, knew Greek, of course, because Greek was the lingua franca of the Mediterranean world. It was the language of culture and commerce; and most of the books of the New Testament were written in it, because they were written not just for Christians in Palestine but also for Christians in places such as Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, places where Aramaic wasn’t the spoken language.
“I say most of the New Testament was written in Greek, but not all. Many hold that Matthew was written in Aramaic-we know this from records kept by Eusebius of Caesarea-but it was translated into Greek early on, perhaps by Matthew himself. In any case the Aramaic original is lost (as are all the originals of the New Testament books), so all we have today is the Greek.”
“We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic because some of his words are preserved for us in the Gospels. Look at Matthew 27:46, where he says from the cross, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ That isn’t Greek; it’s Aramaic, and it means, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’
“What’s more,” I said, “in Paul’s epistles-four times in Galatians and four times in 1 Corinthians-we have the Aramaic form of Simon’s new name preserved for us. In our English Bibles it comes out as Cephas. That isn’t Greek. That’s a transliteration of the Aramaic word Kepha (rendered as Kephas in its Hellenistic form).
“And what does Kepha mean? It means a rock, the same as petra. It doesn’t mean a little stone or a pebble. What Jesus said to Simon in Matthew 16:18 was this: ‘You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my Church.’
“When you understand what the Aramaic says, you see that Jesus was equating Simon and the rock; he wasn’t contrasting them. We see this vividly in some modern English translations, which render the verse this way: ‘You are Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church.’ In French one word, pierre, has always been used both for Simon’s new name and for the rock.
To say that Jesus is downplaying Peter flies in the face of the context. Jesus is installing Peter as a form of chief steward or prime minister under the King of Kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom. As can be seen in Isaiah 22:22, kings in the Old Testament appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatim from this passage in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. He is raising Peter up as a father figure to the household of faith (Isa. 22:21), to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17). This authority of the prime minister under the king was passed on from one man to another down through the ages by the giving of the keys, which were worn on the shoulder as a sign of authority. Likewise, the authority of Peter has been passed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy.”
THAT'S a streatch. I don't think so.
@@sissyrayself7508 well you're gonna have to do better than " I don't think so" ;)
Great!!!!!!!kadesh is 💯% Right
I am also an ex-Catholic who believed blindly in the teachings...then one day I woke up. I agree with all he has said so far. The Papacy is not inerrant...only God is. They (Catholic priests) openly defy Jesus' own teachings by being called, "Father," when Jesus said, bluntly, " 9. And call no one your father on earth, for you have one Father--the one in heaven." (Matthew 23:9, NRSV)
Catholic=CULT
Please explain sola scriptura, where is that in the bible.
You will find a thorough explanation of sola scriptura at this site - www.gotquestions.org/sola-scriptura.html
Hello my friend. My name is Will. Was wondering if I can ask you've question? I'm been witnessing To a man at work who is a very deceived diehard Catholic. I been a Christian for a long time and I know what the kjv of the Bible says and what it does not say. That conveyed, the past 5 months or so I've been diving headlong into the Catholic teachings, ect. Furthermore, I even bought this man where I work a kjv so that he can read, because we know that the Catholic Bible the Commandments are all messed up and also have the Apocrypha which is not the inspired word of God. In trying to defend his false doctrine,, he keeps telling that Catholics were around before the Bible even came out. What your take on how to counter this excuse every time? I have pointed scripture out to home clearly several times and he refuses to see the Bible for what ibis and what it plainly teaches. Looking for your feedback. Thanks
The Roman Catholic Church did not formally exist until 300 AD. That is long after the Bible was written. Plus the Bible was not written by Catholics. Most of their teaching comes from their made up traditions not the Word of God. But little of this will make a difference. Your friend's loyalty is to the Catholic Church and not the Bible. He will not see the truth until he is willing to ask God to show him the truth. Until then he will blindly defend the Catholic Church regardless of what you tell him. He most likely sees you as a "Protestant" which makes you an enemy of the Catholic Church. Keep praying that God will open his eyes.
Do not spread hatred or lies that you read over the internet. Let Catholics remain Catholics and if you do not believe, do not spread lies.
If I hated Catholics then I would say nothing and simply leave them to their false beliefs. Please don't make accusations without giving facts - What lies have I told?
@@EpiGenosko How do you know their beliefs are false. Do you have all the truths and all the Catholics have are false? The Bible says Jesus is the truth, ... not the Catholics, ... not you.
@Ray Brower To understand their beliefs match up with scripture or not, you should really understand what they believe and what the scripture command you to do. Otherwise what right or what truth the non-catholic have to attack other's belief. Why don't they just stop attacking other's belief and focus only preaching what they believe regardless they are heretic or not? There are many out there who don't know Christ yet. Focus preaching to them. Imitate Pope Francis. Love others regardless different belief or even the enemy. It's only God that will be able to convert someone to true faith. All we have to do is only to love others as Jesus has loved us.
He spread truth not hatred you CULT
Fred, What is the origin of your Church???
please answer.
Lamkupar Shangdiar The church is the mystical Body of Christ. He knows his own. Those who are called according to his word are the church. Arguing about when human institutions which refer to themselves as churches started is a red herring, irrelevant.
His name is Chris Murphy. Please pray in agreement with me that the Lord will OPEN up his eyes and the scales will fall off. That's his only hope - that the holy Spirit "himself" will take the time to open his eyes.
Will Scott Does he have a bible?
@@TheJeanette53 yes he has his Catholic Bible. But about a month ago I went to I believe it was Barnes and Nobles here where I live in the Westfarms Mall there's a book store bought them King James Bible it's a real nice one really nice it's extra big letters so we can read it that all the last time the rest of his life. I also gave him my Strong's Concordance Hebrew / Greek dictionary so we can look up words in the Hebrew and Greek. I showed him how to use it. I opened the word to him I sat down with them for like 2 hours a while back and I try to explain to him. I see him like three times a week so I talked to him pretty often. the last five months I've been telling him about the Lord and the discrepancies in the Catholic beliefs but he's not seeing it he keeps adding to God scripture about Mary and he says he's going to stick with Mary cuz she's really nice and she's the mother of God. I went over scripture with him and I keep telling him over and over again he won't listen to me I tried giving him some liked tracks Christian tracks and he says his church won't allow him to read it but keeps throwing them out but he doesn't know that's going to save his life he just refuses stubborn
the rcc is the church of thyatira in revelation 2:18-29
So there is no actual church, only a score of separate groups (Baptists, Lutherans, etc) ? So where does each group say they started?
Gerard - Scripturally there is one universal church that is made up of every true born again Christian. We have local churches that may adopt a name to identify their local congregation. e.g. Grace Bible Church, Family Worship Church, etc. etc. Denominations started at different times as man started to make his own rules and beliefs - Baptist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Roman Catholic, Episcopalian, etc. There is no one universal denomination started by Jesus Christ.
Gerard Leon JESUS YOU CAN'T BE THAT STUPID ???
How can u explain and guarantee that the holy spirit spoke to you after you based in one bible (protestant bible), but ended up different doctrines compare to other sect? So we are now have more than 40 thousands christian denominations and counting. Justify please
Wow. Thank you so much. I been a Christian for almost 4 decades but do appreciate a good teaching on Catholicism. So that I can answer when the time comes or when I feel totally equipped. Thank you so much for your clear teaching.
Thank you Maria - Fred
Fred you did not mention that Peter did not go to Rome to preach, he never went. There is no mention of that in the Bible.
Sue - I know I talked about that fact in one of my videos. But I don't remember which one,
This information is amazing. Thanks.
Amen!!
The best way to answer the presentation of Dr Fred is to read the book Meeting the Protestant Challenge by Karlo Broussard
please be steadfast, don't get weary, I know every time you explain to one you have to explain it again to another, and it can get to be wearisome,however for the human soul it IS worth pouring ALL your strength and ALL your soul into this very very urgent NEED. Its the Up most for HIS HIGHEST
Peter didn’t just say get up, I am just a man but he also literally picked Cornelius up as the text says. This suggests Peter felt very uncomfortable with that. 🤓
So in Matthew 16:19 He gives the keys to Himself? Weird? Shut-up bro. Do not mislead people.
Was Peter the rock Jesus was referring to? I’m not catholic, but if he wasn’t the rock, why did Jesus himself change Peters name from Simon to Peter (meaning rock)? Why would he change his name to “rock” and from then on have everyone call him “rock” if Jesus was referring to himself as the rock? Sorry that doesn’t make sense.
He changed his name to "a small stone" The Rock was the profession that Peter just made that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Scripture refers to Jesus as the Rock numerous times. Even Peter called Jesus the Rock. Even if Perter was the rock (which he was not) there is nothing in scriptures that teaches that Peter was a pope or the church was Roman Catholic. They just made it up.
Fred Tarsitano God always changed names when something important was happening. Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel, etc. I don’t see that being too hard to believe, especially since Jesus spoke Aramaic and probably used the name Cephas. I don’t think your argument is worthy of a name change and Jesus definitely changed his name to Cephas/Peter. Also, you say “they made it up”, why would someone do that? What is the reasoning behind the deception?
@@EpiGenosko Fake News. Greek scholars-even non-Catholic ones-admit, the words petros and petra were synonyms in first century Greek. They meant "small stone" and "large rock" in some ancient Greek poetry, centuries before the time of Christ, but that distinction had disappeared from the language by the time Matthew’s Gospel was rendered in Greek. The difference in meaning can only be found in Attic Greek, but the New Testament was written in Koine Greek-an entirely different dialect. In Koine Greek, both petros andpetra simply meant "rock." If Jesus had wanted to call Simon a small stone, the Greek lithos would have been used. You demonstrate a faulty knowledge of Greek. (For an Evangelical Protestant Greek scholar’s admission of this, see D. A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984], Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., 8:368).
@@simonocarroll Catholics build an entire religious system on the interpretation of one word. They say Peter is the rock Christ built His church on and from there they try to justify all of the unbiblical teachings of Catholicism.
Think This Through
1. Scripture clearly refers to Jesus Christ as the Rock. Peter referred to
Christ as the Rock. The apostles referred to Christ as the Rock. Do you
really believe Christ would build His church on a man and not on
Himself.
2. If Peter is the rock, that does not mean he was a pope. The scriptures
say nothing about Peter or anyone else being a pope or being infallible.
3. If Peter is the rock of the church and was the first infallible pope, why did
the Apostle Paul have to publicly rebuke Peter for preaching a false
gospel. Peter was putting people back under the law in order to receive
salvation
4. If Peter is building Christ’s Church the Scriptures say nothing about that
church being the Roman Catholic Church. The RCC did not come on the
scene for until over 300 years later.
5. Catholicism is built on assumptions and false traditions invented by the
Catholic church and accepted as gospel
6. As long as a Roman Catholic is more interested in blindly defending
their church as opposed to seeking the truth of the Scriptures, these
things will mean nothing to them and sadly they will never come to a
knowledge of the truth. I know - I have been there - Fred